Bevell is at it again... bad plays against a weak Defense

[pocketprotector]

If scoring too quickly is problem, maybe the defense can start the game by letting the other team score on the first play of every drive in the first half. It will keep our defense fresh and the opposing defense on the field!

 

[sekiuHAWK]

We really needed to keep the ball in this game because of the extreme conditions. This could have been achieved by pounding the rock with Lynch. Our Defense was on the field for most of the game in temperatures near 120 degrees. I have always disliked Bevell because of games like this. Our defense wasn't perfect but I would posit that this was a mirage as they were not given a fair chance to succeed. I really think it is ridiculous that our major weapons were not utilized... Bevell gets ideas that just don't make sense.... The other team may know what you are going to do, but when you have players like lynch and harvin..... Make them stop those players.... For gods sake this is not rocket science ... When they can't stop these players everything else opens up.... But you have to set it up properly first... Bevell has no concept of this

 

[RiverDog]

"If scoring too quickly is problem, maybe the defense can start the game by letting the other team score on the first play of every drive in the first half. It will keep our defense fresh and the opposing defense on the field!"[/quote]

Don't be silly. We're talking about the last half of the 4th quarter. Like a chess player, coaches start looking several moves ahead in the 4th quarter, and projecting how many possessions are available and how much time is likely to remain is a common means of developing a strategy. Had we eaten up more time on our last drive vs. Atlanta in the playoffs two years ago, we might have made it to the SB a year earlier than we did.

It was pretty clear to me that the 4th and 2 at the 36 yard line was our best shot to win the game. It is incorrect to say that we would have less than a 50% chance to convert the 4th and 2. We converted over 54% last season even with all our backup Offensive Linemen and no Harvin. Good Teams like Denver can convert nearly 90% over the course of the season.


No, it is not incorrect, at least not necessarily. The 54% 4th down conversion rate from last season was an overall percentage of all 4th down plays regardless of distance. I would suspect that several of those successful conversions were 4th and inches, a little easier to pick up than 4th and 2, which is a passing situation.

No team goes for it on 4th and 2 from their own 36 unless it is their last option. We had 8 minutes left, two timeouts and the 2 minute warning, and were trailing by just 6 points. That is far from being our last option.

Look at it this way: Pete is as big a gambler as there is in the league and has on more than one occasion rolled the dice and gone against conventional wisdom, and he didn't think twice about sending out the punting team. What does that say about the wisdom of going for it in that situation?

 

[RolandDeschain]

What does that say about the wisdom of going for it in that situation?

It means that he is not, in fact, the Messiah returned to Earth and is capable of making a mistake once in a while like the rest of us mere mortals.

 

[Tical21]

Going for a 4th down from your own 36 is one of those things that a football coach can do until the first time they don't convert, at which time they will never do it again for the rest of their lives.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Going for a 4th down from your own 36 is one of those things that a football coach can do until the first time they don't convert, at which time they will never do it again for the rest of their lives.

Because if they don't convert and then the other team scores they get crucified for it.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

It rained today. Thanks a lot Bevell.

 

[Jacknut16]

They ran another 5+ minutes off the clock AND the switched the field on us, pinning us way back in our own end.

There was no way you could expect the defense to all of the sudden put up a 3 and out , and guess what they didnt.

And did you just say the Chargers were just as gassed, REALLY?? Please tell me you dont think that.

Because we punted and put them back on their own 20, we didn't need a 3 and out, and them running off 5 minutes didn't hurt, either, as a matter of fact, it might have worked out perfectly had we scored on what ended up being our last drive as it would have left them very little time remaining on the game clock. You go for it on 4th and 2 at our 36 with 8 minutes remaining and score, you almost certainly would be giving them the ball back with time left to get into FG range.

The fact that we only forced the Chargers to punt twice in the entire game, and one of those coming from their subsequent series after our punt on 4th and 2 is proof that our defense was no more gassed than were the Chargers at that particular point in the game. If they were as gassed as you claim they were, they would have gone through our defense like a hot knife through butter, and that didn't happen.

You said the Chargers were just as gassed as the Hawks were.

Hard to have a legit conversation with someone who is so blatantly wrong.

Everyone else saw it, but for some reason you think that defense was just as well off as San Diego's.

Hell, after that last punt the Chargers ran Vanilla plays and they still burned 5 minutes off the clock and pinned us down in our own end.

Our chance to win that game went WAY down when we put that gassed defense back on the field and basically said he get back out there. NO, it was the offenses time to pick up the defense and it didnt do it, and partly because we should have gone for it on 4th and 2.

