Stop it with the silly Challenges

We are 2-8 in challenges. Precious time outs are wasted. Can't afford that during the playoffs. On multiple occasions I've scratched my head on why we challenged some of the calls! I'm at about a 100% when saying that a challenge will not result in an overturning of the call on the field based solely on what I saw. Who initiates the challenge? Someone in the booth? Whoever it is sucks.

10-4

SoulfishHawk":pwz5g9tq said:

10-4

Click to expand...

Play offs = 1 mistake, season over.

Thinking ahead.

Pete Carroll knows what he's doing. You worry for both of us, I'm not even a little bit worried :th2thumbs:

Pete is a very emotional caught up in the moment coach.........which is why what makes him a great coach also can be a detriment when it comes to rigid unemotional decision making things like;

- when to go for it
- clock management (throwing a pass with 8 seconds left instead of kicking a FG)
- challenges

I think Pete gets caught up in the moment of potential turnovers with players barking in his ear, etc so he's more risky than most coaches with challenges. Sherman was yelling to challenge, so he did.

rastahawk":34q61q07 said:

SoulfishHawk":34q61q07 said:

10-4

Click to expand...

Play offs = 1 mistake, season over.

Thinking ahead.

Click to expand...

Not challenging can be as big a mistake as challenging and just as costly. Of course there is no "not challenged" stat to look up, but there have been times when Pete didn't challenge when the game scenario dictated that it would have been the best call.

The premise that our coaching staff needs to work on their challenge philosophy is sound, but to say we should stop challenging is utter nonsense

He trusted his player, who truly thought it was an incomplete pass. That's a good thing imo.

A quirky out-of-the-box thought

Since he challenged the other team's offensive play catch

This is when the other SF team was rolling pretty well in the first half . In basketball timeouts can be used when the other team is rolling and you need to disrupt their rhythm and give your guys a chance to regroup

First thought: curious on the average length of a challenge vs a timeout. A timeout is 2 minutes. If a challenge on average is longer, perhaps you could call a challenge to disrupt the game even more than a regular timeout. If the average NFL challenge is longer maybe he did it to give his guys on D more time to regroup

Second thought: if the other offense is rolling, and you just call timeout, it could be seen by the other offense is smelling blood. But if you put into doubt a recent play with a challenge, it might put them on edge and be more disruptive

Just some creative thinking ...

But yeah, I'm guessing it was just an unnecessary challenge.

Sgt. Largent":15dbj1ed said:

Pete is a very emotional caught up in the moment coach.........which is why what makes him a great coach also can be a detriment when it comes to rigid unemotional decision making things like;

- when to go for it
- clock management (throwing a pass with 8 seconds left instead of kicking a FG)
- challenges

I think Pete gets caught up in the moment of potential turnovers with players barking in his ear, etc so he's more risky than most coaches with challenges. Sherman was yelling to challenge, so he did.

Click to expand...

Yeah I get that vibe about the in the moment emotion. I was thinking if someone in the booth confirms it. We have such a low success rate at it.

You know your team is doing well when someone is complaining about challenges when they are sitting at 10-4.

kidhawk":2ihni0da said:

rastahawk":2ihni0da said:

SoulfishHawk":2ihni0da said:

10-4

Click to expand...

Play offs = 1 mistake, season over.

Thinking ahead.

Click to expand...

Not challenging can be as big a mistake as challenging and just as costly. Of course there is no "not challenged" stat to look up, but there have been times when Pete didn't challenge when the game scenario dictated that it would have been the best call.

The premise that our coaching staff needs to work on their challenge philosophy is sound, but to say we should stop challenging is utter nonsense

Click to expand...

Stop with the "silly" emotional challenges. Agreed on the need for a more sound challenge philosophy. Not saying we should completely stop using one of the most valuable game-time priviledges afforded to a coaching staff/game managers. That would be stupid.

rastahawk":3lbrh7yn said:

kidhawk":3lbrh7yn said:

rastahawk":3lbrh7yn said:

SoulfishHawk":3lbrh7yn said:

10-4

Click to expand...

Play offs = 1 mistake, season over.

Thinking ahead.

Click to expand...

Not challenging can be as big a mistake as challenging and just as costly. Of course there is no "not challenged" stat to look up, but there have been times when Pete didn't challenge when the game scenario dictated that it would have been the best call.

The premise that our coaching staff needs to work on their challenge philosophy is sound, but to say we should stop challenging is utter nonsense

Click to expand...

Stop with the "silly" emotional challenges. Agreed on the need for a more sound challenge philosophy. Not saying we should completely stop using one of the most valuable game-time priviledges afforded to a coaching staff/game managers. That would be stupid.

Click to expand...

How do we decide which are silly? Are they silly because they fail? A lot of it has as much to do with score of the game, time left, whether we were going to take a timeout anyway.

Pete is the first to admit his mistakes, but failed challenges are not always mistakes. Sometimes the risk is worth the reward.

rastahawk":173hwfd9 said:

SoulfishHawk":173hwfd9 said:

10-4

Click to expand...

Play offs = 1 mistake, season over.

Thinking ahead.

Click to expand...

Interesting, because i remember a lost challenge in the Super Bowl. I guess technically the season was still over after that, but I wasnt disappointed by it.

On our last challenge, Pete had to throw the challenge flag quickly since the 49ers had the ball. There was no time to review the replays so Pete had to trust Sherman. Unfortunately there was no conclusive angle, but I'm glad Pete listens to his players.

Cartire":1e9tbx0o said:

rastahawk":1e9tbx0o said:

SoulfishHawk":1e9tbx0o said:

10-4

Click to expand...

Play offs = 1 mistake, season over.

Thinking ahead.

Click to expand...

Interesting, because i remember a lost challenge in the Super Bowl. I guess technically the season was still over after that, but I wasnt disappointed by it.

Click to expand...

Good thing we were so dominant in that game everything else was a non-factor. Challenges included.

I think everyone is throwing their challenge flags at my post because they may have misinterpreted my weak attempt at humor on the post's title. My real concern was if somebody with a TV screen in their face confirms it. But anyways its kind of quasi-confirmed from the sources on this board that its mostly emotional.

No offense, but PC knows 500 times more about football than any of us.

SoulfishHawk":2no53bw1 said:

Pete Carroll knows what he's doing. You worry for both of us, I'm not even a little bit worried :th2thumbs:

Click to expand...

There ya go

SoulfishHawk":1rgqp2h8 said:

No offense, but PC knows 500 times more about football than any of us.

Click to expand...

Thank you captain obvious :th2thumbs:

Pete doesn't just make decisions like that in a vacuum. I believe Rocky Seto and/or Tater is in the booth advising Pete on what is seen on replay--assuming they have time to watch replay. When there isn't time, he has to go with his gut and what his players tell him.

SoulfishHawk":1ih3x1sg said:

10-4

Click to expand...

Yea, the Seahawks have a good record. No reason for any fans to discuss anything else about the team. Especially on a team message board that exists solely for discussion about the team. Good call.