Some of you really don't understand how Pete operates

[rcaido]

Sorry no danger we lose that game at all after the 24-0 lead...

You guys are acting like teenagers to their parents.

 

[xray]

When we go up 24-0, the opponent is no longer the other team -- it is the clock. Pete loosens the D and doesn't care if we give up 23 points. He goes conservative on O, to avoid turnovers and keep the clock moving.

The goal is to WIN, that is to win the game -- period. Not win by a landslide. Winning by 50-0 is pointless because margin of victory only means something in college football, it is irrelevant in the NFL.

Sure, we could have tackled much better, and maybe a few offensive plays could have been better disguised. But in t the end, we have a W, and that's the only thing that counts.

Carroll was disappointed and called the second half " lousy " . He said that he needs to do a better job coaching . You tell us that you understand Carroll ; but obviously you don't .

 

[bbsplitter]

Once again the difference in offense from first half to second was more about execution than play calls. First possession they called 2 run and 2 pass, Carson ran great in the first so one would think feeding him the rock to start the second with a big lead was the right cal but.... a penalty creating 1st & 15 and then a sack.

Second possession, 2 runs and one completed pass. Giving the ball to Carson on 3&3 is a call I’m ok with, didn’t work.

Third possession 10 plays over 6min and a FG, score 27-11. Can’t complain about that one.

4th possession 3 and out but Atalanta had to use all their T.O. And was left with 2:41 down by 13. I’m not mad at that sequence either.

Last possession.... kneel down winner

I know people here think that because Atlanta was 1-6 they sucked but they really are a better team than the record would suggest. Playing at home they showed a little pride and played a solid second half. HAWKS WIN

Exactly, I don't think it was as conservative as people thought, we just didn't execute. Most of them were smart plays where if you were sat down in a vacuum and asked which play was the best for each situation you would have agreed.

 

[HawkerD]

[ If not for the questionable falcon fumble inside the 5, and 2 missed field goals that is a loss.

Sure. And if Russ didn't throw those 2 TD passes and if Kendricks doesn't intercept that pass, and Bobby decides to sleep in yesterday, we get blown out and Pete makes the team walk home from Atlanta.

Suck it up dude, read the rest of the thread. No one agrees...NOT EVEN PC! Your premise has ZERO standing. Now pick up your toys and go home.

 

[Tusc2000]

[ If not for the questionable falcon fumble inside the 5, and 2 missed field goals that is a loss.

Sure. And if Russ didn't throw those 2 TD passes and if Kendricks doesn't intercept that pass, and Bobby decides to sleep in yesterday, we get blown out and Pete makes the team walk home from Atlanta.

Suck it up dude, read the rest of the thread. No one agrees...NOT EVEN PC! Your premise has ZERO standing. Now pick up your toys and go home.

Sadly, I did read what you wrote, and your rant was not worth re-posting. Your insults are foolish, immature, and frankly they are pretty lame.

 

[bbsplitter]

[ If not for the questionable falcon fumble inside the 5, and 2 missed field goals that is a loss.

Sure. And if Russ didn't throw those 2 TD passes and if Kendricks doesn't intercept that pass, and Bobby decides to sleep in yesterday, we get blown out and Pete makes the team walk home from Atlanta.

Suck it up dude, read the rest of the thread. No one agrees...NOT EVEN PC! Your premise has ZERO standing. Now pick up your toys and go home.

Sadly, I did read what you wrote, and your rant was not worth re-posting. Your insults are foolish, immature, and frankly they are pretty lame.

We all want the Seahawks to win. We don't always agree on how to go about that. Simple. No need to make it personal for either of you.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Group hug...….

 

[kf3339]

What PC says is that "It's not how you start, but how you finish" or something like that all the time.

If yesterday was an indicator, then you can clearly state that something happened, which changed how this team played the second half. Either he changed his own mantra because of DQ, or he just went into a prevent offense and defense to drain the clock. Either way he made this game far closer than what should have happened.

We won which is the most important thing. But it does question his own mantra about how he manages a game as the HC for this team. Lets hope he sees this himself, and realizes that something went very wrong in the second half and doesn't do it again. Ever.

 

[DomeHawk]

I can't believe we have won three 10-AM games. Has that happened before?

 

[Shanegotyou11]

When we go up 24-0, the opponent is no longer the other team -- it is the clock. Pete loosens the D and doesn't care if we give up 23 points. He goes conservative on O, to avoid turnovers and keep the clock moving.

The goal is to WIN, that is to win the game -- period. Not win by a landslide. Winning by 50-0 is pointless because margin of victory only means something in college football, it is irrelevant in the NFL.

Sure, we could have tackled much better, and maybe a few offensive plays could have been better disguised. But in t the end, we have a W, and that's the only thing that counts.

Carroll was disappointed and called the second half " lousy " . He said that he needs to do a better job coaching . You tell us that you understand Carroll ; but obviously you don't .

He also said he was rotating players in and out on O and D to see what they could do and keep team fresh.

