28-0, 14-0, 20-0, 9-0 and 31-0.

[Optimus25]

These are the five road playoff games under Carroll that we've fallen behind on.

Why?

Is it all the rah rah Pete screaming about we can't win games in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd quarter? Is it because Pete preaches it's not about starting, it's about finishing?

Well he's wrong, sometimes you do HAVE to start strong. Can't keep relying on insane come from behind wins because you finally wake up in the 2nd half.

So Pete either needs to figure this out, or change his philosophy of preaching this to his players, because yesterday it bit us in the ass, and it wasn't the first time. It's now a full blown issue.

Didn't help to have two interceptions thrown right from the get-go.
You can't come out cold and spot a 15 & 1 team 14 points....Wilson

Yes it didn't help to have two interceptions. So was Pete involved in the early game play call planning?. Cause the opening series was STUPID. Nothing excuses Petes culpability, and the opening series of both teams is no exception. Were the opening series from both teams a wake up call to the fact that the hawks are too soft in the first quarter, only to keep in the back of their mind the fact that Wilson will sustain a comeback hell or high water?. Again, on Pete.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Yes it didn't help to have two interceptions. So was Pete involved in the early game play call planning?. Cause the opening series was STUPID. Nothing excuses Petes culpability, and the opening series of both teams is no exception. Were the opening series from both teams a wake up call to the fact that the hawks are too soft in the first quarter, only to keep in the back of their mind the fact that Wilson will sustain a comeback hell or high water?. Again, on Pete.

That's my entire point.

Other than the Arizona game this year, Pete, Bevell and Russell come up with a conservative predictable approach to the offense at beginning of games...........and it's permeated to the other units. Thus the continually falling behind on the road in these playoff games.

Offense is so much predicated on tempo and rhythm. Once you find it? It's a thing of beauty. So why continue to play this conservative run the playclock down slow tempo tentative style of offense for 4-5 series before allowing Russell to let it rip?

 

[Optimus25]

But to OP point, why does nothing change?. If it's that obvious, it would seem to be a simple fix. For example, the same subpar offensive line was there in the second half. What changed?

Kearly points to circumstance. Which i see the point, but ultimately I'm with OP. The evidence is too strong and the numbers can't be excused and shushed. Too often we crap the bed out of the gate.

Nothing changes because Pete doesn't think it's a problem.

His philosophy is play conservative, see how the game unfolds and then pour it on to finish strong.............and he's won everywhere he's been. So hard to argue that philosophy.

But there's enough body of evidence to show that there's a fatal flaw in his philosophy and stubbornness to change how he coaches up his players and schemes/gameplans, and we saw it in spades yesterday.

Did he play it conservative against the Broncos? What about the last game with the Cardinals?

We have seen many games where the Hawks come out rolling, and others where they do not. Are we going to continue to ignore those games and focus on the ones we do not?

What you cite only buries you.

So you point to our two biggest victories ever and say what exactly?

Because the fact is yes, those two games were different, and also, exactly what it seems the OP wants.

What shouldn't be ignored is three quarters of zero points at Minnesota and two quarters of 31-0 at Carolina, and both were losses, albeit the gift of Ray finkles ghost says otherwise.

 

[Seahwkgal]

There is no straighting him out because there's nothing to straighten out. Sometimes things don't go our way. But you know what? Since Petes been here they usually do.

You're delusional dude. Then explain my thread line of being that far behind in EVERY road playoff game.

Also explain how we NEVER start fast in 90% of our regular season games. It's systemic, and it is a problem, whether you think so or not. The stats don't lie.

I bet you would trade this squad and coach for the 2005/2006 team wouldn't you? :laugh:

 

[scutterhawk]

These are the five road playoff games under Carroll that we've fallen behind on.

Why?

Is it all the rah rah Pete screaming about we can't win games in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd quarter? Is it because Pete preaches it's not about starting, it's about finishing?

Well he's wrong, sometimes you do HAVE to start strong. Can't keep relying on insane come from behind wins because you finally wake up in the 2nd half.

So Pete either needs to figure this out, or change his philosophy of preaching this to his players, because yesterday it bit us in the ass, and it wasn't the first time. It's now a full blown issue.