I didnt like that it showed little confidence in our offense, as well as the gimmick plays we were calling at time, and especially the Jet sweep at the end of the game. If Carroll Believes RW3 is one of the best why are we even dreaming of not letting him air it out more? We out smarted ourselves at times sunday, live and learn.

 

[hawk45]

It seemed to me that our defense was much, much more tired than the Charger D.

I think we should have gone on 4th and 2 but maybe Pete was saying to himself "gee I'd really like to go here but I'm afraid Bevell would dial up a Turbin 3 yard loss, so yeah, send the punt team out."

:stirthepot:

 

[RiverDog]

You said the Chargers were just as gassed as the Hawks were.

Hard to have a legit conversation with someone who is so blatantly wrong.

Everyone else saw it, but for some reason you think that defense was just as well off as San Diego's.

Hell, after that last punt the Chargers ran Vanilla plays and they still burned 5 minutes off the clock and pinned us down in our own end.

Our chance to win that game went WAY down when we put that gassed defense back on the field and basically said he get back out there. NO, it was the offenses time to pick up the defense and it didnt do it, and partly because we should have gone for it on 4th and 2.

I didnt like that it showed little confidence in our offense, as well as the gimmick plays we were calling at time, and especially the Jet sweep at the end of the game. If Carroll Believes RW3 is one of the best why are we even dreaming of not letting him air it out more? We out smarted ourselves at times sunday, live and learn.

If anyone is blatantly wrong, it's you, as you said our defense was completely GASSED, in caps. You have no factual evidence to support your contention. What you have failed to do is explain how the defense could have played their best football and achieved their best results in the 4th quarter if they were as completely GASSED as you are claiming they were. And it's not as if the Chargers could afford to sit on a 3 score lead, either. The differential was 6 points.

Agreed that the offense let us down in the 4th quarter. The defense gave the offense two opportunities, with plenty of time on both occasions, to score and take the lead. It may not have been great field position, but that wasn't the '85 Bears out there, either.

 

[Jacknut16]

You said the Chargers were just as gassed as the Hawks were.

Hard to have a legit conversation with someone who is so blatantly wrong.

Everyone else saw it, but for some reason you think that defense was just as well off as San Diego's.

Hell, after that last punt the Chargers ran Vanilla plays and they still burned 5 minutes off the clock and pinned us down in our own end.

Our chance to win that game went WAY down when we put that gassed defense back on the field and basically said he get back out there. NO, it was the offenses time to pick up the defense and it didnt do it, and partly because we should have gone for it on 4th and 2.

I didnt like that it showed little confidence in our offense, as well as the gimmick plays we were calling at time, and especially the Jet sweep at the end of the game. If Carroll Believes RW3 is one of the best why are we even dreaming of not letting him air it out more? We out smarted ourselves at times sunday, live and learn.

If anyone is blatantly wrong, it's you, as you said our defense was completely GASSED, in caps. You have no factual evidence to support your contention. What you have failed to do is explain how the defense could have played their best football and achieved their best results in the 4th quarter if they were as completely GASSED as you are claiming they were. And it's not as if the Chargers could afford to sit on a 3 score lead, either. The differential was 6 points.

Agreed that the offense let us down in the 4th quarter. The defense gave the offense two opportunities, with plenty of time on both occasions, to score and take the lead. It may not have been great field position, but that wasn't the '85 Bears out there, either.

You were wrong about the Chargers being just as tired as the Hawks defense.

I think you would get 99/100 people agreeing with this whom watched the game.

Agreed on everything else.

 

[RiverDog]

You were wrong about the Chargers being just as tired as the Hawks defense.

I think you would get 99/100 people agreeing with this whom watched the game.

Agreed on everything else.

In your opinion I was wrong, and your theoretical poll of 99% of the audience agreeing with you is an outrageous assumption. Let me know if you ever want to elicit a viewer poll on that question and bet on your 99% outcome.

Bottom line is that the facts do not support a conclusion that our defense was, in your words, completely GASSED. If anything, they support my contention that they were no more gassed than the Chargers.

 

[hawk45]

Our defense was 2 steps slow and laboring from the opening kickoff and it only got worse as they couldn't get off the field and it was obvious. In this case the 99% poll idea isn't hyperbole, I'm genuinely surprised this point is being argued by anyone anywhere.

What facts support the 2 defenses being equally tired? In a regular game with regular temps, lopsided TOP would lead to lopsided defensive fatigue; this is taken as a given. That game was one of the more dramatic examples of lopsided defensive fatigue that I've witnessed.

