Not so Fun Fact on SeaBass

[Hawkpower]

I think the better discussion here is this:

Given his struggles with onside kicks, given the low percentage of recoveries anyway (especially with the new rules) and considering we had all three timeouts, shouldn't they have kicked it deep?

Considering how the game ended, those potential extra 30 or so yards may have been the difference in the game.

To me, an onside kick should only be used in desperation. I don't think the Hawks were in a desperate situation there.

 

[Seymour]

I think the better discussion here is this:

Given his struggles with onside kicks, given the low percentage of recoveries anyway (especially with the new rules) and considering we had all three timeouts, shouldn't they have kicked it deep?

Considering how the game ended, those potential extra 30 or so yards may have been the difference in the game.

To me, an onside kick should only be used in desperation. I don't think the Hawks were in a desperate situation there.

Absolutely we should have! we stopped them and got it back anyway. It was another ill conceived Pete call that was borderline insane knowing the facts. #2 best attempt would be let anyone besides SeaBass try it.

 

[bbsplitter]

I agree that Michael Dickson should have been the one if they decided to onside kick it. Even without looking at the stats behind SeaBass' attempts, I wouldn't think he would be the man for the job. An onside kick requires a certain flexibility to twist ones body at the last second to restrict the kick to only 10 yards downfield.

Flexibility is not the first thing I think of when I think of SeaBass. Hence his deeper ineffective kicks. He uses proper form squaring up to the kick until the last second to not give the direction away, but when he initiates the kick he simply cant twist fast enough to get the right angle.

 

[Uncle Si]

I think the better discussion here is this:

Given his struggles with onside kicks, given the low percentage of recoveries anyway (especially with the new rules) and considering we had all three timeouts, shouldn't they have kicked it deep?

Considering how the game ended, those potential extra 30 or so yards may have been the difference in the game.

To me, an onside kick should only be used in desperation. I don't think the Hawks were in a desperate situation there.

Really good point. 3 timeouts plus the 2 minute warning

 

[Seymour]

I agree that Michael Dickson should have been the one if they decided to onside kick it. Even without looking at the stats behind SeaBass' attempts, I wouldn't think he would be the man for the job. An onside kick requires a certain flexibility to twist ones body at the last second to restrict the kick to only 10 yards downfield.

Flexibility is not the first thing I think of when I think of SeaBass. Hence his deeper ineffective kicks. He uses proper form squaring up to the kick until the last second to not give the direction away, but when he initiates the kick he simply cant twist fast enough to get the right angle.

Great post!
Not sure how you know all that, but it fits and is logical. The numbers also clearly support some effect of this type is happening there.

 

[bmorepunk]

I really hope they find a better kicker next year.

Dude is under 70% right now. He doesn't have a lot of attempts compared to some other guys, but if he keeps this going, that's really bad.