Finally Re-Watched It (or, Veta Beats the Horse)

[Vetamur]

Kearly..I disagree, but totally see what youre saying.

Bevell sent out the 11 personnel grouping (3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB) hoping that the Patriots would go either nickel or base at worst.. which would then be ideal to run from. He knew that our jumbo vs their jumbo in short yardage situations hadnt worked all day. So, once the Patriots stayed in their jumbo formation.. 3 wrs is still a good formation to be in. It doesnt play to our BEST strength, but in theory its a good matchup.. 3 WRs and they are in jumbo? The Pats just didnt want to lose the game not defending what we do best... and to me that indicates they were ripe for play action. But without Bevells play calling, and yes, in my opinion, creativity we never get to that point.

I see a lot of knocks on his creativity and play calling here..but so much of it seems hindsight^20/20ish. The 3rd and 3 call where people think we should have just gone for the first down..but thats a hallmark of Seahawk football. And most of the time its worked out. They take those shots when they seem. What game was it where is 4th and 7 and they went end zone. That was a touch down so no one says anything, but its a run first offense that wants big plays from the passing game and will grab at those opportunities.

I totally agree Bevell has faults. Im optimistic that he will address some of them. But if not, like Kearly says, at least next season we have Graham!

 

[kearly]

I think it's insane to not blame Bevell for a 3 WR 1 RB formation on 2nd and goal from the 1. But blame him 100% for the loss? Definitely not. It was a culmination of so many things, Bevell getting cute was just one bad play.

Still, it would be nice if Bevell and Pete learned their lesson, and I don't think they did. That's part of the reason I'm so enthused about the Graham trade, as it basically amounts to giving Bevell a bumper car to crash the next time he thinks he's being secretly clever. A higher percentage of those stupid decisions will pay off with a 6'7" power forward to chuck the ball to.

Didn't the Pat's run out their Goalline Defense? This is part of Bevell being cute instead of playing a power/Run-Option play.

Veta... this horse will be beaten to death until the end of time. At least you have brought a new perspective on it.

Imagine if they had the ball at the 1 yard line with a historically good run offense and a guy who led all NFL players in TDs that season. A guy who is one of the toughest players to tackle in NFL history, going up against your 30th ranked goal line run defense. They have 3 chances to make one yard.

In that situation, I'd give just about anything to have the opponent pass the football. And because Seattle effectively telegraphed that a pass was coming, the Pats were able to read the play and jump the route. There is no defending that playcall.

Bevell sent out the 11 personnel grouping (3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB) hoping that the Patriots would go either nickel or base at worst.. which would then be ideal to run from.

2nd and goal from the 1 yard line. Have you ever in your life seen a nickle D or even a base D in that situation?

Belichick didn't dictate shit. He played the defense that he HAD to play. And because Seattle went out there telegraphing a pass, his defense was able to read the play and jump the route. You don't need to be in a nickle defense to jump a route or make a pass play dead on arrival.

The one thing I will credit Belichick for at the end was his decision to not call a timeout and put some pressure on Pete to consider a pass play as the final seconds ticked away. That was an extremely high risk move that probably fails more than it pays off, but it successfully got Pete to make a mistake, and the Pats were lucky enough to make a play with that one chance.

I guess for some people, the coping mechanism they seek is to convince themselves it wasn't a bad call. I could not possibly disagree more, but I understand the why.

My coping mechanism is the fact that the "stick with their guns" mentality of Pete and Bevell has them going balls out to upgrade Wilson's weapons this offseason so that the next time they make this mistake, it won't be hinging on Kearse beating a Browner press and Ricardo Lockette catching a slant. It sure as hell wasn't worth losing a SB over, but that's a definite silver lining to be sure.

 

[Vetamur]

I think it's insane to not blame Bevell for a 3 WR 1 RB formation on 2nd and goal from the 1. But blame him 100% for the loss? Definitely not. It was a culmination of so many things, Bevell getting cute was just one bad play.

Still, it would be nice if Bevell and Pete learned their lesson, and I don't think they did. That's part of the reason I'm so enthused about the Graham trade, as it basically amounts to giving Bevell a bumper car to crash the next time he thinks he's being secretly clever. A higher percentage of those stupid decisions will pay off with a 6'7" power forward to chuck the ball to.

Didn't the Pat's run out their Goalline Defense? This is part of Bevell being cute instead of playing a power/Run-Option play.

