Im ready for a coaching change

[John63]

I dont care if PC stays or goes I want to play a full 4 Qtrs

Sorry, but that was a stupid post. Are you saying that the team does not try to score in the 1st half? That they are intentionally sandbaging? I know you keep throwing around PC's comment that he evaluates the opponent in the first half, but you are misrepresenting what he said and what he meant. EVERY coach evaluates the opponent from their defensive plays in the 1st half.

To think that the team does not play the whole 4 quarter is stupid. Being unsuccessful in the 1st half DOES NOT equate to "not playing".

So, since you seem to know so much, what would you suggest the team do in order to be more successful in the 1st half? Run more? Run less? More deep routes? Screens? Slants?

LOl let me help you PC has said they use the first half to test the defense. He has said you can't win in the 1st or the 2nd or the 3rd. he has said he wants to keep it close and win in the end. It is OBVIOUS to anyone who watches the way we play in the first half and the 2nd is way different and it is not just adjustments.

Now as to what we should do, its really simple

We use uptempo, quick passing, layered routes. You saw it in the 2nd half of the 2 last game and the game before that.

 

[Largent80]

Feel good that we aren't the Cleveland Browns. We are the Seahawks who are almost ALWAYS in the playoffs and quit bitching like a bunch of Bitches about being successful.

 

[Nunya_]

I dont care if PC stays or goes I want to play a full 4 Qtrs

Sorry, but that was a stupid post. Are you saying that the team does not try to score in the 1st half? That they are intentionally sandbaging? I know you keep throwing around PC's comment that he evaluates the opponent in the first half, but you are misrepresenting what he said and what he meant. EVERY coach evaluates the opponent from their defensive plays in the 1st half.

To think that the team does not play the whole 4 quarter is stupid. Being unsuccessful in the 1st half DOES NOT equate to "not playing".

So, since you seem to know so much, what would you suggest the team do in order to be more successful in the 1st half? Run more? Run less? More deep routes? Screens? Slants?

LOl let me help you PC has said they use the first half to test the defense. He has said you can't win in the 1st or the 2nd or the 3rd. he has said he wants to keep it close and win in the end. It is OBVIOUS to anyone who watches the way we play in the first half and the 2nd is way different and it is not just adjustments.

Now as to what we should do, its really simple

We use uptempo, quick passing, layered routes. You saw it in the 2nd half of the 2 last game and the game before that.

I have watched just about presser that PC has given and I have never heard him say most of what you claim....or at least what you are implying he meant.

1. EVERY team tests the Defense of their opponent in the first half.
2. You CAN NOT win in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd quarter. There are 4 quarters in football and the score after the 4th quarter is all that matters. I do remember when PC made that statement and it is NOTHING as you are implying. He was not saying you only need to play the 4th quarter. He was saying that the whole game must be played.
3. I also remember when he said he wants to keep it close. Only a fool would think he meant that he does not want to score in order to keep the game close. If he blew out the opposing team early in the game, he would certainly be happy. You are trying to twist his words to fit your BS narrative.

uptempo is good, but it wears down players. You do not want players gassed in the first half.

I agree, more slants/quick passes can be productive. However, it depends on how the defense is playing your receivers. If the DBs are playing the receivers tight at the line, slants and quick passes are hard to be successful and open it up for pick-6's if your pass routes are anticipated. As the game progresses, DB's tend to play off WRs as they are worn out and do not want to be burnt for on long passes.

The Seahawks use layered routes all game long.

 

[Largent80]

GB flooded the defense to prevent passes and dared us to run. We couldn't get it done, so we played right into their hands in the 1st half. Their points garnered were enough to beat us.

While that is frustrating, calling for a coaching change is the most foolish thing ever. If you are that guy...Hahaha, jackwad status.

They obviously figured it out and came storming back yet again. Who is that on, or is it on anyone? None of us are coaches so to see some of these posts is pretty comical.

 

[lukerguy]

Me too.

Hire Buckner as DLINE coach.
Hire Phillips as D-Coordinator.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Maybe for all of you Cri ing about Adams production. He's done it to everyone.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... amDa01.htm

You clearly don’t understand nuance. He was consistently going after Tre, we refused to put our best corner on him. That is a failure by the coaching staff. Against Griffin he didn’t fare so well. John Jones has some koolaid for you.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Maybe for all of you Cri ing about Adams production. He's done it to everyone.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... amDa01.htm

You clearly don’t understand nuance. He was consistently going after Tre, we refused to put our best corner on him. That is a failure by the coaching staff. Against Griffin he didn’t fare so well. John Jones has some koolaid for you.