 

[RiverDog]

Our defense was 2 steps slow and laboring from the opening kickoff and it only got worse as they couldn't get off the field and it was obvious. In this case the 99% poll idea isn't hyperbole, I'm genuinely surprised this point is being argued by anyone anywhere.

What facts support the 2 defenses being equally tired? In a regular game with regular temps, lopsided TOP would lead to lopsided defensive fatigue; this is taken as a given. That game was one of the more dramatic examples of lopsided defensive fatigue that I've witnessed.

The comparison wasn't between the two defenses. The comparison was between the Seattle defense and the San Diego offense. They were both on the field for exactly the same amount of time.

I never have accepted the theory that the defense expends more energy than does the offense with the result being that the defense gets more tired out. With substitutions and conditioning being equal, the energy demands are pretty much the same. If you're successful and banging out first downs, you don't seem to be getting as tired, but the reality is that you've burned roughly the same amount of calories as your opponent. It's all psychological.

 

[chris98251]

Offense could change out their skill guys at will , RB's WR's TE's, also as a defender you are attempting to beat or run around a blocker, a Blocker just has to lean into you and shadow a defender, the opposite happens in Run Blocking where the Offense is the aggressor and needs to inflict their will on the defense.

Also stress and pressure of being behind and trying to make something happen adds to the fatigue.

Much easier being ahead and relaxed so to speak and pushing around a defense then trying to stop a offense and get caught up.

 

[Tokadub]

there wasn't a game management decision that Pete could have done differently that would have improved our chances of winning.

I strongly disagree with that statement. If we had run the ball with Beast Mode or even Turbin we could of scored just as many if not more points. It's kinda silly to hear people say over and over again we didn't have any opportunities on Offense... That's simply not true we had 10 drives...

Out of 10 drives we scored 3 times...

Against a horrible defense like the Chargers scoring 3 times out of 10 drives is downright pathetic.

If we had run the ball more we could of ate up the clock and our Defense would of performed better. I can say that with 99% certainty the Defense would of played better if they were on the field for 30 minutes instead of 42.

And on that 4th and 2 punt... I know we are so used to our Defense dominating so that decision would traditionally make sense for the Pete Carroll/Russell Wilson team. However this game was the COMPLETE OPPOSITE.

I guarantee you that if we hired like the most brilliant mathematicians/statisticians/football coaches in the world and gave them this scenario:

"You are 4th and 2 with 64 yards to go and 8 minutes left. Your Defense has been on the field nearly 40 minutes and has allowed 24 first downs already. It's 115 degrees on the field, and your Defense hasn't generated a single takeaway. Your offense is averaging 7.2 yards per play + you have 3 of the best offensive play makers in the NFL. WHAT DO YOU DO?"

EVEN IF THEY KNEW OUR DEFENSE COULD GET A STOP AND NOT ALLOW THE CHARGERS A GAME WINNING FIELD GOAL... I'M POSITIVE THE EXPERT BRILLIANT MATHEMTICIANS/STATICIANS/FOOT BALL COACHES WOULD SAY WE SHOULD OF GONE FOR IT ON 4TH AND 2...

The sad thing is we didn't even know if we could stop them from scoring a field goal... and even if we did it's very unlikely we'd have a better opportunity than 4th and 2 with 64 yards to go.

Punting was a bad coaching decision plain and simple.

 

[Tokadub]

Love your conviction bro...but inventing numbers to bolster your position won't win you many debates. Just sayin'.

First, you and the others that believe punting cost us the game need to offer some examples that show the success rate of teams that were down by 6 (or 7 or less), then went for a 4th and 2 from their own 36 with 8:00 remaining in the game.

I think you will find very few teams have even attempted such a thing and trickeration should be excluded from your findings unless you are saying we should have faked the punt. This information is paramount to your argument, imo.

I know you don't believe Denver converts on such plays 90% of the time. Why would they ever punt in that situation if that was even remotely close to truth. And if it's not truth, why fabricate such a number?

You feel we had an 80% chance of converting. I don't want to be one of the yoyos in here that ask the question "do you think you know more than Pete"? But in this instance, I have to ask just that. IF Pete thought we'd have those odds, surely he would have ran a play. Or do you think he didn't see the D was struggling and / or affected by the heat? He built this team, we watch his build. Pete made the call that he felt gave us the best chance to win. Why would he not?

You continue that we have 3 of the best playmakers in the game so should be able to easily convert. Lynch aside, none of those guys can block and Harvin was virtually non-existent by that point in time.

Not punting on 4th and 2 was far from the "nail in our coffin". Not converting would have put SD damn near in field goal range. a single 1st down and they're now up by 9 with the clock ticking....and our D that much more gassed.

