Jermaine Kearse's heroic effort might have cost Hawks a win

[Hasselbeck]

Earlier today I caught a little bit of the 4th quarter. I got to the two point conversion, and watching it in slow-motion, I have to say that the Rams are extremely fortunate the play was not converted by Seattle.

As many of you remember, the play was an empty backfield pre-snap, with Robert Turbin lined up on the outside WR spot to Wilson's right. Jermaine Kearse was inside of him, and there were some receivers lined up on the opposite end too.

This play was basically a repeat of the slant that Lynch scored with in the Denver game. Kearse and Turbin each try to cut inside to run a slant, and both are blatantly held for roughly a second with no flags. Wilson is only given a moment before he's pressured, and rather than scramble he throws a jump ball to the area where Robert Turbin would have been if not held.

Recognizing that Turbin and Kearse have not yet separated, Wilson puts a ton of air under the pass, hoping that one of them can break free and get to the ball. Turbin does exactly that. But unfortunately, so does Kearse.

Kearse is not aware of Turbin's trajectory. In Kearse's mind, he's the only Seahawk with a prayer of getting the ball, so he goes balls out for it. Even with a diving effort, Kearse is only able to get one hand on the ball, a few fingers really. The fruit of his effort is that the ball is effectively batted away.

Which is a real shame, because Robert Turbin was right there. Had Kearse just watched, the ball would have fallen perfectly right into Turbin's gut, a catch anyone could make. Turbin had a step on his defender too, it would have definitely been a Turbin catch if not for Kearse getting a hand on it and knocking it away.

Immediately after the ball hits the ground you can see visible frustration from Turbin's body language, huffing his arms as if to say "AAAAARRRGGH!"

Anyway, just thought I'd share this. I in no way blame Kearse for this play or for the loss. He simply did what he's trained to do, and if the pass had been a little different or if he had been a couple inches taller, he might have made the score himself. I chalk it up to bad luck. This game, and really this season, have been about Seattle not catching the breaks they got in 2013.

Yep.. mentioned this earlier this week.. if Kearse doesn't lunge at the ball, it drops right into Turbin's arms.

 

[Hasselbeck]

And anyone saying that we should of gone for the 2 point conversion when we were down 12-21... you are embarrassing me as a Seahawk fan. You clearly don't have the slightest clue about probability and statistics.

You don't go for a 2 point conversion when you would still need another Touchdown to tie the game and there's over 15 minutes remaining... seriously guys? do you have no football understanding whatsoever?

You only go for 2 points when you put yourself in a situation that you can equalize with the opposing team. For example if the other team scores a TD you need another TD to tie the game and to tie the game with 1 more TD you would need a 2 point conversion before they scored...

I donno this just seems like football 101... If anything we may have gone for the 2 point conversion too early but I agree with the decision the way this game was going...

I would like to ad to this than wnehever you score a touchdown in the 4th quarter to take a 7 point lead, it should be an almost nobrainer to go for 2 to make it a 9 pt lead and a 2 score game. I really dont get why teams always tend to kick it in these situation, since the potential benefit of a 2 score game far outweights the difference gained between a 7pt and an 8pt lead

With an 8 point margin, you still get the chance to stop the 2 pointer. Going for two up 7 is a very dumb move, even if the two pointer works.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I don't mean to hijack this, but since we are on the point of 2 pt conversions I'm very curious as to why we didn't try a two point conversion.When we made it 21-12.

Had we made the conversion, the score would have been 21-14, a one score differential.

The point is, had we missed it, it would have put us basically in the same situation as if we kicked an extra point, meaning we still would have been down a 2 score differential.

Besides, a two pointer is not guaranteed, so attempting the 2pts gives us greater odds at converting one.

Just curious, if we were within a one score differential, it might have changed how the Rams called their plays etc.

I would argue that it was too early to go for two when we did.

I concur.

I mean I see why they went for 2.. but I felt they should have waited, because there was still time for the Rams to go back down the field and score a touchdown to make it a 9 point game.