Veta... this horse will be beaten to death until the end of time. At least you have brought a new perspective on it.

Imagine if they had the ball at the 1 yard line with a historically good run offense and a guy who led all NFL players in TDs that season. A guy who is one of the toughest players to tackle in NFL history, going up against your 30th ranked goal line run defense. They have 3 chances to make one yard.

In that situation, I'd give just about anything to have the opponent pass the football. And because Seattle effectively telegraphed that a pass was coming, the Pats were able to read the play and jump the route. There is no defending that playcall.

Bevell sent out the 11 personnel grouping (3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB) hoping that the Patriots would go either nickel or base at worst.. which would then be ideal to run from.

2nd and goal from the 1 yard line. Have you ever in your life seen a nickle D or even a base D in that situation?

Belichick didn't dictate shit. He played the defense that he HAD to play. And because Seattle went out there telegraphing a pass, his defense was able to read the play and jump the route. You don't need to be in a nickle defense to jump a route or make a pass play dead on arrival.

The one thing I will credit Belichick for at the end was his decision to not call a timeout and put some pressure on Pete to consider a pass play as the final seconds ticked away. That was an extremely high risk move that probably fails more than it pays off, but it successfully got Pete to make a mistake, and the Pats were lucky enough to make a play with that one chance.

I guess for some people, the coping mechanism they seek is to convince themselves it wasn't a bad call. I could not possibly disagree more, but I understand the why.

My coping mechanism is the fact that the "stick with their guns" mentality of Pete and Bevell has them going balls out to upgrade Wilson's weapons this offseason so that the next time they make this mistake, it won't be hinging on Kearse beating a Browner press and Ricardo Lockette catching a slant. It sure as hell wasn't worth losing a SB over, but that's a definite silver lining to be sure.

Pretty sure Ive said 3 times now I disagree with the play call, so lets just talk for talking, not getting attacking or psycho analyzing. And, maybe not a true nickel, but yes, Ive seen plenty of defenses have more than 3 DBs on the field with the offense inside 3.

Ive also seen the Seahawks run the ball plenty of out the personnel set. And so have you. I think there is some self scouting concern here though because it seems as though not the personnel, but rather the particular formation seems to have been used in just one play. Not sure if that is true, but I read that in the aftermath.

As Ive said, I prefer play action there.

I dont need a coping mechanism. Its life and things in life sometimes hurt and stay with you. But this is all hind sight. I didnt see anyone critisize the play to end the first half.. if it hadnt worked we would be treated to "you take the points when in the Super Bowl" and "why are you throwing to the guy who hasnt even caught a pass all season".

Not sure why this is getting borderline personal...just a discussion. I totally understand if people disagree with me. In fact, I wrote that I expect it.

 

[Uncle Si]

Losing the 10 point lead wasn't just on the defense, in my opinion. Yes, the team has ridden that side of the ball as part of its game plan. But the other is Lynch and pounding the other team into submission, killing clock and just leaving the other team's offense (in this case, Tom Brady) on the sideline with their own offense. After the 10 point lead, the Seahawks missed a handful of chances to extend drives and add points. With a defense as short staffed and hurt as it was, i feel this was critical.

Almost a perfect storm of events for the Patriots to get back into it. It was a great game though, and really both teams probably deserved to win it

Yeah, it was tough to watch during the game that day. The banged up Defense gave the ball back to the offense several times and if they would have kept any one of those drives going - the outcome likely would have been different. I didn't see any foul on Lockette when he got tripped up. But, I do have a problem with how NE was allowed to continue the drive on that 3rd and 14 play with 10 min to go in the game. I saw obvious holding on Bennett by their Center (Stork). That's the only way Brady could step up in the pocket there with Bennett held and tackled to the ground. Should have been called back and 3rd and 24.

During one of those drive opportunities to kill the clock, I didn't like the play call when they threw deep on 3rd and short to Kearse. Man, just get the first down. I was hollering about that even before it went through Kearse's hands (or it may have been tipped out?) Not going to go back and watch. Point is, they didn't convert. They should have went with a higher percentage call there to move the chains. Yeah, yeah... convert that and they're in great shape. But, they didn't and the risk of that call cost them dearly.

Seeing a few more plays here and there on replays, that last NE Touchdown looked like Edelman did push off (on Simon?)

