Seahawks Redzone

[Siouxhawk]

So, yeah, our coaching staff is at least equal to what they have.

Yeah, not even close.

One more Super Bowl appearance this decade than us qualifies as close to me. And we're 1-1 in actual head-to-head meetings, so of course we're on par.

We compete with them because we have more talent than them, not better coaching. If we were without Russell Wilson for 4 straight games, I would practically guarantee we would lose all 4 of those games. New England has a better coaching staff straight across the board. Our coaching staff was so bad at one point, we actually gave the Patriots a superbowl ring. Remember that?

We beat them straight up this year on their own hallowed turf with all their key parts, so I think our coaching staff sent a pretty direct message that they're not anything we should be afraid of.

 

[hawkfan68]

We beat them straight up this year on their own hallowed turf with all their key parts, so I think our coaching staff sent a pretty direct message that they're not anything we should be afraid of.

Yes they did....too bad they couldn't do that for the Saints and Bucs game. Only coming up with game plans that work against top teams is half the battle. They didn't do their jobs against the lesser teams. If they had done their jobs during those games, this thread and discussion may have been moot. Cherry picking only their success and not acknowledging where they have failures - you seem to be bent on doing that.

 

[Siouxhawk]

We beat them straight up this year on their own hallowed turf with all their key parts, so I think our coaching staff sent a pretty direct message that they're not anything we should be afraid of.

Yes they did....too bad they couldn't do that for the Saints and Bucs game. Only coming up with game plans that work against top teams is half the battle. They didn't do their jobs against the lesser teams. If they had done their jobs during those games, this thread and discussion may have been moot. Cherry picking only their success and not acknowledging where they have failures - you seem to be bent on doing that.

It was the topic of discussion if you would have read further. Don't worry, I understand the inconsistencies brought about by an inexperienced offensive line this past year.

 

[hawkfan68]

We beat them straight up this year on their own hallowed turf with all their key parts, so I think our coaching staff sent a pretty direct message that they're not anything we should be afraid of.

Yes they did....too bad they couldn't do that for the Saints and Bucs game. Only coming up with game plans that work against top teams is half the battle. They didn't do their jobs against the lesser teams. If they had done their jobs during those games, this thread and discussion may have been moot. Cherry picking only their success and not acknowledging where they have failures - you seem to be bent on doing that.

It was the topic of discussion if you would have read further. Don't worry, I understand the inconsistencies brought about by an inexperienced offensive line this past year.

True but those inconsistences existed from day 1. A coordinator who has a pulse of what's happening would take steps to understand that and make plans to account for that. Going back to the Pats example, at the beginning of the season NE Oline was rated one of the worst. Yet NE found ways to overcome that, they played with backup and 3rd string QB to start their season and didn't miss a beat. That's astute coaching. They found ways to overcome adversity.

The Seahawk OL was poor this season no doubt. But did the playcalling help out the inconsistent and inexperienced OL any? In some games like NE yes it did but in others like against TB and GB absolutely not. Some of that is on Bevell. He shares some of the blame for the dysfunctional offense. Per your posts, it seems that Bevell is immune to any accountability for the poor offensive results. One of the other issues I have with Bevell's calls is that if it works, he will move away from it quickly. There's no rhyme or rhythm to how he calls games. He's just as inconsistent with his playcalls as the OL is. I hope that is one of the many things he improves upon since he's going to be here next season and possibly beyond that.

 

[cymatica]

So, yeah, our coaching staff is at least equal to what they have.

Yeah, not even close.

One more Super Bowl appearance this decade than us qualifies as close to me. And we're 1-1 in actual head-to-head meetings, so of course we're on par.

Watching our o-line try to protect a franchise qb with a basketball player and tight end at tackle is just one example of a bad decision the Patriots coaching would not make. When Pete and co can better balance creativity and practicality then maybe

 

[Siouxhawk]

We beat them straight up this year on their own hallowed turf with all their key parts, so I think our coaching staff sent a pretty direct message that they're not anything we should be afraid of.

Yes they did....too bad they couldn't do that for the Saints and Bucs game. Only coming up with game plans that work against top teams is half the battle. They didn't do their jobs against the lesser teams. If they had done their jobs during those games, this thread and discussion may have been moot. Cherry picking only their success and not acknowledging where they have failures - you seem to be bent on doing that.

It was the topic of discussion if you would have read further. Don't worry, I understand the inconsistencies brought about by an inexperienced offensive line this past year.

