Kyle and McVay passed him by.

Bench Wilson
Trade Wagner
Fire Schneider

Brooks is a bust

Say what you will but this is a banner day.

Since the SB loss Pete has NEVER won a game like this.

We have had multiple opportunities to win the division in a winner-take-all game and never came out on top.

If we can win a divisional playoff game this year, this season will be a success by almost any measure.


You also have to recognize that somehow, against a complete nemesis of ours, Norton ended up being the hero of this game. Norton.

Finally, the moves to get DJ Reed, Adams, and Dunlop seem to have made an incredible difference for this team.

This might be the most important win for this franchise since the SB loss.

The overreaction to the overreactors is always humorous.

Sports Hernia wrote:The overreaction to the overreactors is always humorous.

I don't know why...The Garbage posts the ridicule that has gone on is ridiculous...


LTH

Jerhawk wrote:Bench Wilson
Trade Wagner
Fire Schneider

Nah trade Wilson, he us too short, not black enough and merely a game manager.

Sent from my IN2017 using Tapatalk

Sports Hernia wrote:The overreaction to the overreactors is always humorous.

Makes me laugh. I knew id get solid replies in here.

Sports Hernia wrote:The overreaction to the overreactors is always humorous.

Yeah, but would you say it's inexcusable?

Sports Hernia wrote:The overreaction to the overreactors is always humorous.

It's the 3 or 4 pollyannas that make this place truly unbearable.

I can't tell which posts are sarcastic and which are serious

Pete is a great regular season coach. With Pete I feel like he makes worse teams play above their potential, and he makes good teams play below what they are truly capable of. He's a motivator and honestly he's created a great culture in Seattle.

My issue with Pete is he is dogmatic. He's ridgid in his approach, not only does he want to win, but he wants to win his way. We'll be doing things that work, specifically on offense and inexplicably go away from it. Game plans are often times lacking and in game coaching decisions often leave me befuddled, especially when it comes to clock management.

This is okay in the regular season, but in the playoffs it has bitten us very badly. We've under performed there for quite some time. Since our Super Bowl run we've lost more than we've won in the playoffs. What concerns me is we've lost the same way, each and every time. We've really dropped the ball there and turned what should have been wins into losses. We haven't learned from our losses in the post season thus far.

Maybe this year will be different, I don't know. I'm suspecting it won't be though -- especially with Wilson being off his game. I'm a bit of a different breed, I'm willing to have a potential nonce as head coach and go through losing seasons for the potential of a Super Bowl. I feel like we have the roster to accomplish a Super Bowl run, but I don't think Carroll is the guy to get us there. I think we need a fresh prospective and sometimes that is all a roster needs in order to get a Super Bowl and push a team over the top. Things could always be worse, but I feel like we've been caught in a circular loop that I don't see breaking under Carroll.

Sports Hernia wrote:The overreaction to the overreactors is always humorous.

Totally true!

For me it’s odd to be saying cool your jets to the told you so crowd rubbing dirt in the faces of the Negative Nellie’s. They were wrong but will still complain about Jn’P, KNJ, Scotty, etc.,etc.. Thehy are entitled to their opinions even if they are wrong.

Play nice children!

TwistedHusky wrote:Say what you will but this is a banner day.

Since the SB loss Pete has NEVER won a game like this.

We have had multiple opportunities to win the division in a winner-take-all game and never came out on top.

If we can win a divisional playoff game this year, this season will be a success by almost any measure.


You also have to recognize that somehow, against a complete nemesis of ours, Norton ended up being the hero of this game. Norton.

Finally, the moves to get DJ Reed, Adams, and Dunlop seem to have made an incredible difference for this team.

This might be the most important win for this franchise since the SB loss.

Takes a man to admit he was wrong.

Good post

Go Hawks!

Spin Doctor wrote:Pete is a great regular season coach. With Pete I feel like he makes worse teams play above their potential, and he makes good teams play below what they are truly capable of. He's a motivator and honestly he's created a great culture in Seattle.

My issue with Pete is he is dogmatic. He's ridgid in his approach, not only does he want to win, but he wants to win his way. We'll be doing things that work, specifically on offense and inexplicably go away from it. Game plans are often times lacking and in game coaching decisions often leave me befuddled, especially when it comes to clock management.

This is okay in the regular season, but in the playoffs it has bitten us very badly. We've under performed there for quite some time. Since our Super Bowl run we've lost more than we've won in the playoffs. What concerns me is we've lost the same way, each and every time. We've really dropped the ball there and turned what should have been wins into losses. We haven't learned from our losses in the post season thus far.

Maybe this year will be different, I don't know. I'm suspecting it won't be though -- especially with Wilson being off his game. I'm a bit of a different breed, I'm willing to have a potential nonce as head coach and go through losing seasons for the potential of a Super Bowl. I feel like we have the roster to accomplish a Super Bowl run, but I don't think Carroll is the guy to get us there. I think we need a fresh prospective and sometimes that is all a roster needs in order to get a Super Bowl and push a team over the top. Things could always be worse, but I feel like we've been caught in a circular loop that I don't see breaking under Carroll.