Pete made the right call. I've not seen a single headline or even a story reading or suggesting "Hawks decision to not go on 4th and 2 results in loss". That's because it didn't.

Make no mistake, I admire you guys that wanted to roll the dice in that situation. You are passionate fans that believe we would convert and go onto win the game. And you could be right...but that wouldn't make Pete wrong.

You have a very limited mind set and point of view when it comes to this game (in my opinion).

Every game is different and all you need to do is look at this ONE GAME to know that punting in that situation was a horrible coaching decision (see my previous post for a clear no-brainer explanation).

Look up the stats... I linked it in a previous post in this thread... Denver did in fact convert 89% of their 4th down conversions last season. I'm not sure what you are even talking about when you say "I know you don't believe Denver converts on such plays 90% of the time."... FACT DENVER CONVERTED ON 89% OF 4th DOWNS LAST SEASON.

Pete and or Bevell made a mistake... it happens nobody is perfect. They made a mathematically poor decision given the way this game was going. They took our best chance to win the game and gave the ball to them instead. It's a fact, and we lost it's history.

We never got another opportunity that was so easy 4th and 2 on the 36... And we never should have expected to have a better opportunity.

All they needed was a field goal to win after our punt which was a heck of a lot more likely than us not converting a 4th and 2 AND us having a game winning drive pinned back with 90 yards to go AFTER stopping them from scoring a Field Goal.

Our coaches made a monumental blunder in this game plain and simple. If you can't see that you either have blind love for our coaches and think they can't ever make 1 single mistake or you lack critical thinking skills/analysis.

 

[Tokadub]

And seriously what do you think our chances of converting on 4th and 2 were?

I certainly think it's a lot more likely than preventing the Chargers from scoring a Field Goal AND driving it ALL THE WAY DOWN THE FIELD FOR 90 YARDS WITH VERY LITTLE TIME REMAINING...

If we can't convert 4th and 2 at least 75% of the time with our offensive personnel against a TERRIBLE DEFENSE (one of worst in league) Bevell is a joke IMO...

 

[Tokadub]

Funny how a loss instantly changes sound decisions to bad play calls.

Keep hoisting that banner of hindsight, Doobie and Roland.

Actually I was noticing the bad play calls from the start of the game. And it didn't take us losing the game for me to realize we made a poor decision punting the ball. It was simple mathematical probability based on how THIS GAME WAS GOING up until that point. And the probability for winning after punting wasn't even comparable to going for it on 4th and 2. The coaches screwed up.

People need to be able to look at this game in isolation, not from the perspective of the historically great defense of the Superbowl Champs from last season.

We don't know if we'll be that good on defense this season, it's very unlikely and we are off to a bad start.

If this was a game where our defense was dominating and not dehydrated and totally outplayed the ENTIRE GAME then punting WOULD of been the correct decision. Apparently some people are so hyped up about our previous defensive performances (which may no longer exist), they can't analyze this game correctly.

Fact is right now our Offense has looked much better than our Defense, and it's been that way since pre-season. Some of you might need to get used to the idea of our Offense carrying some of the load and not depending on our Defense every single time.

If we depend on Defense every single time like we did against the Chargers, we won't win the Superbowl IMO.

 

[Tokadub]

You were wrong about the Chargers being just as tired as the Hawks defense.

I think you would get 99/100 people agreeing with this whom watched the game.

Agreed on everything else.

In your opinion I was wrong, and your theoretical poll of 99% of the audience agreeing with you is an outrageous assumption. Let me know if you ever want to elicit a viewer poll on that question and bet on your 99% outcome.

Bottom line is that the facts do not support a conclusion that our defense was, in your words, completely GASSED. If anything, they support my contention that they were no more gassed than the Chargers.

You're very VERY wrong. Are you being serious here? 42 minutes for the defense in 115 degree temperature? If it was EVER EVEN PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE FOR A DEFENSE TO BE GASSED... THIS WAS THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO OF A DEFENSE BEING GASSED.

I guess you think Defenses never get tired? That's the only conclusion a sane individual could conclude from your posts.

It's likely the Chargers failed to score on that drive because they were starting to get tired too, but they were no where near as tired as the Defense because they were able to dictate the game and dominate. Meaning while our entire defense was running for their lives trying to stop them and exerting maximum energy the entire game, their offense was calmly executing and on many plays their guys weren't going 100%.

Nobody ever talks about the Offense getting tired, defensive players in general exert much more energy over the course of the game.

Not even sure why I'm responding to you, it's so absurd that you would try to argue that.