True but those inconsistences existed from day 1. A coordinator who has a pulse of what's happening would take steps to understand that and make plans to account for that. The Oline was poor this season no doubt. But did the playcalling help out the Oline any? In some games like NE yes but in others like against TB and GB absolutely not. Some of that is on Bevell. He shares some of the blame for the dysfunctional offense. Per your posts, it seems that Bevell is immune to any accountability for the poor offensive results.

I've never said that so that would be your perception coming through. I'm sure Bevell wanted to see 3 more wins from the team as did all the coaching staff. But in retrospect, I'm sure they are proud of their work this year in lieu of all the key injuries and the struggling line. Lesser teams and coaching staffs wouldn't have gotten as far as we did.

 

[hawkfan68]

I've never said that so that would be your perception coming through. I'm sure Bevell wanted to see 3 more wins from the team as did all the coaching staff. But in retrospect, I'm sure they are proud of their work this year in lieu of all the key injuries and the struggling line. Lesser teams and coaching staffs wouldn't have gotten as far as we did.

So here's the difference between your and my mindset. I don't like to compare the Seahawks with lesser teams. I believe that they should be measured against the elite teams. I couldn't care less about what the lesser teams coaching staffs do. I care about what the Seahawks coaching staff does. In a few games against lesser coaching staffs this season, they got outcoached and outplayed. That's a fact.

 

[Siouxhawk]

I've never said that so that would be your perception coming through. I'm sure Bevell wanted to see 3 more wins from the team as did all the coaching staff. But in retrospect, I'm sure they are proud of their work this year in lieu of all the key injuries and the struggling line. Lesser teams and coaching staffs wouldn't have gotten as far as we did.

So here's the difference between your and my mindset. I don't like to compare the Seahawks with lesser teams. I believe that they should be measured against the elite teams. I couldn't care less about what the lesser teams coaching staffs do. I care about what the Seahawks coaching staff does. In a few games against lesser coaching staffs this season, they got outcoached and outplayed. That's a fact.

And in some games against what are considered superior teams -- Super Bowl participants -- we won, outcoached and outplayed them. The total sum due to our inconsistencies that plagued us all year. And the harsh injuries. That's why I think our coaching staff should be commended for getting the team as far as they did. It also stoked my enthusiasm for 2017.

 

[Anthony!]

Dude, what is your deal? I never wrote about the previous play. Read thoroughly before you write.

I was referring to personnel packages for specific plays. Those are set in advance.

Just more obfuscation and nonsense. What does that have anything to do with why our worst WR was made the first read on that play? Bevell chose Lockette for that personnel package. That alone was a stupid decision. The stupidity was only compounded by the dialing up of that play in that situation.

Actually Lockette was not the first read he was the only read it was a one read timing pattern, it was not designed to go to anyone else. PC said that was a designed quick timing route. The fact that not only did Lockette come out of the break slow he ran the route wrong only proves his coach failed him, then add his coach threw him under the bus and never took any responsibility and then add he should not have been put in that situation by his coach. We had a big Wr who had gotten over 100 yards and as a result they were forced to put Browner on him, you would think that he would be in at the goal line if for no other reason than to keep browner out of the play. Then the Wr who is the target is your 5 WR, then your asking a smaller WR Kearse to block a bigger CB in Browner. There were so many things wrong with the design and calling of that play it was pathetic, and alot of that falls at the feet of the OC that is a fact deal with it.

He didn't fail him and he didn't throw him under the bus. That is the proverbial making a mountain out of a molehill that gets perpetuated when those uninformed just repeat the myths. It's Fake News 101.
And why does everyone keep saying Lockette was the No. 5 receiver? I would say Matthews was more of the No. 5. By the way, it was the OC who drew up the play to Matthews before the half. Never hear any credit given for that.

The only fact of the matter was that we were inches away from scoring a touchdown on that play and the Patriots rookie corner made a career-changing play.

Dude Bevel came right out in the media and blamed Lockette that si throwing him under the bus. After that its all BS excuses on your part and there for a waste of my time

 

[Siouxhawk]

Just more obfuscation and nonsense. What does that have anything to do with why our worst WR was made the first read on that play? Bevell chose Lockette for that personnel package. That alone was a stupid decision. The stupidity was only compounded by the dialing up of that play in that situation.