I can't quite see it as a great game. There's no solace in calling it that for me. There were some exciting moments. But, it was a game for all the marbles. I just think the Hawks could have and perhaps should have put the Patriots away with a bit more ball control with the 10 point lead. I kept saying one more score would put the game away. But, it may have also served to be what open the floodgates for the Hawks as the Patriots would have played more desperately. I think there was enough of a Defense that could have further rattled Brady.

It was there for the taking and they just didn't get it done. :34853_doh:

Damnit... now i"m sad again.

The Kearse play kills me when I see the replay. I didn't like the play call (like you). But Kearse also drops the first down, which compounds its impact. I mean the Seahawks lived by that type of decision making all season (think Baldwin's 35 yard grab against the Packers right before Kearse's game winner)... but still, this was with a 10 point lead heading into the 4th quarter.

And I do agree with Kearly on the last play. If anything, the mistake was simply being too cute.

 

[Ozzy]

The Kearse drop is the hardest thing for me even more so than the final play. Game is over if he catches that and I'm not sure if it was because his NFCCG was still fresh for me(horrible until the final play) or just my dissapointment all year in Kearse but I still have a hard time with that play. I wasn't a huge fan of the play call but they obviously saw something and they were right. Kearse should of caught the ball and if he does game is essentially over. For me and I'm sure most will disagree but the game hinged on that play and we saw the outcome.

 

[Uncle Si]

The Kearse drop is the hardest thing for me even more so than the final play. Game is over if he catches that and I'm not sure if it was because his NFCCG was still fresh for me(horrible until the final play) or just my dissapointment all year in Kearse but I still have a hard time with that play. I wasn't a huge fan of the play call but they obviously saw something and they were right. Kearse should of caught the ball and if he does game is essentially over. For me and I'm sure most will disagree but the game hinged on that play and we saw the outcome.

I agree.. maybe not hinged, but certainly was the turning point. 3rd and 2, If he catches that we start the 4th quarter with fresh downs and driving. Get any points out of that and the game is essentially over.

 

[Scottemojo]

It isn't personal for me, Veta, though Bevell discussions here do have a history of being that.

One thing you said really sums up how bad the play call was. Forget that Lockette hasn't caught a quick slant all year. Forget that Kearse trying to rub Browner is a total mismatch for the Patriots. The bad part is that if Lockette does catch it, it looks like he still will not get into the endzone. The whole reason they ran that play was explained as wanting to use a pass so that Seattle could then save timeouts for subsequent run plays on third or 4th downs. So why a pass route that isn't in the end zone? Why not come out and say the truth, earlier in the game we ran a play to Lynch from the same personnel and he scored, so we were trying to show them the same look and do something unexpected? Nobody said that because it sounded dumb.

The reality is that we had a bad red zone offense all year. That bad red zone offense was missing it's blocking tight end, on IR, a good slant route runner in Richardson, on IR, and the Patriots DBs, both if them, won their matchups vs two replacement level wide receivers being asked to do something they are not great at.

I'm not pissed about one play. I had the same complaints about Bevell all year, after games I would even post some screenshots of some broken plays where the thinking behind the play call is the real problem, and more often than not the bad plays Seattle runs are the THEY WILL NEVER SEE THIS COMING variety, or as I like to call it, cute shit.

Bevell is a league average OC working with below league average WR talent and an above average running game featuring the most demoralizing back in the league. He threw Lockette under the bus in the aftermath of that play, and all year when the offense had good games he enjoyed the spotlight, and when they struggled he was snarky, go back and watch the midweek pressers, it is easy to see. Bevell got less than half the YPP from Harvin than Percy got in either Minnesota or New York. I watch a lot of games that don't feature the Hawks, offenses have identities, and the identity of a Seattle offense is that we spend the first 20 game minutes feeling out a D with a lot of personnel groups, showing them looks to see how they respond. We don't usually go back to the same well over and over in the passing game, we spread the wealth, precisely because being unpredictable is more important (to our offense, anyway) than targeting a weakness, having WRs who can run every route from the X, Y, or Z is more important than isolating a matchup all day long. That identity only partly hangs on Bevell. I think the constantly shifting personnel groups is his baby for sure.

Yes, I know, long rant. Sorry. But there isn't anything in there philisophically that I wasn't complaining about long before that one play.
Let me put it another way. On defense, this team excels partly by not asking it's players to do things they simply cannot. THe running game excels mostly because of the same things, it caters to the strengths of the personnel. Russell shines when allowed to play to his strengths. But about half the time, we ask our pass catchers to do things that do not cater to their strengths. Baldwin outside, Kearse in the slot, Willson blocking an OLB...It was a theme all year but illustrated by that single play.