It's not an easy scheme to just abandon and go straight man to man, or some hybrid coverage so Griffin can follow Adams around.

It's something the defense has to practice in training camp and experiment with throughout the season. You certainly don't bust it out for one game in the Divisional round of the playoffs.

I have a better solution, get a better CB than Flowers, so he's not a liability in the biggest games of the year against very good QB's.

 

[John63]

I dont care if PC stays or goes I want to play a full 4 Qtrs

Sorry, but that was a stupid post. Are you saying that the team does not try to score in the 1st half? That they are intentionally sandbaging? I know you keep throwing around PC's comment that he evaluates the opponent in the first half, but you are misrepresenting what he said and what he meant. EVERY coach evaluates the opponent from their defensive plays in the 1st half.

To think that the team does not play the whole 4 quarter is stupid. Being unsuccessful in the 1st half DOES NOT equate to "not playing".

So, since you seem to know so much, what would you suggest the team do in order to be more successful in the 1st half? Run more? Run less? More deep routes? Screens? Slants?

LOl let me help you PC has said they use the first half to test the defense. He has said you can't win in the 1st or the 2nd or the 3rd. he has said he wants to keep it close and win in the end. It is OBVIOUS to anyone who watches the way we play in the first half and the 2nd is way different and it is not just adjustments.

Now as to what we should do, its really simple

We use uptempo, quick passing, layered routes. You saw it in the 2nd half of the 2 last game and the game before that.

I have watched just about presser that PC has given and I have never heard him say most of what you claim....or at least what you are implying he meant.

1. EVERY team tests the Defense of their opponent in the first half.
2. You CAN NOT win in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd quarter. There are 4 quarters in football and the score after the 4th quarter is all that matters. I do remember when PC made that statement and it is NOTHING as you are implying. He was not saying you only need to play the 4th quarter. He was saying that the whole game must be played.
3. I also remember when he said he wants to keep it close. Only a fool would think he meant that he does not want to score in order to keep the game close. If he blew out the opposing team early in the game, he would certainly be happy. You are trying to twist his words to fit your BS narrative.

uptempo is good, but it wears down players. You do not want players gassed in the first half.

I agree, more slants/quick passes can be productive. However, it depends on how the defense is playing your receivers. If the DBs are playing the receivers tight at the line, slants and quick passes are hard to be successful and open it up for pick-6's if your pass routes are anticipated. As the game progresses, DB's tend to play off WRs as they are worn out and do not want to be burnt for on long passes.

The Seahawks use layered routes all game long.

Then you are not watching or reading every interview well. As to the rest believe what you want, drink the kool aid.

 

[Seahawk_Dan]

Me too.

Hire Buckner as DLINE coach.
Hire Phillips as D-Coordinator.

Considering how Buckner upgraded the Raiders D-Line in a year, I am shocked they let him go.

 

[John63]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...-explains-why-seahawks-underachieved-in-2019/

hmm seems there are others that think SB should be the goal, and we could have, and we are not using Wilson right and wasting the first half

 

[Largent80]

Well this thread is full of people that would never sniff a job in an NFL front office but let em fantasize.......

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I would love to see Wade Phillips running this defense. There's a coaching change.....

 

[TwistedHusky]

The question one has to ask is this:

Would you be willing to trade less success on an average Sunday for doing better in the playoffs when we make them?



Nobody can dispute that Carroll has put together a system that is tremendously successful in the regular season. This year is a bit skewed, because of all the backup QBs we got lucky enough to face - but this would still have been a 9 + win team even without that.

We have had some great Sundays. It is a great experience to go watch those thrilling 2nd halves. (I am not being facetious with that).

I am just going to accept that the success we have on Sundays won't be realized in the playoffs. It is really easy to be a prisoner of the moment, get caught up in the wins and expect we should be doing better in the playoffs. Remember all the people calling the Seahawks one of the best teams (if not the best team) in the NFC? We know that is laughable now, we are just built to have solid regular seasons.

We have a great QB. We have a coach that is not really capable of using that great QB like other coaches likely would. But he is capable of winning with 3rd string castoffs. It won't work in the playoffs - but it beats being the Browns, Bengals, or even the Steelers.