Actually Lockette was not the first read he was the only read it was a one read timing pattern, it was not designed to go to anyone else. PC said that was a designed quick timing route. The fact that not only did Lockette come out of the break slow he ran the route wrong only proves his coach failed him, then add his coach threw him under the bus and never took any responsibility and then add he should not have been put in that situation by his coach. We had a big Wr who had gotten over 100 yards and as a result they were forced to put Browner on him, you would think that he would be in at the goal line if for no other reason than to keep browner out of the play. Then the Wr who is the target is your 5 WR, then your asking a smaller WR Kearse to block a bigger CB in Browner. There were so many things wrong with the design and calling of that play it was pathetic, and alot of that falls at the feet of the OC that is a fact deal with it.

He didn't fail him and he didn't throw him under the bus. That is the proverbial making a mountain out of a molehill that gets perpetuated when those uninformed just repeat the myths. It's Fake News 101.
And why does everyone keep saying Lockette was the No. 5 receiver? I would say Matthews was more of the No. 5. By the way, it was the OC who drew up the play to Matthews before the half. Never hear any credit given for that.

The only fact of the matter was that we were inches away from scoring a touchdown on that play and the Patriots rookie corner made a career-changing play.

Dude Bevel came right out in the media and blamed Lockette that si throwing him under the bus. After that its all BS excuses on your part and there for a waste of my time

No he didn't. It's the echo chamber myth that you like to propagate. His words were "we" needed to go harder to the ball. That is hardly throwing anyone under the bus.
And he's right, because a split second quicker gives us a TD or a PI.

 

[hawkfan68]

No he didn't. It's the echo chamber myth that you like to propagate. His words were "we" needed to go harder to the ball. That is hardly throwing anyone under the bus.
And he's right, because a split second quicker gives us a TD or a PI.

Many sources closer to the team, IMO, believe Bevell did throw Lockette under the bus. So you can continue to call it a "myth" but where there's smoke there's fire. In this case the fire is obvious.

Here's a link of such an article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ve-been-stronger-to-ball?campaign=Twitter_atn. "Lockette could have been stronger to the ball. Bevell pointed out to reporters multiple times".

One more - http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...lockette-doesn-sit-seahawks-article-1.2102541

Waiting for your evidence that Bevell's throwing Lockette is a mere "echo chamber myth".....
That's the main reason people believe your posts lack credibility. You keep harping the same stuff even when proof is given otherwise.

 

[Siouxhawk]

No he didn't. It's the echo chamber myth that you like to propagate. His words were "we" needed to go harder to the ball. That is hardly throwing anyone under the bus.
And he's right, because a split second quicker gives us a TD or a PI.

Many sources closer to the team, IMO, believe Bevell did throw Lockette under the bus. So you can continue to call it a "myth" but where there's smoke there's fire. In this case the fire is obvious.

Here's a link of such an article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ve-been-stronger-to-ball?campaign=Twitter_atn. "Lockette could have been stronger to the ball. Bevell pointed out to reporters multiple times".

Here's the link to the Bing search I did to find the article....multiple sources...some even from media that have access to the team - https://www.bing.com/search?q=bevel...a23edc4b6990085853f9663eb4&first=11&FORM=PORE. There's at least six pages of articles and stuff on this.

Waiting for your evidence that Bevell's throwing Lockette is a mere "echo chamber myth".....
That's the main reason people believe your posts lack credibility. You keep harping the same stuff even when proof is given otherwise.

The exact quote was: "We could have done a better job staying strong on the ball." It's possible those in our society which just came to light with our national election might construe this as throwing someone under the bus, but I just see it as a coach telling the truth while responding to a reporter's postgame question.

And it was "we," not "Lockette"

Your bing links, by the way, just went to blogs which are opinion-based and tied in with your search criteria are very much the echo chamber of a myth.

 

[Anthony!]

No he didn't. It's the echo chamber myth that you like to propagate. His words were "we" needed to go harder to the ball. That is hardly throwing anyone under the bus.
And he's right, because a split second quicker gives us a TD or a PI.

Many sources closer to the team, IMO, believe Bevell did throw Lockette under the bus. So you can continue to call it a "myth" but where there's smoke there's fire. In this case the fire is obvious.

Here's a link of such an article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ve-been-stronger-to-ball?campaign=Twitter_atn. "Lockette could have been stronger to the ball. Bevell pointed out to reporters multiple times".

One more - http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/f...lockette-doesn-sit-seahawks-article-1.2102541

Waiting for your evidence that Bevell's throwing Lockette is a mere "echo chamber myth".....
That's the main reason people believe your posts lack credibility. You keep harping the same stuff even when proof is given otherwise.

Nice find I was looking, not the first time he has thrown others under the bus while not taking any responsibility.