Didn't help to have two interceptions thrown right from the get-go.
You can't come out cold and spot a 15 & 1 team 14 points....Wilson

Yes it didn't help to have two interceptions. So was Pete involved in the early game play call planning?. Cause the opening series was STUPID. Nothing excuses Petes culpability, and the opening series of both teams is no exception. Were the opening series from both teams a wake up call to the fact that the hawks are too soft in the first quarter, only to keep in the back of their mind the fact that Wilson will sustain a comeback hell or high water?. Again, on Pete.

So mistakes made by Russell Wilson are Pete's fault. LOLOL yeah, okay.
I am one of Russell Wilson's BIGGEST fans, but those two hurry up passes were > HIS < mistakes and no one else takes the blame for the poor execution.
It looked to me like he was trying to force it to Lynch, and the communication went sour.

 

[scutterhawk]

So you point to our two biggest victories ever and say what exactly?

Because the fact is yes, those two games were different, and also, exactly what it seems the OP wants.

What shouldn't be ignored is three quarters of zero points at Minnesota and two quarters of 31-0 at Carolina, and both were losses, albeit the gift of Ray finkles ghost says otherwise.

I will say it again, whatever the hell Pete has been doing, has worked out very well for 70% of the games he's Coached for the Seahawks, not one, but TWO SUPER BOWL appearances, with one of them netting the Seahawks their very FIRST Lombardi, and some of Y'all want to piss and moan when we've FINALLY gotten a Head Coach that has delivered.....go figure. :34853_doh:

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So you point to our two biggest victories ever and say what exactly?

Because the fact is yes, those two games were different, and also, exactly what it seems the OP wants.

What shouldn't be ignored is three quarters of zero points at Minnesota and two quarters of 31-0 at Carolina, and both were losses, albeit the gift of Ray finkles ghost says otherwise.

I will say it again, whatever the hell Pete has been doing, has worked out very well for 70% of the games he's Coached for the Seahawks, not one, but TWO SUPER BOWL appearances, with one of them netting the Seahawks their very FIRST Lombardi, and some of Y'all want to piss and moan when we've FINALLY gotten a Head Coach that has delivered.....go figure. :34853_doh:

So Pete should just keep doing the same thing? He shouldn't evolve as a head coach and make minor changes to his philosophy?

This is pro sports, if you're not evolving and changing with the times you're going to devolve, players and coaches. Just ask guys like Marty Schottenheimer, who also refused to change how they coached, and ended up on the scrap heap because the game passed them by.

 

[DavidSeven]

What the do you want the guy to do? What are the solutions beyond more 'rah rah' conjecture?

He held an entire training camp at 10AM PST to address this issue.

At the end of the day, you can't fight against nature. Playing at 10AM once is tough enough; forcing a west coast team to play back-to-back 10AM games is empirically and objectively unfair. You can't coach a guy to run a race faster if the the competition doesn't have to run the same laps.

 

[Uncle Si]

What you cite only buries you.

So you point to our two biggest victories ever and say what exactly?

Because the fact is yes, those two games were different, and also, exactly what it seems the OP wants.

What shouldn't be ignored is three quarters of zero points at Minnesota and two quarters of 31-0 at Carolina, and both were losses, albeit the gift of Ray finkles ghost says otherwise.

It buries me because I didn't feel it necessary to continue with examples?

No, those two games were not different. It wouldn't be hard to maybe point to a 21-0 halftime lead against the Vikings this year, or the painful thumpings we gave Green Bay, or New Orleans?. Should we keep going? Were all those games different than the Super Bowl or Cardinal game? Is that virtually the same number of examples as the OP gave? Should we add the blowout wins against San Francisco and AZ in the PC era? How about at the Bills? at Atlanta? home to the Vikings (2013), at the Giants...at the Redskins (17-7 but Percy had two TDS taken off the board), at the Eagles?

Buried?

 

[scutterhawk]

So Pete should just keep doing the same thing? He shouldn't evolve as a head coach and make minor changes to his philosophy?

This is pro sports, if you're not evolving and changing with the times you're going to devolve, players and coaches. Just ask guys like Marty Schottenheimer, who also refused to change how they coached, and ended up on the scrap heap because the game passed them by.