Carroll isn't changing. This is like Green Bay with McCarthy. GB getting rid of McCarthy didn't change things much, in terms of success. The defense got much better, the offense got much worse. For now, GB looks better than with McCarthy. But getting rid of a successful coach often turns more into a George Karl situation than McCarthy. (Even so, it took Rodgers literally driving him out for that to occur. Does anyone think Wilson will drive off Carroll? Because that is what it will take.)

Would you be willing to endure more regular-season losses and even miss the playoffs occasionally, in order to have more playoff success when you make it? Because that is the likely impact of removing Carroll and even putting in one of the better offensive coaches in his seat.

 

[Mad Dog]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...-explains-why-seahawks-underachieved-in-2019/

hmm seems there are others that think SB should be the goal, and we could have, and we are not using Wilson right and wasting the first half

Russell is an eternal optimist which is why I love him as a QB, but that doesn't make him realistic at all. But it does allow him to perform at the highest level. He also likely believes bull markets will last and heaven is waiting for him when he dies.

Fact is, we got pretty much what we were going to get out of this season and I don't expect SB's unless we are the 1 seed these days.

 

[XxxZagnutxxX]

The 4-5 people pounding their chest the loudest for Pete's firing have join dates after we won the Super Bowl. So they expect it every year. This site has been around for a long time in one form or another. Where have they been? Just discovered the internet? A non-playoff season should clear the (t)rolls. That would free up some spots on the season ticket waiting list.

 

[Nunya_]

Then you are not watching or reading every interview well. As to the rest believe what you want, drink the kool aid.

Well, how I interpret his words is logical and is a view shared by almost every coach in the league.

While your interpretation is borderline batsh!t crazy and completely defies any football knowledge or logic.

Tell you what Skippy, if you want to have an honest discussion, post the video(s) where he said the things you claim. It will be much more productive to dissect them than trying to discuss things with someone taking things out of context and claiming them as fact as you are doing.

 

[Largent80]

The 4-5 people pounding their chest the loudest for Pete's firing have join dates after we won the Super Bowl. So they expect it every year. This site has been around for a long time in one form or another. Where have they been? Just discovered the internet? A non-playoff season should clear the (t)rolls. That would free up some spots on the season ticket waiting list.

Ha... Zag for the slam DUNK.......Suck it , Pete is our coach and JS is our GM, and thank GAWD for them

 

[Nunya_]

The question one has to ask is this:

Would you be willing to trade less success on an average Sunday for doing better in the playoffs when we make them?

Nobody can dispute that Carroll has put together a system that is tremendously successful in the regular season. This year is a bit skewed, because of all the backup QBs we got lucky enough to face - but this would still have been a 9 + win team even without that.

We have had some great Sundays. It is a great experience to go watch those thrilling 2nd halves. (I am not being facetious with that).

I am just going to accept that the success we have on Sundays won't be realized in the playoffs. It is really easy to be a prisoner of the moment, get caught up in the wins and expect we should be doing better in the playoffs. Remember all the people calling the Seahawks one of the best teams (if not the best team) in the NFC? We know that is laughable now, we are just built to have solid regular seasons.

We have a great QB. We have a coach that is not really capable of using that great QB like other coaches likely would. But he is capable of winning with 3rd string castoffs. It won't work in the playoffs - but it beats being the Browns, Bengals, or even the Steelers.

Carroll isn't changing. This is like Green Bay with McCarthy. GB getting rid of McCarthy didn't change things much, in terms of success. The defense got much better, the offense got much worse. For now, GB looks better than with McCarthy. But getting rid of a successful coach often turns more into a George Karl situation than McCarthy. (Even so, it took Rodgers literally driving him out for that to occur. Does anyone think Wilson will drive off Carroll? Because that is what it will take.)

Would you be willing to endure more regular-season losses and even miss the playoffs occasionally, in order to have more playoff success when you make it? Because that is the likely impact of removing Carroll and even putting in one of the better offensive coaches in his seat.

I would want a team that makes the playoffs more often than not. If the team is good enough to make the playoffs, then they are normally good enough to reach the SB. The narrative that some coaches are only good enough to have good regular seasons but are not good enough to make it through the playoffs is nothing more than BS. While it is true that some coaches do not have good post-season records, that is not always a good indication of their overall coaching skills.

 

[Largent80]

Crizilla is the OP and always bitches about everything. He NEVER praises anything. It's always a plethora of whining.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Every single year you come on here and tell everyone "if you're satisfied with losing in the playoffs" etc.
Every......single.....year. Nobody is happy we are done, geezus man.

Because it happens every,,,,,single,,,,,year and people refuse to admit theres a problem.