For you Michael K.

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by DanielVogelbach » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:21 pm

D-train wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:02 pm
btw a lot of people were furious that PC punted on 4th and 11. If I was just a PC hater it would be pretty easy to jump on that band wagon but I have no problem with that decision. You have to have confidence in you D with all three TOs and the two minute warning. RW would have had plenty of time even if we had got it back if Graham hadn't been give the 1st down.
There were countless 3rd & longs converted by Rodgers. That's execution. That's not Pete. If they could've kept Adams out of the endzone on his cut move or any of the other red zone defensive opportunities it would've helped tremendously. (two 3rd and goals were 7s for GB I recall) If Myers hits the 50 yard field goal, it would've helped tremendously. So easy to go after the play caller when things don't work out. But, it was both run plays and pass plays that weren't working out in the first half. People are looking at the Lynch 3 runs getting stopped like there should be no credit given to GB for stopping that. It's a cat and mouse game with the play calling. Lynch had just ran for 8 yards.

The Pete call I wasn't crazy about was the first decision to go for 2. It was shaping up to maybe bite him in the ass. Had they scored another TD, they would've needed to convert the 2 point to go up 3. I was wondering if maybe they would give it to Lynch at that point for the 2 point. Too bad never got to find out the answer.

ThePro
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 2:12 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by ThePro » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:22 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:05 pm

I hear about Hollister and Turner’s drops too. And yeah, it pisses me off. But it also pisses me off how large of a roll those two seem to play in big downs. We used Hollister like he is Jimmy Graham, and when we had Jimmy Graham we used him like George Fant!

Different offensive coordinator now. Schotty would have used Graham correctly.

Michael K.
Posts: 11345
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by Michael K. » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:35 pm

DanielVogelbach wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:21 pm
D-train wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:02 pm
btw a lot of people were furious that PC punted on 4th and 11. If I was just a PC hater it would be pretty easy to jump on that band wagon but I have no problem with that decision. You have to have confidence in you D with all three TOs and the two minute warning. RW would have had plenty of time even if we had got it back if Graham hadn't been give the 1st down.
There were countless 3rd & longs converted by Rodgers. That's execution. That's not Pete. If they could've kept Adams out of the endzone on his cut move or any of the other red zone defensive opportunities it would've helped tremendously. (two 3rd and goals were 7s for GB I recall) If Myers hits the 50 yard field goal, it would've helped tremendously. So easy to go after the play caller when things don't work out. But, it was both run plays and pass plays that weren't working out in the first half. People are looking at the Lynch 3 runs getting stopped like there should be no credit given to GB for stopping that. It's a cat and mouse game with the play calling. Lynch had just ran for 8 yards.

The Pete call I wasn't crazy about was the first decision to go for 2. It was shaping up to maybe bite him in the ass. Had they scored another TD, they would've needed to convert the 2 point to go up 3. I was wondering if maybe they would give it to Lynch at that point for the 2 point. Too bad never got to find out the answer.
I understand there are specific changes that might have made a difference. All of those little things become less significant if we don't dig a huge hole.

Yes, the defense stunk, but the defense stunk all year. Once again, it reminds me of all the hand ringing about a shitty kicker two years ago. The guy was shitty when we got him and then we all act shocked that he is still shitty. Coach the team you have....the team we had has a crappy defense. And they spent the entire first half playing like they thought they could win 13 to 10.

This man coaches the exact same way, regardless of who his team is. He is so good at motivating these guys that he gets them to buy in. Imagine if he actually put them in a position to win?

I have faith they will probably improve the defense. And then, until we lose key players to injuries, his same old philosophy will work. I have just grown very tired of watching him in the last two playoff games taking a win or go home game and acting like he it is the right time to see if this team can grow. If Russ playing street ball is the only way you can win, you might not come out of the gates with that in week 1. But, in the playoffs? The second and long dive plays, the conservative passes, the insistence for about a month now to involve Hollister when he has frequently proven he is no more than a below average play maker? Like he is some kind of weapon? I don't get it.

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by DanielVogelbach » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:38 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:35 pm

I understand there are specific changes that might have made a difference. All of those little things become less significant if we don't dig a huge hole.
Same damn thing. You stop them at the goal line, you get a takeaway, you hit the 50 yard field goal, you cover Adams on his legendary cut to the endzone… you do some of those things, and the hole isn't as huge. If the defense is getting off the field on 3rd and long, then the hole isn't as huge. The point is that the hole wasn't huge because Pete called too many running plays. Cap did a nice job of breaking that down for you in the other thread.