I'm sorry, but we fans don't really know all the ins & outs of what's going on behind the scenes, and if Pete (with all his successes) has a psychological reason for Coaching a different way, I have to believe that he probably knows a thing or two that we aren't privy to.
What I'm reading from some here at .NET, is that you believe that he is either unaware of what he is doing, or that he has a self destruct EGO that is getting in his way.
If he comes out on a giddy-up & get after it, and we lose a game because of a premature burnout, there would be others bitching about him doing it the wrong way.
As far as I'm concerned, even Keel thinking, rhyme & rhythm execution, along with dictating the tempo of games has actually paid off for Pete.
Every single coach in the League makes mistakes, just check out how many of them were sitting at home while the Playoffs got under way, then do an honest assessment, and remember that Pete ( for all his perceived faults ) has taken our Seahawks into the playoff for 5 Years in a row, and that is hardly "Scrap Heap" production.
Look, there were mistakes made by the Seahawks on both Offense AND Defense in the first half, but yelling rah rah in their ears wasn't going to fix anything.
The Panthers came out on fire, but hey, they had a whole two Weeks to get ready for some road weary players to come play in their back yard.
The Panthers took advantage of the Seahawks messed up inner clock, but they would have been fools if they didn't milk it for all they could get.

 

[IndyHawk]

With 2 Super Bowls,I think Pete pretty much knows wtf he is doing.It isn't pretty but it wins games

 

[scutterhawk]

What the do you want the guy to do? What are the solutions beyond more 'rah rah' conjecture?

He held an entire training camp at 10AM PST to address this issue.

At the end of the day, you can't fight against nature. Playing at 10AM once is tough enough; forcing a west coast team to play back-to-back 10AM games is empirically and objectively unfair. You can't coach a guy to run a race faster if the the competition doesn't have to run the same laps.

You are exactly right, that's why they call it HFA, (plenty of time to get rested up)
It should be obvious as to why it's only fair that they give the final two teams an extra Week to prepare, acclimate, and play in a totally neutral Stadium. :th2thumbs:

 

[Optimus25]

What you cite only buries you.

So you point to our two biggest victories ever and say what exactly?

Because the fact is yes, those two games were different, and also, exactly what it seems the OP wants.

What shouldn't be ignored is three quarters of zero points at Minnesota and two quarters of 31-0 at Carolina, and both were losses, albeit the gift of Ray finkles ghost says otherwise.

It buries me because I didn't feel it necessary to continue with examples?

No, those two games were not different. It wouldn't be hard to maybe point to a 21-0 halftime lead against the Vikings this year, or the painful thumpings we gave Green Bay, or New Orleans?. Should we keep going? Were all those games different than the Super Bowl or Cardinal game? Is that virtually the same number of examples as the OP gave? Should we add the blowout wins against San Francisco and AZ in the PC era? How about at the Bills? at Atlanta? home to the Vikings (2013), at the Giants...at the Redskins (17-7 but Percy had two TDS taken off the board), at the Eagles?

Buried?

Well OP did distinguish road playoff games. With a team this talented you're going to find examples of early leads and big time first quarter play for sure.

But it's almost like you're dismissing the problem in lieu of some games it didn't occur.

In reality Pete himself said it's a problem, and one he doesn't know the fix for. So what exactly are you saying?. It didn't occur in some games so there!?

people who want to dismiss the conversation due to back to back super bowls need to remember two things:

1. San Fran nfccg was an uphill battle that we didn't fully surmount until a fluke fourth down free play backyard bomb touchdown.

2. Nfccg last year was one of the most epic comebacks ever. That relied on incredible luck in combination with absolute perfection in execution by Russ.

Both of these games were truly some of the greatest i have witnessed as a fan, but the reality is both easily could have went against us due to early game struggles.

I'm not even close to anti Pete as i am to just annihilating whatever the hell it is our first quarter offensive gameplan is and just resorting to bombs to Jimmy over and over. Literally could not produce less than Carolina, Minnesota, and both nfccg first quarters combined. Ok so that's a joke, but seriously, it'd produce more.

 

[Optimus25]

So you point to our two biggest victories ever and say what exactly?

Because the fact is yes, those two games were different, and also, exactly what it seems the OP wants.

What shouldn't be ignored is three quarters of zero points at Minnesota and two quarters of 31-0 at Carolina, and both were losses, albeit the gift of Ray finkles ghost says otherwise.