 

[Vetamur]

It isn't personal for me, Veta, though Bevell discussions here do have a history of being that.

One thing you said really sums up how bad the play call was. Forget that Lockette hasn't caught a quick slant all year. Forget that Kearse trying to rub Browner is a total mismatch for the Patriots. The bad part is that if Lockette does catch it, it looks like he still will not get into the endzone. The whole reason they ran that play was explained as wanting to use a pass so that Seattle could then save timeouts for subsequent run plays on third or 4th downs. So why a pass route that isn't in the end zone? Why not come out and say the truth, earlier in the game we ran a play to Lynch from the same personnel and he scored, so we were trying to show them the same look and do something unexpected? Nobody said that because it sounded dumb.

The reality is that we had a bad red zone offense all year. That bad red zone offense was missing it's blocking tight end, on IR, a good slant route runner in Richardson, on IR, and the Patriots DBs, both if them, won their matchups vs two replacement level wide receivers being asked to do something they are not great at.

I'm not pissed about one play. I had the same complaints about Bevell all year, after games I would even post some screenshots of some broken plays where the thinking behind the play call is the real problem, and more often than not the bad plays Seattle runs are the THEY WILL NEVER SEE THIS COMING variety, or as I like to call it, cute shit.

Bevell is a league average OC working with below league average WR talent and an above average running game featuring the most demoralizing back in the league. He threw Lockette under the bus in the aftermath of that play, and all year when the offense had good games he enjoyed the spotlight, and when they struggled he was snarky, go back and watch the midweek pressers, it is easy to see. Bevell got less than half the YPP from Harvin than Percy got in either Minnesota or New York. I watch a lot of games that don't feature the Hawks, offenses have identities, and the identity of a Seattle offense is that we spend the first 20 game minutes feeling out a D with a lot of personnel groups, showing them looks to see how they respond. We don't usually go back to the same well over and over in the passing game, we spread the wealth, precisely because being unpredictable is more important (to our offense, anyway) than targeting a weakness, having WRs who can run every route from the X, Y, or Z is more important than isolating a matchup all day long. That identity only partly hangs on Bevell. I think the constantly shifting personnel groups is his baby for sure.

Yes, I know, long rant. Sorry. But there isn't anything in there philisophically that I wasn't complaining about long before that one play.
Let me put it another way. On defense, this team excels partly by not asking it's players to do things they simply cannot. THe running game excels mostly because of the same things, it caters to the strengths of the personnel. Russell shines when allowed to play to his strengths. But about half the time, we ask our pass catchers to do things that do not cater to their strengths. Baldwin outside, Kearse in the slot, Willson blocking an OLB...It was a theme all year but illustrated by that single play.

Fully understand..and yea, the fact that Lockette wouldnt have end had the TD doesnt help him. I just think Bevell has to be graded on a body of work. Like you said, he has an above average ground game to work with ..but Lynch wasnt seen as he is now without Bevell, and as I pointed out Bevell is the only OC to make the read option anything more than a gimmick. Hes asked to do a lot with a little...so.. I suppose Im perhpas cutting him more slack than I should have. I just really am resistant to grading someone on one play. Not that he was flawless otherwise. but I do want to give him credit for building probably the most cost effective offense in the league.

Now if we can start running bubbles only occasionally and only to people who it makes sense to....and I never want to see a Bryan Walters type in a route again....

 

[JonRud]

Blame Canada.

 

[DavidSeven]

Good post, OP. I like your assessment of the game in whole -- I feel largely the same.

I agree with some comments here that we do get a little overly-creative with the personnel groupings, but at the same time, some of that is necessitated by the fact that our talent at receiver and tight end was terrible last year. Arguably, the league worst or at least on par with Oakland. In that sense, it's hard to exploit match-ups because none of our players last year could really win match-ups. So, sometimes we have to get cute or explore how teams want to defend us. The usage of Chris Matthews was a bit of unpredictability that worked in our favor until Belichick realized that a sub-average CB w/ length (Browner) could effectively erase him.

Last year, due to lack of talent, we could not play teams straight up (our best vs. your best) in the passing game -- we would lose that match-up every time. I think 2012 (w/ Rice, Tate, Baldwin, Miller, McCoy) was probably the last time we could do that. Not surprisingly, we had the #1 offense in DVOA that year. We have regressed severely in terms of receiving talent since then. That doesn't even get into the fact that our O-line is built to be just average in pass-pro. Put that altogether, you see why we need to rely rub-slants and ref-picks to get TDs and can't just expect things like bootleg-and-fade-to-corner (one-on-one) to work consistently.

