themunn":1cgh6mcl said:
Aren't the Patriots the guys that went nearly 10 years between Superbowl wins?
The same guys that went 18-0 then lost the superbowl, failed to make the playoffs the following year and were 1 and done each of the following 2 years too?
Then they finally made it back to the superbowl and lost to the same team that done them 4 years prior?
Those Patriots?
That team is so successful because they've stuck with their all-time-great coach and not allowed 2 seasons and 3 games of discord to dictate what they do. Imagine they'd kicked Belichick after the 2010 season - "the league's caught up to him, spygate was what made him so good, the team just hasn't recovered from 18-1".
--snip--
THIS, for the win. (and MikeAk's comment too)
Pete has already reinvented himself a couple times over in his coaching career, just at the NFL level alone. Add in college and it's a couple more.
Yes, we got our asses kicked in Green Bay and in Tennessee in the heat, our D got worn down. Kudos to Tennessee.
As someone mentioned, the Titans game was a lot, lot, lot, like the early season game a couple years back vs. the Chargers where our D got worn down in the heat and we lost.
Yes, Pete needs to be willing to move to a "score early and often" model of offense, to game plan for each opponent to WIN the game against them, taking on favorable matchups instead of being so focused on "imposing our will on our opponents" (on offense).
Our D played lights-out first halves against both Green Bay and Tennessee, with roughly ZERO help from the pathetic offensive production, and getting creamed in plays run and time of possession. A few less 3-and-outs by the offense in the first half, a non-gassed defense, and both are very different games.
Pete is a smart man. He'll figure out what's working and not. But yes, he gets pulled back to his "run the ball" over-emphasis cliche script too early and often. Pete, the short possession passing game works the same as a grind-it-out running game! Pete, didn't you realize that New England imposed their will on us in SB49 with that short passing game and Brady and Edelman and Amendola dinking and dunking us to death? Why not develop *multiple* ways to impose our will on opponents? Actually, we had this with the Read Option running game, and imposed our will with that before the rest of the league figured out how to defend it better, and Wilson slowed down/got injured. And why not impose our will in different ways at different times? Dink and dunk in the first half, and then Ground Chuck/Read Option from the middle of the third quarter on, with a few series of no-huddle/up-tempo mixed in.
Losing is all that gets Pete Carroll's attention enough to change. All the close games we've had with his at-times overly conservative approach have kept him from changing; after all, it's always been close, it's always "almost worked". A couple bruising losses might be what it takes to get Pete to wake up and adjust to the team he has and scheme to win games against specific opponents, instead of over-prioritizing the impose-our-will crap. Save that stuff for the 4th quarter with a lead, against a gassed opposing D. An opponent worn down by short passing ball control is just as worn down as one worn down by a smashmouth running attack.
Pete has another change of stripes in him and another Super Bowl run or two as well. He's not done, and getting rid of Pete now would be like the Pats canning Belichick after the 2010 season.