 

[hawkfan68]

No he didn't. It's the echo chamber myth that you like to propagate. His words were "we" needed to go harder to the ball. That is hardly throwing anyone under the bus.
And he's right, because a split second quicker gives us a TD or a PI.

Many sources closer to the team, IMO, believe Bevell did throw Lockette under the bus. So you can continue to call it a "myth" but where there's smoke there's fire. In this case the fire is obvious.

Here's a link of such an article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ve-been-stronger-to-ball?campaign=Twitter_atn. "Lockette could have been stronger to the ball. Bevell pointed out to reporters multiple times".

Here's the link to the Bing search I did to find the article....multiple sources...some even from media that have access to the team - https://www.bing.com/search?q=bevel...a23edc4b6990085853f9663eb4&first=11&FORM=PORE. There's at least six pages of articles and stuff on this.

Waiting for your evidence that Bevell's throwing Lockette is a mere "echo chamber myth".....
That's the main reason people believe your posts lack credibility. You keep harping the same stuff even when proof is given otherwise.

The exact quote was: "We could have done a better job staying strong on the ball." It's possible those in our society which just came to light with our national election might construe this as throwing someone under the bus, but I just see it as a coach telling the truth while responding to a reporter's postgame question.

And it was "we," not "Lockette"

Your bing links, by the way, just went to blogs which are opinion-based and tied in with your search criteria are very much the echo chamber of a myth.

Yet you provide very little, except for your opinion, as evidence for your beliefs. Not a problem in that but it's your opinion it's a "myth". In reality it may not be a myth.

Plenty of sources closer to the team have stated that Bevell threw Lockette under the bus. Bob Condotta, Seattle Times reporter was the one who provided that quote. http://fansided.com/2015/02/02/seahawks-oc-darrell-bevell-throws-player-bus/

Once again who is more credible - a guy who spends his livelihood around the team as a sports reporter or someone who seems to worship the ground Darrell Bevell walks on, stating it's a "myth".

 

[Siouxhawk]

No he didn't. It's the echo chamber myth that you like to propagate. His words were "we" needed to go harder to the ball. That is hardly throwing anyone under the bus.
And he's right, because a split second quicker gives us a TD or a PI.

Many sources closer to the team, IMO, believe Bevell did throw Lockette under the bus. So you can continue to call it a "myth" but where there's smoke there's fire. In this case the fire is obvious.

Here's a link of such an article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ve-been-stronger-to-ball?campaign=Twitter_atn. "Lockette could have been stronger to the ball. Bevell pointed out to reporters multiple times".

Here's the link to the Bing search I did to find the article....multiple sources...some even from media that have access to the team - https://www.bing.com/search?q=bevel...a23edc4b6990085853f9663eb4&first=11&FORM=PORE. There's at least six pages of articles and stuff on this.

Waiting for your evidence that Bevell's throwing Lockette is a mere "echo chamber myth".....
That's the main reason people believe your posts lack credibility. You keep harping the same stuff even when proof is given otherwise.

The exact quote was: "We could have done a better job staying strong on the ball." It's possible those in our society which just came to light with our national election might construe this as throwing someone under the bus, but I just see it as a coach telling the truth while responding to a reporter's postgame question.

And it was "we," not "Lockette"

Your bing links, by the way, just went to blogs which are opinion-based and tied in with your search criteria are very much the echo chamber of a myth.

Yet you provide very little, except for your opinion, as evidence for your beliefs. Not a problem in that but it's your opinion it's a "myth". In reality it may not be a myth.

Plenty of sources closer to the team have stated that Bevell threw Lockette under the bus. Bob Condotta, Seattle Times reporter was the one who provided that quote. http://fansided.com/2015/02/02/seahawks-oc-darrell-bevell-throws-player-bus/

Once again who is more credible - a guy who spends his livelihood around the team as a sports reporter or someone who seems to worship the ground Darrell Bevell walks on, stating it's a "myth".

See, this right here is an example of the new labeled phenomenon called "fake news." You just did it. You said it was a quote from the Times' Bob Condotta, which would have been reputable, but in all actuality it was a blog from fansided from an author I've never heard of and it was nothing but his opinion. That's all. His opinion offers no more merit than a contributor on our .net forum here.

Bevell answered a question without malice. I'm sure even Ricardo himself wouldn't take issue with that explanation.

 

[Anthony!]

No he didn't. It's the echo chamber myth that you like to propagate. His words were "we" needed to go harder to the ball. That is hardly throwing anyone under the bus.
And he's right, because a split second quicker gives us a TD or a PI.