I will say it again, whatever the hell Pete has been doing, has worked out very well for 70% of the games he's Coached for the Seahawks, not one, but TWO SUPER BOWL appearances, with one of them netting the Seahawks their very FIRST Lombardi, and some of Y'all want to piss and moan when we've FINALLY gotten a Head Coach that has delivered.....go figure. :34853_doh:

There's not one person saying fire Pete, etc. So piss and moan otherwise, yes. We just went to a major important playoff game and went down 31-0 at half.

I'd say that's worth pissing and moaning. That means literally a blind kid and a donkey could have drew up the game plan and I'm pretty sure we could not have possibly done worse.

See my post above as well. I agree Pete is a blessing. Best time of my life as a fan. But using the back to back super bowls as your evidence is kinda self defeating, considering both games in the nfccg were epic comebacks that i don't think could happen twice. Both should have went against us due to poor starts.

So if we don't discuss that problem here, what's the point of .net?.

Rather everyone takes their happy pill and waits till next year's fourth quarter playoff deficit and Russ attempting to defy the odds?

Hell walshs kick may have been a detriment since people in this thread act like our best offense WASN'T a fumbled snap twenty yards in the backfield. Nothing to see here!. We're a success!

 

[Optimus25]

These are the five road playoff games under Carroll that we've fallen behind on.

Why?

Is it all the rah rah Pete screaming about we can't win games in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd quarter? Is it because Pete preaches it's not about starting, it's about finishing?

Well he's wrong, sometimes you do HAVE to start strong. Can't keep relying on insane come from behind wins because you finally wake up in the 2nd half.

So Pete either needs to figure this out, or change his philosophy of preaching this to his players, because yesterday it bit us in the ass, and it wasn't the first time. It's now a full blown issue.

Didn't help to have two interceptions thrown right from the get-go.
You can't come out cold and spot a 15 & 1 team 14 points....Wilson

Yes it didn't help to have two interceptions. So was Pete involved in the early game play call planning?. Cause the opening series was STUPID. Nothing excuses Petes culpability, and the opening series of both teams is no exception. Were the opening series from both teams a wake up call to the fact that the hawks are too soft in the first quarter, only to keep in the back of their mind the fact that Wilson will sustain a comeback hell or high water?. Again, on Pete.

So mistakes made by Russell Wilson are Pete's fault. LOLOL yeah, okay.
I am one of Russell Wilson's BIGGEST fans, but those two hurry up passes were > HIS < mistakes and no one else takes the blame for the poor execution.
It looked to me like he was trying to force it to Lynch, and the communication went sour.

Fair enough but who was involved in the opening series game plan?. Pretty sure Pete is in the mix.

And the opening series was absolute garbage.

Of course players are the tip of the spear out there, but to say Russ wasn't put in a position to fail on our opening series and the other INT is flat wrong.

They had a broken secondary unit, correct?. So why is our first play a RO and the second one which has Russ's safety valve going to the middle of the field?.

Isn't kuechly considered all pro?

Don't both those plays just flat out go right at the teeth of that defense?

Where's the quick slant to Doug?. Wheel route to lynch down the sideline?. Anything to the edges?

Allowing game planning to escape culpability is naivety at its finest.

 

[vonstout]

I feel like every one of these cases can be explained though.


2015: 9-0 vs Minnesota.

-6 degrees at kickoff. The Vikings got to practice in it all week. Seattle could not. 'Nuff said.

The weather didn't turn cold until Saturday night so the Vikings were practicing in colder weather (temp was in low 30's the week before) but nothing like the game temps.

 

[Uncle Si]

What you cite only buries you.

So you point to our two biggest victories ever and say what exactly?

Because the fact is yes, those two games were different, and also, exactly what it seems the OP wants.

What shouldn't be ignored is three quarters of zero points at Minnesota and two quarters of 31-0 at Carolina, and both were losses, albeit the gift of Ray finkles ghost says otherwise.

It buries me because I didn't feel it necessary to continue with examples?

No, those two games were not different. It wouldn't be hard to maybe point to a 21-0 halftime lead against the Vikings this year, or the painful thumpings we gave Green Bay, or New Orleans?. Should we keep going? Were all those games different than the Super Bowl or Cardinal game? Is that virtually the same number of examples as the OP gave? Should we add the blowout wins against San Francisco and AZ in the PC era? How about at the Bills? at Atlanta? home to the Vikings (2013), at the Giants...at the Redskins (17-7 but Percy had two TDS taken off the board), at the Eagles?

