"Ouch, that's hot"

jmahon316":9t0141tv said:

For the 3rd time, Seattle decided to pass it on first or second and goal.

This is equivalent to touching a hot stove. Eventually, it'll be cold and safe right?

Ouch, that's hot...
Ouch, that's hot...
Ouch, that's hot...

I swear if they try this one more time (WHETHER IT WORKS OUT OR NOT), someone better get fired.

Click to expand...

Ad Hawk":1946u6aq said:

jmahon316":1946u6aq said:

For the 3rd time, Seattle decided to pass it on first or second and goal.

This is equivalent to touching a hot stove. Eventually, it'll be cold and safe right?

Ouch, that's hot...
Ouch, that's hot...
Ouch, that's hot...

I swear if they try this one more time (WHETHER IT WORKS OUT OR NOT), someone better get fired.

Click to expand...

What gives you the confidence that running it with this current o-line and RBs would win the 2-pt conversion? This isn't the same team, nor the same Defense.

Click to expand...

Ad Hawk":290n2vjt said:

If that was all you needed to be convinced, you must be very comfortable working off of small sample sizes. Rawls had an earlier very short run to gain the 1st, and was met in the backfield, turned to the right and eluded two tackles and was brought down by a Norman arm-tackle before gaining 1 yard.

No, your confidence in the run to gain short yardage seems misplaced, though that aspect of the game was certainly better than last week.

Click to expand...