When do you win games?

This is a heck of a contrast to the "Games are won in the 4th quarter" philosophy.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/patr ... 43530.html

That article appears to be unrelated to your comment.

Apples and oranges. I don't think you can defend the statement that game-planning and preparation are completely absent from Seattle's methods. It'd be extremely reductive. We know this team has Tell the Truth Thursday (or whatever) and we know that there's accountability.

"Win in the 4th quarter" is more of a defense of Pete's philosophy of ball control. Play defense and chew the clock until the 4th quarter, then take shots when necessary.

It may not make us look like the 2007 Patriots, but the end result is that every game is close. We've lost, like, only two games by more than one score since 2011.

bmorepunk":xmqbs4kd said:

That article appears to be unrelated to your comment.

Click to expand...

It's an article on Belichick keeping a quote up that wars are won before they start. Contrast that with Pete's philosophy that games are won in the 4th quarter. How is that not related?

HawkGA":2jwzuoqn said:

bmorepunk":2jwzuoqn said:

That article appears to be unrelated to your comment.

Click to expand...

It's an article on Belichick keeping a quote up that wars are won before they start. Contrast that with Pete's philosophy that games are won in the 4th quarter. How is that not related?

Click to expand...

Montana pretty much covered this a couple posts back so this is redundant. But I don't want to post and dump.

The quote you're talking about is this:

"The only sign we have in the locker room is from 'The Art of War.' 'Every battle is won before it is fought,'" he told CNBC contributor Suzy Welch in 2017 .

Click to expand...

As an aside: it's battles, not wars as you mentioned.

The context of the use is preparation during the week, overall season, and offseason. Does Pete Carroll and his team not spend all week preparing, in detail for all of their games? Belichick is better at it. But it's a core job function and philosophy of every NFL coach.

You're comparing a quote about the philosophy of preparation with Pete Carroll's <cheesy Madden-esque> philosophy that the game is won at the end of the fourth quarter. That's a philosophy of in-game focus and effort regardless of the game situation.

Those two coaching philosophies are independent of each other. One has to do with what you do outside the game, the other inside the game. Therefore, unrelated.

I don't mean to suggest the team doesn't game plan but it seems slow starts are pretty common for the Hawks. Might be that it's a general philosophy that is the problem. Trying to keep it close and then home that you turn it on late in the game is just a different mindset then stressing that you'll win the game before even stepping on the field.

But they are not unrelated. It's all part of the package.

And thanks for the correction on wars, not battles. I couldn't remember the exact quite and rather than looking it up, I went with the title of the book. Not really sure that changes much in the interpretation.

Sorry, but using the Patriots of all teams in the Super Bowl as an example of the importance of starting fast is unintentionally hilarious. Do you know how many combined points they have scored in the first quarter of all seven of their Super Bowls? The answer is just three points total, all from a field goal last year where they ended the first quarter down 3-9 against the Eagles. They've written the book on starting slow and trailing in the first quarter but trying to keep things manageable.

HawkGA":1xyk8ie1 said:

bmorepunk":1xyk8ie1 said:

That article appears to be unrelated to your comment.

Click to expand...

It's an article on Belichick keeping a quote up that wars are won before they start. Contrast that with Pete's philosophy that games are won in the 4th quarter. How is that not related?

Click to expand...

The connotation is that games are won through preparation and planning..

PC prepares and plans to win games in the 4th quarter.

Whether BBs planning and prep are superior is the contrast... the method is similar

Every coach prepares during the week leading up to a game. The question is; how good are they at it?

On defense Pete usually has his teams ready to play. He understands that side of the ball well, and is quite possibly one of the best defensive minds of all time. Certainly the best in today's NFL.

Unfortunately he isn't very good on offense. His ways of thinking are a relic of the past. On offense more often than not we play to not lose the game. We're always playing on our heels, rather than being on the attack. On one hand I get his strategy. Pete Carroll plays the toxic differential game. He wants to avoid turnovers at all costs. There is a strong correlation between the toxic deficit and wins.

On the other hand Pete Carroll is more obsessed with playing football his way than anything else. He severely handicaps his QB with his offensive scheme. Wilson does not seem to have the freedoms that are awarded to other top tier QBs. Nor does Carroll trust him to throw the entire route tree. We don't use every single one of the routes in the route tree, and we don't implement plays that the bread and butter of just about every other NFL team. We don't really utilize the middle of the field much, and we don't use much in the way of timing routes.

I understand Pete Carroll's desire to cut down on turnovers, but at some point he has to start trusting his QB. Handicapping the offense until a gun is to your head is a detriment to a team. This mentality has been holding our team back. Good implementation of timing routes, slants over the middle, and option routes could exponentially increase our third down conversion success, red zone efficiency and time of possession.

Pete Carroll is very slow to adjust and when he does it, he does so begrudgingly. We are the NFL's version of Mohammed Ali's famous rope a dope tactic that he employed in his later years.