If it wasn’t for the 2 fumbles

The game isn’t close.

If it wasn't for the PI challenge and bounced ball off the chest on Montcrief we are losing

Doesn't really work that way

Sports Hernia":2ys0fgof said:

The game isn’t close.

Click to expand...

Or if Little Ben hadn't come down with a quick case of "Girls Elbow"

I think the point here is, the Stealers got 14 points off of Chris Carson fumbles.

We could do lots off "what it's" here, but 14 points off turnovers is a legitimate stat that Pete Carroll pays attention to.
It's something that the coaches will address during practice this week, and something I think that Chris Carson will rarely be guilty of in the future.

Turnovers, and scores off of, are stats that effect the game, and good talking points. The smart retorts add nothing to the conversation, and I doubt any coach would find them of interest when addressing their teams because it's something that is out of their control.

Last i looked, this is a forum for discussing Seahawks, their games, and the "Turning Points." Without such discussions, Dan Patrick wouldn't have a show by that name.

Next thing you know, people will be commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

ivotuk":3elprck6 said:

I think the point here is, the Stealers got 14 points of off Chris Carson fumbles.

We could do lots off "what it's" here, but 14 points off turnovers is a legitimate stat that Pete Carroll pays attention to.
It's something that the coaches will address during practice this week, and something I think that Chris Carson will rarely be guilty of in the future.

Turnovers, and scores off of, are stats that effect the game, and good talking points. The smart retorts add nothing to the conversation, and I doubt any coach would find them of interest when addressing their teams because it's something that is out of their control.

Next thing you know, people will be commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

Click to expand...

That's ridiculous. Commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

FYI in the first sentence of your second paragraph it's affect not effect.

ivotuk":3709a353 said:

I think the point here is, the Stealers got 14 points of off Chris Carson fumbles.

We could do lots off "what it's" here, but 14 points off turnovers is a legitimate stat that Pete Carroll pays attention to.
It's something that the coaches will address during practice this week, and something I think that Chris Carson will rarely be guilty of in the future.

Turnovers, and scores off of, are stats that effect the game, and good talking points. The smart retorts add nothing to the conversation, and I doubt any coach would find them of interest when addressing their teams because it's something that is out of their control.

Last i looked, this is a forum for discussing Seahawks, their games, and the "Turning Points." Without such discussions, Dan Patrick wouldn't have a show by that name.

Next thing you know, people will be commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

Click to expand...

*"What ifs"

WHAT ITS

I do hope people realize that Ben was 8/15 for 75 yards when he left, only offense they generated when he was there was because of the fumble and pass interference on Kendrick’s, otherwise we were shutting them down

I am so ashamed, can you guys forgive me?

That seems less fun.

Of course, it shouldn't have been close.

We played a team that was starting a backup QB for 3 quarters.

That it was close at all is concerning.

That's 3 fumbles (and an int/ near int if I recall correctly) by Carson in 2 games.

Uncharacteristic. It is something the coaches need to address. The other stuff is just the breaks of the game. Ball control is something you have some control of.

mikeak":37uey6px said:

If it wasn't for the PI challenge and bounced ball off the chest on Montcrief we are losing

Doesn't really work that way

Click to expand...

While you are correct, you missed my point.
If we play a cleaner game and avoid major mistakes it’s comfortable win.
The mistakes are easily fixed.

It seemed like the Stealers backup QB played about as well as a healthy Ben would have. But yeah, Big Ben might have made "one more" play that the backup did, and that could have changed the outcome.

Sports Hernia":ajkgioiq said:

mikeak":ajkgioiq said:

If it wasn't for the PI challenge and bounced ball off the chest on Montcrief we are losing

Doesn't really work that way

Click to expand...

While you are correct, you missed my point.
If we play a cleaner game and avoid major mistakes it’s comfortable win.
The mistakes are easily fixed.

Click to expand...

I get that part but you are saying if we make no mistakes but then other team still makes theirs it is a comfortable win

If neither team makes mistakes it is still close. My point is mistakes will normally happen

seabowl":18h16wqj said:

ivotuk":18h16wqj said:

I think the point here is, the Stealers got 14 points of off Chris Carson fumbles.

We could do lots off "what it's" here, but 14 points off turnovers is a legitimate stat that Pete Carroll pays attention to.
It's something that the coaches will address during practice this week, and something I think that Chris Carson will rarely be guilty of in the future.

Turnovers, and scores off of, are stats that effect the game, and good talking points. The smart retorts add nothing to the conversation, and I doubt any coach would find them of interest when addressing their teams because it's something that is out of their control.

Next thing you know, people will be commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

Click to expand...

That's ridiculous. Commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

FYI in the first sentence of your second paragraph it's affect not effect.

Click to expand...

FYI, after FYI, put a comma. Thank you.

Nice to see someone notices the fact that the Hawks win this game easily w/out the fluke fumbles. Meh

seabowl":352nzly2 said:

ivotuk":352nzly2 said:

I think the point here is, the Stealers got 14 points of off Chris Carson fumbles.

We could do lots off "what it's" here, but 14 points off turnovers is a legitimate stat that Pete Carroll pays attention to.
It's something that the coaches will address during practice this week, and something I think that Chris Carson will rarely be guilty of in the future.

Turnovers, and scores off of, are stats that effect the game, and good talking points. The smart retorts add nothing to the conversation, and I doubt any coach would find them of interest when addressing their teams because it's something that is out of their control.

Next thing you know, people will be commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

Click to expand...

That's ridiculous. Commenting on spelling and grammatical errors.

FYI in the first sentence of your second paragraph it's affect not effect.

Click to expand...

It was the third paragraph. Idgit.

mikeak":ta9x7dnm said:

Sports Hernia":ta9x7dnm said:

mikeak":ta9x7dnm said:

If it wasn't for the PI challenge and bounced ball off the chest on Montcrief we are losing

Doesn't really work that way

Click to expand...

While you are correct, you missed my point.
If we play a cleaner game and avoid major mistakes it’s comfortable win.
The mistakes are easily fixed.

Click to expand...

I get that part but you are saying if we make no mistakes but then other team still makes theirs it is a comfortable win

If neither team makes mistakes it is still close. My point is mistakes will normally happen

Click to expand...

The quantifiable stats suggest that in this game, if neither team makes mistakes, it's a Seahawks blowout.

Run the ball (150 yards), stop the run (less than 90 yards), control the clock (10 minute advantage).

That's a double digit win 9 times out of 10.

McGruff":1setu1j5 said:

Run the ball (150 yards), stop the run (less than 90 yards), control the clock (10 minute advantage).

That's a double digit win 9 times out of 10.

Click to expand...

Absolutely true. Do you think that the Seahawks running the ball more than twice as much as the Steelers has anything to do with the Seahawks having not quite double the rushing yards, though?

More generally, teams with leads run the ball and try to eat the clock and teams that are behind pass the ball and try to preserve the clock. Winning leads to running, not the other way around.

That's generally true even before getting into trying to use rushing yards and TOP as a measurement when comparing a team that runs a lot to a team that doesn't.

As for "if you flip x plays" arguments, for whatever number of plays you want to change the outcome on it's only fair to let fans of the opposing team change the outcome on the same number of plays, including changing back the ones you wanted to change. That almost always gets us right back to where we started without even going through the hypothetical of if what happened hadn't have actually happened.