Many sources closer to the team, IMO, believe Bevell did throw Lockette under the bus. So you can continue to call it a "myth" but where there's smoke there's fire. In this case the fire is obvious.

Here's a link of such an article - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ve-been-stronger-to-ball?campaign=Twitter_atn. "Lockette could have been stronger to the ball. Bevell pointed out to reporters multiple times".

Here's the link to the Bing search I did to find the article....multiple sources...some even from media that have access to the team - https://www.bing.com/search?q=bevel...a23edc4b6990085853f9663eb4&first=11&FORM=PORE. There's at least six pages of articles and stuff on this.

Waiting for your evidence that Bevell's throwing Lockette is a mere "echo chamber myth".....
That's the main reason people believe your posts lack credibility. You keep harping the same stuff even when proof is given otherwise.

The exact quote was: "We could have done a better job staying strong on the ball." It's possible those in our society which just came to light with our national election might construe this as throwing someone under the bus, but I just see it as a coach telling the truth while responding to a reporter's postgame question.

And it was "we," not "Lockette"

Your bing links, by the way, just went to blogs which are opinion-based and tied in with your search criteria are very much the echo chamber of a myth.

Yet you provide very little, except for your opinion, as evidence for your beliefs. Not a problem in that but it's your opinion it's a "myth". In reality it may not be a myth.

Plenty of sources closer to the team have stated that Bevell threw Lockette under the bus. Bob Condotta, Seattle Times reporter was the one who provided that quote. http://fansided.com/2015/02/02/seahawks-oc-darrell-bevell-throws-player-bus/

Once again who is more credible - a guy who spends his livelihood around the team as a sports reporter or someone who seems to worship the ground Darrell Bevell walks on, stating it's a "myth".

LOl everyone hears him say it in his interview. so there really is no debating it.

 

[nash72]

So, yeah, our coaching staff is at least equal to what they have.

Yeah, not even close.

One more Super Bowl appearance this decade than us qualifies as close to me. And we're 1-1 in actual head-to-head meetings, so of course we're on par.

We beat them straight up this year on their own hallowed turf with all their key parts, so I think our coaching staff sent a pretty direct message that they're not anything we should be afraid of.

Yes we did. Shame that was Seattles superbowl this season. Did Carroll out coach Belichick in that game? Maybe, but that doesnt discount the fact that I would take any coach from the Patriots before I would take any of Seattles. Belichick will go down as the greatest NFL coach in history while Carroll will be remembered for the superbowl he pissed away. Thats how bad the play call was in the superbowl. It defined this team.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Carroll will have at least 2 and just might make it into the Hall before it's all said and done.

 

[nash72]

I've never said that so that would be your perception coming through. I'm sure Bevell wanted to see 3 more wins from the team as did all the coaching staff. But in retrospect, I'm sure they are proud of their work this year in lieu of all the key injuries and the struggling line. Lesser teams and coaching staffs wouldn't have gotten as far as we did.

So here's the difference between your and my mindset. I don't like to compare the Seahawks with lesser teams. I believe that they should be measured against the elite teams. I couldn't care less about what the lesser teams coaching staffs do. I care about what the Seahawks coaching staff does. In a few games against lesser coaching staffs this season, they got outcoached and outplayed. That's a fact.

Seattle has always played up or down to their competition under Carroll. Thats what separates New England from us in my opinion. They dont lose to teams they shouldnt lose to. Sure, maybe once it a blue moon buts its super rare. All the while it comes to no surprise to anybody when the Hawks lose to the Rams or the Saints. Thats the difference in coaching.

 

[hawkfan68]

See, this right here is an example of the new labeled phenomenon called "fake news." You just did it. You said it was a quote from the Times' Bob Condotta, which would have been reputable, but in all actuality it was a blog from fansided from an author I've never heard of and it was nothing but his opinion. That's all. His opinion offers no more merit than a contributor on our .net forum here.

Bevell answered a question without malice. I'm sure even Ricardo himself wouldn't take issue with that explanation.

I'm guessing you didn't even read the article but felt the need to dismiss it. If you would have scrolled down the article you would have seen the tweet from Bob Condotta. You didn't because you knew it would refute what you've been standing behind all along so you had to dismiss it as "fake news".

I'm certain that any player wouldn't appreciate a coach throwing him under a bus publicly. Furthermore, I would say most human beings wouldn't appreciate that if that happened to them. If Lockette didn't take issue, as you claim, then that says more about Lockette's maturity and character than it does about Bevell. I commend Lockette for being a better person.