Michael K.
Posts: 11345
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by Michael K. » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:47 pm

ThePro wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:22 pm
Michael K. wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:05 pm

I hear about Hollister and Turner’s drops too. And yeah, it pisses me off. But it also pisses me off how large of a roll those two seem to play in big downs. We used Hollister like he is Jimmy Graham, and when we had Jimmy Graham we used him like George Fant!

Different offensive coordinator now. Schotty would have used Graham correctly.
I'll never soften on Bevell, I think he sucks ass, and watching him blow it against the Packers in week 17 didn't change my mind. But, we are never going to have an offense that looks any different than this as long as Pete Carroll is here. He just hasn't realized that now that he isn't at USC, the other team has guys getting paid too.

Michael K.
Posts: 11345
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by Michael K. » Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:54 pm

Here is what you guys are telling me I have to accept....I have to accep Pete for what he is. So, fine.

- We are a team that will lose three or four divisional games every year because Pete has done the same shit for 10 years now and the teams he plays often know that.
- Because of that we will never win another divisional title, and even if we do, the 3 or 4 seed is most likely.
- Since I have been told that it is virtually impossible to win a second round playoff game on the road, we must now accept that the best we will ever be is a team that plays WC weekend and maybe one more.

I wonder if PC and JS hadn't assembled one of the best defenses every and went on that two year run, if they would still be around? I would love to say yes, since they have Russ Wilson, but we all now know that Russ sucks in the playoffs and is only good for two quarters...so we would probably be just another 9 or 10 win playoff team every year with no rings.

ThePro
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 2:12 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by ThePro » Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:42 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:54 pm
Here is what you guys are telling me I have to accept....I have to accep Pete for what he is. So, fine.

- We are a team that will lose three or four divisional games every year because Pete has done the same shit for 10 years now and the teams he plays often know that.
- Because of that we will never win another divisional title, and even if we do, the 3 or 4 seed is most likely.
- Since I have been told that it is virtually impossible to win a second round playoff game on the road, we must now accept that the best we will ever be is a team that plays WC weekend and maybe one more.


I wonder if PC and JS hadn't assembled one of the best defenses every and went on that two year run, if they would still be around? I would love to say yes, since they have Russ Wilson, but we all now know that Russ sucks in the playoffs and is only good for two quarters...so we would probably be just another 9 or 10 win playoff team every year with no rings.
No one has said this...

ThePro
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 2:12 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by ThePro » Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:48 pm

Michael K. wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:47 pm


I'll never soften on Bevell, I think he sucks ass, and watching him blow it against the Packers in week 17 didn't change my mind. But, we are never going to have an offense that looks any different than this as long as Pete Carroll is here. He just hasn't realized that now that he isn't at USC, the other team has guys getting paid too.
What do you want the offense to look like? They were top 5 most of the year. 1000 yard rusher and damn near two 1000 yard receivers with a 4000 yard QB.

Michael K.
Posts: 11345
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 5:27 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by Michael K. » Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:04 pm

ThePro wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:48 pm
Michael K. wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:47 pm


I'll never soften on Bevell, I think he sucks ass, and watching him blow it against the Packers in week 17 didn't change my mind. But, we are never going to have an offense that looks any different than this as long as Pete Carroll is here. He just hasn't realized that now that he isn't at USC, the other team has guys getting paid too.
What do you want the offense to look like? They were top 5 most of the year. 1000 yard rusher and damn near two 1000 yard receivers with a 4000 yard QB.
I would like him to coach the team he has, as I have said repeatedly. Believing that we could beat the Packers in Green Bay with the bullshit offensive game plan we attempted for 30 minutes is crap. Wasn't going to work with THIS roster. Maybe the team we had in November, but guess what, it wasn't November and we were a different team. If this was an anomaly I might be able to accept that. But, as we have broken down several times, these slow starts are not a new issue.

I am tired of hearing "it doesn't matter how you start." He actually had the balls to say that this week. When you lose the first half by 18, it kind of does matter, since you only won the second half by 13. The FINAL score matters Pete. In case you weren't aware, the Final score is not weighed heavier based on how many points you scored late in the game. They all matter the same. Many many instances were a slow start lead to a comeback that fell just short....but we are still being told the shitty ass starts don't matter. :roll:

ThePro
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 2:12 am

Re: For you Michael K.

Post by ThePro » Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:17 pm

Here's more ammo.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

https://twitter.com/evansilva/status/12 ... 66208?s=19

At this point Michael K's opinion is waaaay in the majority. Fans are tired of this shit.

I think it is more than a preference but instead a necessity. This is happening against teams with a great pass rush. I think it takes that long for the offense to adapt.

This off season is going to be huge . With lots of cap room and 12 draft picks (3 in first two rounds) Seahawks could fix alot of weaknesses. No excuse for a sub standard O line anymore. I would throw $$$ at the defense and draft a C and at least one T.

Post Reply