 

[Sports Hernia]

This will be my only comment in this thread. I will blame that Super Bowl loss on Bevell until the day I die. I hated his playcalling BEFORE his epic fail in SB 49, and "that play" confirmed my bias. Hand the ball off to Lynch and the Hawks are back to back champs, it's as simple as that, end of story!
< dealer claps out and walks away >

 

[OrFan]

..........It just seems that common sense eludes Bevell at times. Unfortunately, it happened at the most crucial point in the game. The fact that it's the one thing shown time and time again in highlights or lowlights from the SB just exacerbates it. 99% percent of the nation who watched the game is laughing at the stupidity of that play.

ivotuk wrote: (about a month and a half ago)...............Never, ever, ever put the fate of a Super Bowl in the hands of Darrell Bevell, Jermaine Kearse, and Ricardo Lockette all three working in unison. Don't make matters more complicated than they need to be when the game's on the line. Instead, put it on your strength.


That covers it for me. I'm happy some of you are OK with how it turned out. I am not and possibly never will be. Not gonna change how hard I root for the Hawks next season and beyond, but I think the only way I get "OK" with it is if our team wins a couple more in the next several years.

Agreed completely with this. It was bad then, it is still bad, it will always be bad. You go with the one who got you to the dance to begin with.

 

[Siouxhawk]

I still go back to why we wasted two timeouts leading up to the pick. One came after an incompletion to Kearse; the other after the Kearse circus catch. The clock had even stopped on that second one when Kearse had gotten out of bounds. How different would things have been if we had had a second and goal from the 1 with 3, heck, even 2 timeouts in our back pocket?

Great analysis, by the way, Veta. You echo my points on the final play and Bev 100 percent

 

[fenderbender123]

This is what I've been saying since it happened. I don't blame the play call either. Patriots had been stuffing the run fairly successfully all game, especially during short yardage situations. Russell Wilson is clutch and rarely turns the ball over. An incomplete pass stops the clock. I mean...it was just a great play by the Patriots. A hell of a game.

 

[kearly]

Pretty sure Ive said 3 times now I disagree with the play call, so lets just talk for talking, not getting attacking or psycho analyzing. And, maybe not a true nickel, but yes, Ive seen plenty of defenses have more than 3 DBs on the field with the offense inside 3.

Ive also seen the Seahawks run the ball plenty of out the personnel set. And so have you. I think there is some self scouting concern here though because it seems as though not the personnel, but rather the particular formation seems to have been used in just one play. Not sure if that is true, but I read that in the aftermath.

I do think this topic is a classic example of a coping mechanism. All the "I don't blame the playcall" talk, you didn't hear a word of it from anywhere the day of or after the game. It started to creep in a few days later after the five stages of grief had run their course and each individual person had found some manner of moving on. For some, the way to move on was to say we got unlucky.

It's not personal, and in fact I was an ardent Bevell defender in his first couple seasons here.

But I do get a little emotional when I hear stuff I disagree with very strongly, especially if I feel it creates a false or unhealthy narrative that hinders problem fixing. As Scotte says, this is not a reaction to one play, but the culmination of years of bad habits by Bevell that came to a head in dramatic fashion. And what sticks in my craw a bit is that neither Pete nor Bevell have shown any remorse for the decision system that led to plays like that one. I think as fans, we can't let them off the hook for stuff like that. I think most people see it, but unfortunately Pete and Bevell are not as quick to see it as almost everyone else. It's frustrating. Even brilliant people have blind spots.

As far as the personnel set, usually in that situation (1 yard line, seconds left, 3 WR, no fullback) they pass, and there were examples of them passing in nearly the exact same situation a couple of times in the 2014 season. That's why NE knew it was coming, and said as much after the game.

I think the results clearly speak for themselves. You don't try to outscheme Bill Belichick when you have the physically superior team. The sad part for me is that, uncharacteristically, I don't think Pete has learned his lesson from this. We all love Pete, but he owns a share of the blame for the tendencies that led to that fated playcall.

Getting Graham and allegedly targeting playmaker WRs in the draft strikes me as doubling down on a flawed idea. Though I will say, I'm not complaining about the upgrades, and if Bevell is not going to change his ways and if Pete is going to continue to tolerate them, then I commend them for at least making those flawed concepts more workable.