Which is exactly what the Rams would wind up doing.

That drive that eventually cut it to 28-26 takes on a lot of new meaning if they get the two pointer to tie.

 

[gulliver]

I saw it live at Ed Jones and was yelling NOOOOOO at Kearse in slow motion.

I saw the pass, saw Turbs sitting back there for the catch, I'm thinking YEEESS, and then I see Kearse dive backwards and stretch out, and somehow it was clear it was out of reach. I was hoping he didn't touch it cuz Turbin was a lock.

Alas...

 

[AgentDib]

I buy Pete's claim that the ball was intended for Kearse because I don't see a reason for him to stretch the truth about it. Kearly's blurb is an example of how he could have said it was intended for Turbin without throwing Kearse under the bus. That being said, it wouldn't shock me if this was coach-speak for some unknown reason.

And anyone saying that we should of gone for the 2 point conversion when we were down 12-21... you are embarrassing me as a Seahawk fan. You clearly don't have the slightest clue about probability and statistics.

I agree with you that we probably should not have gone for two in this situation but you're diving into the deep end of the overconfident pool with your last statement.

There are too many variables with large uncertainty ranges. The outcome will be influenced by your 2 point success rate, the probability of holding the opposing offense to {0 3 7} points in multiple possessions, your probability of recovering an onside kick, and your probability of scoring {0 3 7 8} points in multiple possessions. You can justify anything depending on how you estimate those factors and if somebody comes up with a different conclusion from yours it could easily be just as logical but using different assumptions.

 

[idahawks]

And anyone saying that we should of gone for the 2 point conversion when we were down 12-21... you are embarrassing me as a Seahawk fan. You clearly don't have the slightest clue about probability and statistics.

You don't go for a 2 point conversion when you would still need another Touchdown to tie the game and there's over 15 minutes remaining... seriously guys? do you have no football understanding whatsoever?

You only go for 2 points when you put yourself in a situation that you can equalize with the opposing team. For example if the other team scores a TD you need another TD to tie the game and to tie the game with 1 more TD you would need a 2 point conversion before they scored...

I donno this just seems like football 101... If anything we may have gone for the 2 point conversion too early but I agree with the decision the way this game was going...

I would like to ad to this than wnehever you score a touchdown in the 4th quarter to take a 7 point lead, it should be an almost nobrainer to go for 2 to make it a 9 pt lead and a 2 score game. I really dont get why teams always tend to kick it in these situation, since the potential benefit of a 2 score game far outweights the difference gained between a 7pt and an 8pt lead

Sorry but I don't follow this logic at all. The extra point is pretty much guaranteed, by kicking it you are forcing the other team to make a 2 pt conversion just to tie. If you don't make your 2 pt conversion you have a 7 pt lead and you are guaranteeing the opponent overtime if they score.

 

[capncrunch]

Ahh. No more RT posts from Kearly but still another post. Well, I think it is time for a vicious personal attack against you. No, just kidding. That's cool. I watched the game only once and didn't notice the location of Turbin. No opportunity to scramble to buy more time for RW I guess. I agreed with the decision to go for 2 at the time. I wouldn't say I would always do it earlier or later in that situation. In a way, there's less pressure on the offense to attempt 2 at that stage. interesting point made above about our lack of a taller target(s) for a jump ball kind of pass. I haven't held as negative a view of Kearse as the other guy above does but I am keen to see more targets for Richardson, Norwood and Helfet moving forward.

 

[Bobblehead]

And anyone saying that we should of gone for the 2 point conversion when we were down 12-21... you are embarrassing me as a Seahawk fan. You clearly don't have the slightest clue about probability and statistics.

You don't go for a 2 point conversion when you would still need another Touchdown to tie the game and there's over 15 minutes remaining... seriously guys? do you have no football understanding whatsoever?

You only go for 2 points when you put yourself in a situation that you can equalize with the opposing team. For example if the other team scores a TD you need another TD to tie the game and to tie the game with 1 more TD you would need a 2 point conversion before they scored...