Buried?

Well OP did distinguish road playoff games. With a team this talented you're going to find examples of early leads and big time first quarter play for sure.

But it's almost like you're dismissing the problem in lieu of some games it didn't occur.

In reality Pete himself said it's a problem, and one he doesn't know the fix for. So what exactly are you saying?. It didn't occur in some games so there!?

people who want to dismiss the conversation due to back to back super bowls need to remember two things:

1. San Fran nfccg was an uphill battle that we didn't fully surmount until a fluke fourth down free play backyard bomb touchdown.

2. Nfccg last year was one of the most epic comebacks ever. That relied on incredible luck in combination with absolute perfection in execution by Russ.

Both of these games were truly some of the greatest i have witnessed as a fan, but the reality is both easily could have went against us due to early game struggles.

I'm not even close to anti Pete as i am to just annihilating whatever the hell it is our first quarter offensive gameplan is and just resorting to bombs to Jimmy over and over. Literally could not produce less than Carolina, Minnesota, and both nfccg first quarters combined. Ok so that's a joke, but seriously, it'd produce more.

The conversation quickly morphed away from road playoff games. But yes I see the point in your games. Mine is that there are just as many in which the Hawks did blow a team out in the first half. There were issues in the games listed. Do what's the difference then?

 

[scutterhawk]

Fair enough but who was involved in the opening series game plan?. Pretty sure Pete is in the mix.

And the opening series was absolute garbage.

Of course players are the tip of the spear out there, but to say Russ wasn't put in a position to fail on our opening series and the other INT is flat wrong.

They had a broken secondary unit, correct?. So why is our first play a RO and the second one which has Russ's safety valve going to the middle of the field?.

Isn't kuechly considered all pro?

Don't both those plays just flat out go right at the teeth of that defense?

Where's the quick slant to Doug?. Wheel route to lynch down the sideline?. Anything to the edges?

Allowing game planning to escape culpability is naivety at its finest.

Russell Wilson DID NOT EXECUTE.
Look, we can hash, and rehash on this til hell freezes over, but that ill advised and errant pass is still going to go against RW, JUST as his sensational play in the second half gets laid at his doorstep.
It wasn't Bevell nor was it Pete that messed up the execution of those two interception plays.
I guarantee you that both Pete and Darrell have given Wilson a whole lot more freedom to change a play, especially when they KNOW that he's quite capable of pulling off some fantastic plays, but if and when he does alter the plays, the buck stops there with him.

 

[Year of The Hawk]

IMHO Pete is running a simple scheme on both sides of the ball in the first half. It is a strategy. He has said as much himself. He is feeling out there play and lets them shoot there preverbal play load. He feels that even a little bit down in score he will have them figured out and counter there moves. Plus it seems we are better at regaining the lead as opposed to holding one. When you show to much to early you are easy to figure out. More strategy than anything else. It fits in with his whole mantra of finish strong.

Unfortunately this does not always work. It is frustrating for the fan but I will not criticize him for it because of his success with it overall. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

IMHO Pete is running a simple scheme on both sides of the ball in the first half. It is a strategy. He has said as much himself. He is feeling out there play and lets them shoot there preverbal play load. He feels that even a little bit down in score he will have them figured out and counter there moves. Plus it seems we are better at regaining the lead as opposed to holding one. When you show to much to early you are easy to figure out. More strategy than anything else. It fits in with his whole mantra of finish strong.

Unfortunately this does not always work. It is frustrating for the fan but I will not criticize him for it because of his success with it overall. You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.

This doesn't work for me.

Pete instilled this philosophy from day one because he had a rookie QB that he didn't want to ruin by putting too much on his shoulders trying not to damage Russell's growth.

That part of Russell's career is over, we now know he's the smartest, most savvy dynamic QB in the league. So it doesn't matter how good our D is, or how many points they're averaging giving up per game..........Russell is more than capable of going bananas on this league each and every game. Especially with our offensive weapons like Doug, Graham, Rawls, etc.

Why try and eek out 4th quarter come from behind wins 24-20? Why constantly put pressure on our D to hold leads late in games when we have a QB that can pound teams into dust?