That is how I personally cope with the grief, knowing that a repeat of the outcome of that last play will be far less likely from a personnel standpoint next season, even if the methodology remains problematic.

 

[TheWalrus]

I'm very late to this thread. Great post Vetamur, I agree with your thoughts.

I love that you brought up Burley being inactive. I think that is a huge think that gets overlooked, and I would love it if someone asked Carroll about that decision. I don't think much of Burley, but NE had two small WRs and he is better suited to cover those guys than Simon. Obviously Carroll can't foresee that Lane is going to get injured, but Burley should have been active.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Pretty sure Ive said 3 times now I disagree with the play call, so lets just talk for talking, not getting attacking or psycho analyzing. And, maybe not a true nickel, but yes, Ive seen plenty of defenses have more than 3 DBs on the field with the offense inside 3.

Ive also seen the Seahawks run the ball plenty of out the personnel set. And so have you. I think there is some self scouting concern here though because it seems as though not the personnel, but rather the particular formation seems to have been used in just one play. Not sure if that is true, but I read that in the aftermath.

I do think this topic is a classic example of a coping mechanism. All the "I don't blame the playcall" talk, you didn't hear a word of it from anywhere the day of or after the game. It started to creep in a few days later after the five stages of grief had run their course and each individual person had found some manner of moving on. For some, the way to move on was to say we got unlucky.

It's not personal, and in fact I was an ardent Bevell defender in his first couple seasons here.

But I do get a little emotional when I hear stuff I disagree with very strongly, especially if I feel it creates a false or unhealthy narrative that hinders problem fixing. As Scotte says, this is not a reaction to one play, but the culmination of years of bad habits by Bevell that came to a head in dramatic fashion. And what sticks in my craw a bit is that neither Pete nor Bevell have shown any remorse for the decision system that led to plays like that one. I think as fans, we can't let them off the hook for stuff like that. I think most people see it, but unfortunately Pete and Bevell are not as quick to see it as almost everyone else. It's frustrating. Even brilliant people have blind spots.

As far as the personnel set, usually in that situation (1 yard line, seconds left, 3 WR, no fullback) they pass, and there were examples of them passing in nearly the exact same situation a couple of times in the 2014 season. That's why NE knew it was coming, and said as much after the game.

I think the results clearly speak for themselves. You don't try to outscheme Bill Belichick when you have the physically superior team. The sad part for me is that, uncharacteristically, I don't think Pete has learned his lesson from this. We all love Pete, but he owns a share of the blame for the tendencies that led to that fated playcall.

Getting Graham and allegedly targeting playmaker WRs in the draft strikes me as doubling down on a flawed idea. Though I will say, I'm not complaining about the upgrades, and if Bevell is not going to change his ways and if Pete is going to continue to tolerate them, then I commend them for at least making those flawed concepts more workable.

That is how I personally cope with the grief, knowing that a repeat of the outcome of that last play will be far less likely from a personnel standpoint next season, even if the methodology remains problematic.

And that's your opinion and only your opinion.

Pete and no member of the organization owe you or any other fan an apology and definitely should not show any remorse.

As has been pointed out on countless occasions, the Hawks have had one of the better offenses in the league the last few years under Pete and Bevell's planning and execution. They've been crowned NFC champions the last two years and won a Super Bowl just two years ago.

I hope your post was nothing but foolish sarcasm, because that's really all it was worth. Hawks fans are on top of the world right now, and righfully so. I firmly believe that the Hawks are headed to a third consecutive NFC championship and another Super Bowl appearance and the type of negativism you spew just isn't constructive at all.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Pretty sure Ive said 3 times now I disagree with the play call, so lets just talk for talking, not getting attacking or psycho analyzing. And, maybe not a true nickel, but yes, Ive seen plenty of defenses have more than 3 DBs on the field with the offense inside 3.

Ive also seen the Seahawks run the ball plenty of out the personnel set. And so have you. I think there is some self scouting concern here though because it seems as though not the personnel, but rather the particular formation seems to have been used in just one play. Not sure if that is true, but I read that in the aftermath.

I do think this topic is a classic example of a coping mechanism. All the "I don't blame the playcall" talk, you didn't hear a word of it from anywhere the day of or after the game. It started to creep in a few days later after the five stages of grief had run their course and each individual person had found some manner of moving on. For some, the way to move on was to say we got unlucky.