I donno this just seems like football 101... If anything we may have gone for the 2 point conversion too early but I agree with the decision the way this game was going...

I'll admit, most know football more than I, However, at this point, it is not about, probabilities and statistics, its about trying to win the game.

If you are 8pts down, or 9 pts down, you are two scores from leveling or winning the game, however, if you do make a two point conversions, the dynamics of the game is very different when your 1 score down. Besides, we had to go for two at some point, and you want to talk about statistics and probability, I suggest that given more opportunities, your chances of making a two point conversion is much higher..

Besides, PC by all accounts is not your typical football 101 type guy., he is a coach that likes to extend the boundaries of thinking and what is perceived to be the norm. try it sometime.

 

[Tokadub]

Ugh so hungover, so drunk last night when I was posting in this thread...

I still think I agree with what I said but it could of been worded in a much better/friendlier way, sorry bout that.

So to better explain why you shouldn't go for two when down 12-21 with 4:22 remaining in 3rd quarter...

So lets say that by the end of the game the Rams kick 2 more field goals giving them a total of 27 points. If you don't go for 2 point conversion then the score would be 13-27.

Meaning in the very realistic scenario of the Rams ending up with 27 points, we would have needed 2 normal Touchdowns to tie the game 13+7+7 = 27.

If you go for two there and fail then you would need a normal Touchdown AND a Touchdown going for 2 to tie the game 12+7+8 = 27.

You always go for the 2 point conversion as late as you possibly can when you are losing to avoid scenarios like this one I explained above that we could of faced VS. the Rams. It's much easier to get 3 normal 7 point touchdowns to tie the game in this scenario than trying to go for 8 so that it's just a 1 score game.

Hope that makes sense, that's about the best I can explain it, basically since you don't know what will happen the rest of the game you generally take the "safe" route until the coaches believe they have no other choice towards the end of the game. Down 12-21 with almost 20 minutes left in the game is not one of those scenarios.

 

[kearly]

Too early, thats the common sentiment, that I Have gotten, but late in the 3rd quarter, we are two scores down, whether we make a extra point, or fail on a two pointer. I'd have seen if we could make it a one score game. 4th quarter when your behind maybe to late.

It was 21-19 before the 2-point conversion attempt, which was in an effort to tie the game. This play occurred with 9:44 remaining in the 4th quarter.

I do agree with you though, I personally thought it was too early to gamble for two. Miss the two-pointer and give up a TD, it's a 2 score game. My brother and dad were watching the game with me and they both disagreed with me emphatically, but I was exactly right.

Granted, kicking a PAT would have put Seattle down by 8 on the next Rams TD - Seattle would have still needed a 2 point conversion on the next touchdown anyway - but I've seen too many games where a coach lost because he went for 2 with too much time left. A lot can happen in 10 minutes, and you never know what kind of wacky scenarios can unfold where you might look back and really wished you'd taken the PAT.

If there had been four minutes left, then sure, go for two. I wouldn't say the decision cost Seattle the game but in the future I'd like to see Seattle trust their offense a little more to keep putting up points with 10 minutes left on the clock, especially when your QB is red hot.

 

[kearly]

This play just shows how a minor adjustment by Wilson or Kearse and the game is tied. But this play also reminds me of how close it came last year of having Baldwin mess up the catch by Kearse against the 9ers. Very close to a similar result with Baldwin ducking out of the way at the last moment.

Game of inches they say.

Good stuff.

 

[kearly]

And Tokadub with the all or nothing analysis that gives no insight...

The end zone camera makes it look to me like Wilson never made it to even seeing where Turbin was, he got pressure and tried to make the lob to Kearse, who had set his guy up with a jump cut. This is a straight up basketball post play, and they know there is no inside help because the inside LB has spy duty on Russell, mirroring his every move.

But bad pass pro from Britt and Sweezy sped the play up.