So you are right he said both parts.

 

[Sports Hernia]

He clearly DID let up. That doesn't make it right though. Go for the throat, period.
We are all aware of how Pete operates.

Bingo. This.

 

[rcaido]

I can't believe we have won three 10-AM games. Has that happened before?

Never and we still got one more to go against the Panthers. We are winning road games & 10AM games, people complaining about not blowing out teams.... :?

 

[2_0_6]

Five years ago in the same spot Pete continues to throttle down and blow the team out. As of late and especially yesterday he seems to play to not lose instead of playing to solidify a win.

I want the old Pete back.

 

[AgentDib]

The hawks were on the brink of losing the game.

Maybe it felt that way as an emotional fan but that just isn't the case.

That doesn't make it right though. Go for the throat, period.

Being aggressive with a big lead works most of the time, but it also backfires now and then. That's how the Packers let us back in the game in the playoffs and how the Falcons blew the 28-3 lead over the Patriots in the Super Bowl. It's not worth being more entertained as a fan to have a lower chance of winning.

I don't suppose any of the complainers can tell me what Pete's record here with a lead at halftime is?

 

[John63]

Once again the difference in offense from first half to second was more about execution than play calls. First possession they called 2 run and 2 pass, Carson ran great in the first so one would think feeding him the rock to start the second with a big lead was the right cal but.... a penalty creating 1st & 15 and then a sack.

Second possession, 2 runs and one completed pass. Giving the ball to Carson on 3&3 is a call I’m ok with, didn’t work.

Third possession 10 plays over 6min and a FG, score 27-11. Can’t complain about that one.

4th possession 3 and out but Atalanta had to use all their T.O. And was left with 2:41 down by 13. I’m not mad at that sequence either.

Last possession.... kneel down winner

I know people here think that because Atlanta was 1-6 they sucked but they really are a better team than the record would suggest. Playing at home they showed a little pride and played a solid second half. HAWKS WIN

Exactly, I don't think it was as conservative as people thought, we just didn't execute. Most of them were smart plays where if you were sat down in a vacuum and asked which play was the best for each situation you would have agreed.

Hmm so the answer when things go bad is execution, not coaching but execution. So the coaching always gets a pass. Got it. So running a play right to were the defense is expecting it and thinking it will work is on the players not the coaches. Got it. While I don't agree at least I get were some stand, coaches gods don't make mistakes, players mortal and worthless, as its all about the coaches and if what they say does not work it's the players not executing. Hmm

 

[bbsplitter]

The hawks were on the brink of losing the game.

Maybe it felt that way as an emotional fan but that just isn't the case.

Agreed. Onside kicks have an extremely low percentage of success since the rule change they are almost impossible. If they would have recovered it I would have agreed they were "on the brink" of losing. But onside kicks fail far too often to consider it "on the brink" of anything.

 

[John63]

The hawks were on the brink of losing the game.

Maybe it felt that way as an emotional fan but that just isn't the case.

Agreed. Onside kicks have an extremely low percentage of success since the rule change they are almost impossible. If they would have recovered it I would have agreed they were "on the brink" of losing. But onside kicks fail far too often to consider it "on the brink" of anything.

We got lucky wiht the fumble that ws not a fumble, if that is called correctly we loose. So yeah it was that close.

 

[bbsplitter]

The hawks were on the brink of losing the game.

Maybe it felt that way as an emotional fan but that just isn't the case.

Agreed. Onside kicks have an extremely low percentage of success since the rule change they are almost impossible. If they would have recovered it I would have agreed they were "on the brink" of losing. But onside kicks fail far too often to consider it "on the brink" of anything.

We got lucky wiht the fumble that ws not a fumble, if that is called correctly we loose. So yeah it was that close.

If it was not a fumble, don't you mean if they had called it incorrectly?

 

[HawkerD]

During Pete's hypothetical next interview

Team owner: Pete, Tell me about tour basic in game coaching philosophy

Pete: Well I go one of two ways. Either I start slow and let the other team build a lead so I can turn the helm over to my MVP QB and have him engineer a big comeback. Or I start fast and build a big lead so I can let the other team catch back up and make it real interesting at the end. At the end of the day its about keeping it close because a lot of fans like competitive games.

Team owner: But Pete isn't it better to go out, get the lead and keep it. Break the other teams morale and glide to victory?

Pete: I say always compete and there is nothing competitive in a blow out.

Team owner: Well I just want to win!

Pete: Didn't you watch Super Bowl 49? Sure I could have had Marshawn just run it in but where was the fun in that. I wanted to make it competitive! And you know what, they will be talking about that playcall for the next 100 years. I made history right there!

Team owner: Well thanks for your insights Pete. We'll let you know.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

We were not going to loSE that game, but they made it a game by going conservative. Should have went for the throat, it's 2019. Pete needs to stop living in his past and adjust. The Falcons got incredibly lucky when the Hawks dropped an easy pick 6. It goes both ways.