It's not personal, and in fact I was an ardent Bevell defender in his first couple seasons here.

But I do get a little emotional when I hear stuff I disagree with very strongly, especially if I feel it creates a false or unhealthy narrative that hinders problem fixing. As Scotte says, this is not a reaction to one play, but the culmination of years of bad habits by Bevell that came to a head in dramatic fashion. And what sticks in my craw a bit is that neither Pete nor Bevell have shown any remorse for the decision system that led to plays like that one. I think as fans, we can't let them off the hook for stuff like that. I think most people see it, but unfortunately Pete and Bevell are not as quick to see it as almost everyone else. It's frustrating. Even brilliant people have blind spots.

As far as the personnel set, usually in that situation (1 yard line, seconds left, 3 WR, no fullback) they pass, and there were examples of them passing in nearly the exact same situation a couple of times in the 2014 season. That's why NE knew it was coming, and said as much after the game.

I think the results clearly speak for themselves. You don't try to outscheme Bill Belichick when you have the physically superior team. The sad part for me is that, uncharacteristically, I don't think Pete has learned his lesson from this. We all love Pete, but he owns a share of the blame for the tendencies that led to that fated playcall.

Getting Graham and allegedly targeting playmaker WRs in the draft strikes me as doubling down on a flawed idea. Though I will say, I'm not complaining about the upgrades, and if Bevell is not going to change his ways and if Pete is going to continue to tolerate them, then I commend them for at least making those flawed concepts more workable.

That is how I personally cope with the grief, knowing that a repeat of the outcome of that last play will be far less likely from a personnel standpoint next season, even if the methodology remains problematic.

And that's your opinion and only your opinion.

Pete and no member of the organization owe you or any other fan an apology and definitely should not show any remorse.

As has been pointed out on countless occasions, the Hawks have had one of the better offenses in the league the last few years under Pete and Bevell's planning and execution. They've been crowned NFC champions the last two years and won a Super Bowl just two years ago.

I hope your post was nothing but foolish sarcasm, because that's really all it was worth. Hawks fans are on top of the world right now, and righfully so. I firmly believe that the Hawks are headed to a third consecutive NFC championship and another Super Bowl appearance and the type of negativism you spew just isn't constructive at all.

And please ask yourself this question: how much of that is courtesy of Russell Wilson's ability to scramble and improvise? IMO and likely kearly's and any other number of posters here, that aspect of Seattle's offense covers a lot of Bevell's flaws.

More importantly, what the hell difference does a post by someone on a fan message board that isn't all roses and perfume have to do with the team's success? Kearly or anyone else's "negativism" as you call it (I prefer "realism" myself) has no affect whatsoever on the Hawks' performance as a team, Pete's coaching, Bevell's coaching, etc. I got news for you, Pete, Bevell, Cable, et. al. are fallible human beings. They're VERY good at what they do, but far from perfect (Percy Harvin, etc.).

All your doing here is propping yourself up as a "better fan" than kearly and by extension the rest of us that think the call was total shit or in any way are critical of Pete, Bevell, etc. and that is as tiresome as it gets around here.





Gee, I just can't understand why Kip doesn't do the Random Thoughts any more. :sarcasm_off:
.
.
.
.

 

[Largent80]

I wore my Lynch jersey on the flight to Houston. I heard no less than 6 times..."should have run the ball".

 

[Siouxhawk]

Pretty sure Ive said 3 times now I disagree with the play call, so lets just talk for talking, not getting attacking or psycho analyzing. And, maybe not a true nickel, but yes, Ive seen plenty of defenses have more than 3 DBs on the field with the offense inside 3.

Ive also seen the Seahawks run the ball plenty of out the personnel set. And so have you. I think there is some self scouting concern here though because it seems as though not the personnel, but rather the particular formation seems to have been used in just one play. Not sure if that is true, but I read that in the aftermath.

I do think this topic is a classic example of a coping mechanism. All the "I don't blame the playcall" talk, you didn't hear a word of it from anywhere the day of or after the game. It started to creep in a few days later after the five stages of grief had run their course and each individual person had found some manner of moving on. For some, the way to move on was to say we got unlucky.

It's not personal, and in fact I was an ardent Bevell defender in his first couple seasons here.

