Keeping it close…

[AKNFidel]

Pete loves to keep games close so they can win in the 4thQTR…. They let Chicago remain in the game with piss poor tackling, and got bit by the Bears. IMHO… Pete and Norton have to go, the sooner the better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[JustTheTip]

This season has been miserable. While it is still not worth it for a season like this, I hope it was enough to cost Pete his job.

 

[emurri]

They need to be gone today! They can start interviewing other teams coaches tomorrow. Send John packing as well. Do it now!

 

[Mizak]

Keeping it close cost the Hawks more than 6 wins. This crap is all on Pete. LTH better not be sad he gets fired.

 

[pinksheets]

What does this even mean? Did Pete tell them to tackle poorly so the Bears could score? Did he opt to not score points?

There was a lot of bad execution, and Pete prefers to play lower risk football, but this "prefers to win close games" thing has been interpreted into utter nonsense.

 

[AKNFidel]

What does this even mean? Did Pete tell them to tackle poorly so the Bears could score? Did he opt to not score points?

There was a lot of bad execution, and Pete prefers to play lower risk football, but this "prefers to win close games" thing has been interpreted into utter nonsense.

Bad execution is a direct reflection on the coaching staff. A play or 2 is excusable, but today’s outing shows negligence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[pinksheets]

:greetingsearthling:

What does this even mean? Did Pete tell them to tackle poorly so the Bears could score? Did he opt to not score points?

There was a lot of bad execution, and Pete prefers to play lower risk football, but this "prefers to win close games" thing has been interpreted into utter nonsense.

Bad execution is a direct reflection on the coaching staff. A play or 2 is excusable, but today’s outing shows negligence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

But "keeping it close" implies that was intentional to have a game with a smaller points margin.

I agree the coaching was poor, but I don't think it's because Pete wants the other team to score or the Hawks not to just to be more exciting.

 

[AKNFidel]

:greetingsearthling:

What does this even mean? Did Pete tell them to tackle poorly so the Bears could score? Did he opt to not score points?

There was a lot of bad execution, and Pete prefers to play lower risk football, but this "prefers to win close games" thing has been interpreted into utter nonsense.

Bad execution is a direct reflection on the coaching staff. A play or 2 is excusable, but today’s outing shows negligence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

But "keeping it close" implies that was intentional to have a game with a smaller points margin.

I agree the coaching was poor, but I don't think it's because Pete wants the other team to score or the Hawks not to just to be more exciting.

It’s always been Pete’s M/O, He never goes for the kill until the 4th. I can’t think of a game where the Seahawk stepped on an opposing team throat early in a game. Maybe this loss is clouding my memory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Stud]

It's weird. Unlike the previous years, I knew the game was over the instance the Bears got the 2 point conversion. Even with a minute left I knew Wilson wasn't going to get it done.

 

[WmHBonney]

The worst thing that happened was the ten point Seattle lead. I knew the foot would come off the gas and the defense would go soft.

 

[pinksheets]

:greetingsearthling:

What does this even mean? Did Pete tell them to tackle poorly so the Bears could score? Did he opt to not score points?

There was a lot of bad execution, and Pete prefers to play lower risk football, but this "prefers to win close games" thing has been interpreted into utter nonsense.

Bad execution is a direct reflection on the coaching staff. A play or 2 is excusable, but today’s outing shows negligence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

But "keeping it close" implies that was intentional to have a game with a smaller points margin.

I agree the coaching was poor, but I don't think it's because Pete wants the other team to score or the Hawks not to just to be more exciting.

It’s always been Pete’s M/O, He never goes for the kill until the 4th. I can’t think of a game where the Seahawk stepped on an opposing team throat early in a game. Maybe this loss is clouding my memory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

What was the missed opportunity for a kill shot, though? Making the FG basically would have sealed it, and Russ was floundering in the passing game.

The team executed poorly, which is fair to put on the coaching, I just don't think the issue here was a philosophical one.

 

[AKNFidel]

:greetingsearthling:

Bad execution is a direct reflection on the coaching staff. A play or 2 is excusable, but today’s outing shows negligence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

But "keeping it close" implies that was intentional to have a game with a smaller points margin.

I agree the coaching was poor, but I don't think it's because Pete wants the other team to score or the Hawks not to just to be more exciting.

It’s always been Pete’s M/O, He never goes for the kill until the 4th. I can’t think of a game where the Seahawk stepped on an opposing team throat early in a game. Maybe this loss is clouding my memory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

What was the missed opportunity for a kill shot, though? Making the FG basically would have sealed it, and Russ was floundering in the passing game.

The team executed poorly, which is fair to put on the coaching, I just don't think the issue here was a philosophical one.

Kill shots don’t always need to be on Offense. If our Defense could have made the initial tackles in the flat, Chicago would have been toast.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[pinksheets]

:greetingsearthling:
But "keeping it close" implies that was intentional to have a game with a smaller points margin.

I agree the coaching was poor, but I don't think it's because Pete wants the other team to score or the Hawks not to just to be more exciting.

It’s always been Pete’s M/O, He never goes for the kill until the 4th. I can’t think of a game where the Seahawk stepped on an opposing team throat early in a game. Maybe this loss is clouding my memory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

What was the missed opportunity for a kill shot, though? Making the FG basically would have sealed it, and Russ was floundering in the passing game.

The team executed poorly, which is fair to put on the coaching, I just don't think the issue here was a philosophical one.

Kill shots don’t always need to be on Offense. If our Defense could have made the initial tackles in the flat, Chicago would have been toast.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Ok but again unless you're saying not making those tackles was a deliberate coaching decision, you can't attribute it to a philosophy of "keep it close". Are you saying the coaches were sloppy leading to sloppy execution or that Pete asked for sloppy play in hopes it'd help let the Bears keep it closer?

My whole issue is with this being framed as some specific choice by Pete to "keep it close". There's no way he said "let them break free and move further downfield for a more exciting finale.

 

[JPatera76]

F-Pete and his keep it close 4th qtr rah rah, Ken Norton loving ass.
And F-KNJ for even being close to this team. He can’t coach his way out of a paper bag.

 

[zchurch74]

Normally listen to 710 Monday mornings. When they run the ad about the Pete interview at 930 they play a clip of Pete saying something like, “this is how we play, this is how we win”. I ******* HATE THIS. I always feel like Pete is saying he loves to play games close just to prove people wrong when he does win and his way is successful.

I really do think Pete believes as long as he pulls out one last second victory a year he is safe. He doesn’t think about the 6 loses in the season his coaching cost them. All he cares about is the one game they do survive and win and that’s all it takes.

He doesn’t care what the critics think. He doesn’t care about the overall team record. He has been coaching long enough and has a super bowl what else is there? Firing Pete is the best thing for Pete. He needs to realize his way isnt good enough. This team deserves better. I don’t care how good we have been the last ten years. I care about how bad we have become the last three. We were a feared team and now we are almost a win on other teams schedules. No one is afraid to come to Seattle. No one is afraid of Russ. Teams want to play against our defense, so much third string QBs are successful.

I’d rather lose knowing we are rebuilding then being force fed the same ole shit every week and a coach telling us, “we are so close, we can feel it. The locker room can feel it. When we put it together we are going to be hard to stop”. Well it’s been three years and we haven’t seen them put it together. It’s done and it’s OK. We had a great run but it’s time to start over.