I don't think the pass was intended for Turbin. But I don't think this was exactly a designed play either. This was more of a Russel Magic kind of play, a desperation heave, almost like a mini-hail mary.

In those kinds of situations the intended target becomes less important than the guy who actually gets there. I'm guessing that even if Kearse thought he was the target, he probably would have laid off had he seen Turbin, the way the Baldwin did for Kearse in the NFCCG. Not blaming Kearse for the lack of all seeing eyes, but I feel comfortable chalking this one up as a tough break for the Hawks.

 

[Tokadub]

Another big "almost" play with Kearse from that game can be seen in this screenshot I just took.

As you can see Kearse is wide open and him and Russell have no excuse to not complete this Touchdown which would of won the game if everything else went identically the rest of the game.

But for some reason Kearse hesitated like he didn't think Russell could see him or something, he did that right around where I drew the red X.

Had Kearse continued to run this route instead of hesitating there he could of been right on target with Russell's throw, it was a little high but he should of been able to get it quite easily since he was wide open.

Not sure if Kearse messed up the route or if he really was supposed to stop there. Seems like one of those situations that when you are so wide open with tons of space in front of you the last thing you wanna do is stop or hesitate which lets the defender catch up and may cause your QB to overthrow you, consistent speed seems like it would of been perfect for Kearse here.

 

[Tokadub]

He is 56% catch rate so far this season, I'm busy and rushing this response right now but I wouldn't be surprised if that's the lowest on our team just like Kearse has always been... bad hands.

K now that I have time, gonna find out how our guys are doing with their receptions per target.

1) Richardson = 100%
2) Miller = 85.7%
3) Turbin = 85.7%
4) Harvin = 84.6%
5) Lynch = 80%
6) Lockette = 66.7%
7) Baldwin = 65.7%
8) Kearse = 56%
9) Helfet = 55.6%
10) Willson = 54.5%
11) Walters = 50%

Last year Kearse was 22/38 for 57.9%

This year Kearse is 14/25 for 56%

Really hope this improves for him by the end of the year.

 

[Swedishhawkfan]

And anyone saying that we should of gone for the 2 point conversion when we were down 12-21... you are embarrassing me as a Seahawk fan. You clearly don't have the slightest clue about probability and statistics.

You don't go for a 2 point conversion when you would still need another Touchdown to tie the game and there's over 15 minutes remaining... seriously guys? do you have no football understanding whatsoever?

You only go for 2 points when you put yourself in a situation that you can equalize with the opposing team. For example if the other team scores a TD you need another TD to tie the game and to tie the game with 1 more TD you would need a 2 point conversion before they scored...

I donno this just seems like football 101... If anything we may have gone for the 2 point conversion too early but I agree with the decision the way this game was going...

I would like to ad to this than wnehever you score a touchdown in the 4th quarter to take a 7 point lead, it should be an almost nobrainer to go for 2 to make it a 9 pt lead and a 2 score game. I really dont get why teams always tend to kick it in these situation, since the potential benefit of a 2 score game far outweights the difference gained between a 7pt and an 8pt lead

Sorry but I don't follow this logic at all. The extra point is pretty much guaranteed, by kicking it you are forcing the other team to make a 2 pt conversion just to tie. If you don't make your 2 pt conversion you have a 7 pt lead and you are guaranteeing the opponent overtime if they score.

I see your point, thing is you see teams tie the game with 2 point conversions ALL THE TIME (its seemingly only the hawks that cant score on them ever ). If you get a two possesion 9pt lead with two minutes left, you win the game barring a miracle. if it comes down to a 2pt conversion, i still believe the offence has a higher than 50% chance to score.

So that is why i think that going for it, with a probably higher than 50% successrate and almost guaranteed win if you do, and you still have a fairly safe 7pt lead if you fail, is smarter than giving them the ball 8 points down with a higher than 50% chance of getting the two point conversion anyway. I understand that it is a gamble, but if you can basically win the game with one play from two yards out and the only risk is that a failure still gives you a 7pt lead, I think that the gain far outweighs the risk on this one.