But I do get a little emotional when I hear stuff I disagree with very strongly, especially if I feel it creates a false or unhealthy narrative that hinders problem fixing. As Scotte says, this is not a reaction to one play, but the culmination of years of bad habits by Bevell that came to a head in dramatic fashion. And what sticks in my craw a bit is that neither Pete nor Bevell have shown any remorse for the decision system that led to plays like that one. I think as fans, we can't let them off the hook for stuff like that. I think most people see it, but unfortunately Pete and Bevell are not as quick to see it as almost everyone else. It's frustrating. Even brilliant people have blind spots.

As far as the personnel set, usually in that situation (1 yard line, seconds left, 3 WR, no fullback) they pass, and there were examples of them passing in nearly the exact same situation a couple of times in the 2014 season. That's why NE knew it was coming, and said as much after the game.

I think the results clearly speak for themselves. You don't try to outscheme Bill Belichick when you have the physically superior team. The sad part for me is that, uncharacteristically, I don't think Pete has learned his lesson from this. We all love Pete, but he owns a share of the blame for the tendencies that led to that fated playcall.

Getting Graham and allegedly targeting playmaker WRs in the draft strikes me as doubling down on a flawed idea. Though I will say, I'm not complaining about the upgrades, and if Bevell is not going to change his ways and if Pete is going to continue to tolerate them, then I commend them for at least making those flawed concepts more workable.

That is how I personally cope with the grief, knowing that a repeat of the outcome of that last play will be far less likely from a personnel standpoint next season, even if the methodology remains problematic.

And that's your opinion and only your opinion.

Pete and no member of the organization owe you or any other fan an apology and definitely should not show any remorse.

As has been pointed out on countless occasions, the Hawks have had one of the better offenses in the league the last few years under Pete and Bevell's planning and execution. They've been crowned NFC champions the last two years and won a Super Bowl just two years ago.

I hope your post was nothing but foolish sarcasm, because that's really all it was worth. Hawks fans are on top of the world right now, and righfully so. I firmly believe that the Hawks are headed to a third consecutive NFC championship and another Super Bowl appearance and the type of negativism you spew just isn't constructive at all.

And please ask yourself this question: how much of that is courtesy of Russell Wilson's ability to scramble and improvise? IMO and likely kearly's and any other number of posters here, that aspect of Seattle's offense covers a lot of Bevell's flaws.

More importantly, what the hell difference does a post by someone on a fan message board that isn't all roses and perfume have to do with the team's success? Kearly or anyone else's "negativism" as you call it (I prefer "realism" myself) has no affect whatsoever on the Hawks' performance as a team, Pete's coaching, Bevell's coaching, etc. I got news for you, Pete, Bevell, Cable, et. al. are fallible human beings. They're VERY good at what they do, but far from perfect (Percy Harvin, etc.).

All your doing here is propping yourself up as a "better fan" than kearly and by extension the rest of us that think the call was total shit or in any way are critical of Pete, Bevell, etc. and that is as tiresome as it gets around here.





Gee, I just can't understand why Kip doesn't do the Random Thoughts any more. :sarcasm_off:
.
.
.
.

If anyone is being self-righteous around here, it's you.
I understand we all have a right on a message board to express ourselves and that's why I made a point from the get-go of the post I responded to state: that's your opinion, now here's mine. Wasn't trying to come close to being the super fan that you somehow got the impression I was working toward.
It just struck me as far-fetchedness that the poster wants the coaching staff, particularly Pete and Bev, to somehow be contrite, remorseful and even issue an apology to Hawks fans for the ill-fated interception. Not only will that not happen, but I don't think 12s would want that to happen. No coaching staff competes as hard as they do and I'll trust their wisdom and judgement in that same situation every time again.

And no, I don't buy the everything good happens because of Russell's ability to scramble argument that you seem to be proposing. That scrambling ability is a fantastic and very useful tool that our quarterback has, but it still comes within the framework of our offense and the particular play called by our coordinator. Position groups are responsible for downfield blocking, for instance, when Russell does his thing, and those techniques are accounted for and coached up by our staff within the framework of each particular play.

Anyhow, I happen to support in full the coaching staff we have in place. As the OP accurately pointed out, Bev is the perfect man for the job in working with Russell in our read offense. The two seem to have a great rapport and Russell's growth under his tutelage is without question. So yeah, what we do here doesn't mean beans in the reality of the big picture if how the Seahawks conduct their business, but when I witness our coaching staff being attacked, I know I can do something and I refuse to sit by idly and just let it go. Not this team. Not this era.