Without doing the research, I would have to imagine the very nature of the playoffs make it rare that many coaches walk away with significantly more than a .500 record there when its all said and done.

I think you will miss Pete more than you realize when he finally hangs em up. Not that he doesnt have faults, and some of your points have merit, but man do I appreciate Seahawk football right now.

Enjoy the ride.

I believe we're .500 in the playoffs since winning the SB, which is quite good.

Spin Doctor wrote:Pete is a great regular season coach. With Pete I feel like he makes worse teams play above their potential, and he makes good teams play below what they are truly capable of. He's a motivator and honestly he's created a great culture in Seattle.

My issue with Pete is he is dogmatic. He's ridgid in his approach, not only does he want to win, but he wants to win his way. We'll be doing things that work, specifically on offense and inexplicably go away from it. Game plans are often times lacking and in game coaching decisions often leave me befuddled, especially when it comes to clock management.

This is okay in the regular season, but in the playoffs it has bitten us very badly. We've under performed there for quite some time. Since our Super Bowl run we've lost more than we've won in the playoffs. What concerns me is we've lost the same way, each and every time. We've really dropped the ball there and turned what should have been wins into losses. We haven't learned from our losses in the post season thus far.

Maybe this year will be different, I don't know. I'm suspecting it won't be though -- especially with Wilson being off his game. I'm a bit of a different breed, I'm willing to have a potential nonce as head coach and go through losing seasons for the potential of a Super Bowl. I feel like we have the roster to accomplish a Super Bowl run, but I don't think Carroll is the guy to get us there. I think we need a fresh prospective and sometimes that is all a roster needs in order to get a Super Bowl and push a team over the top. Things could always be worse, but I feel like we've been caught in a circular loop that I don't see breaking under Carroll.

Yeah your right we should ditch Pete and hire you....LMAO!!!!!


LTH

pinksheets wrote:I believe we're .500 in the playoffs since winning the SB, which is quite good.

We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run. One of those wins was a free gift from Blair Walsh with 23 seconds left in the game, chip shot field goal miss.

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:I believe we're .500 in the playoffs since winning the SB, which is quite good.

We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run.

3-4.

Technically true, (below 500) but not at all unusual for a 5 year playoff stretch for any coach.

A bit of straw grasping to try and create a narrative honestly.

To give context, Sean Payton is 3-4 in the playoffs since 2013.

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:I believe we're .500 in the playoffs since winning the SB, which is quite good.

We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run.

Wait, so your line is after we last made a SB we lost not last we won? Is just making the SB the goal or is winning one? Because it sounds like you're drawing an arbitrary line that suits this narrative.

It's extremely difficult to make the playoffs a lot and also have a strong winning record in the playoffs because unless you win the SB, you're taking a loss.

Pete has still won a playoff game in each of their last 4 appearances. That's quite good, period. There's not someone who just constantly gets to Conference Championships out waiting in the wings because that's either Belichik or they don't exist.

pinksheets wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:I believe we're .500 in the playoffs since winning the SB, which is quite good.

We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run.

Wait, so your line is after we last made a SB we lost not last we won? Is just making the SB the goal or is winning one? Because it sounds like you're drawing an arbitrary line that suits this narrative.

It's extremely difficult to make the playoffs a lot and also have a strong winning record in the playoffs because unless you win the SB, you're taking a loss.

Pete has still won a playoff game in each of their last 4 appearances. That's quite good, period. There's not someone who just constantly gets to Conference Championships out waiting in the wings because that's either Belichik or they don't exist.

We should have lost in Minnesota, and we lost in 2018 against the Cowboys, not a single win that season. Pete does not have what it takes to get us to another Super Bowl. What concerns me is not that we're losing, it is HOW we're losing. We keep making the same mistakes each loss, we keep losing the same way and not adjusting. I highly doubt Pete ever brings us another Super Bowl again, and I doubt he even gets us an NFC Championship game.

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:I believe we're .500 in the playoffs since winning the SB, which is quite good.

We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run.

Wait, so your line is after we last made a SB we lost not last we won? Is just making the SB the goal or is winning one? Because it sounds like you're drawing an arbitrary line that suits this narrative.

It's extremely difficult to make the playoffs a lot and also have a strong winning record in the playoffs because unless you win the SB, you're taking a loss.

Pete has still won a playoff game in each of their last 4 appearances. That's quite good, period. There's not someone who just constantly gets to Conference Championships out waiting in the wings because that's either Belichik or they don't exist.

We should have lost in Minnesota, and we lost in 2018 against the Cowboys, not a single win that season. Pete does not have what it takes to get us to another Super Bowl. What concerns me is not that we're losing, it is HOW we're losing. We keep making the same mistakes each loss, we keep losing the same way and not adjusting. I highly doubt Pete ever brings us another Super Bowl again, and I doubt he even gets us an NFC Championship game.

Just to humor us, could you provide the list of coaches in the last few years that have a playoff record well over .500?

I'm struggling to come up with a long list....since you seem to think Pete losing games in the playoffs is an anomaly.

Thanks

Just for context, Bill Belichick was 9-8 in the playoffs in the 9 seasons between their 3rd & 4th SB titles.

This just illustrates the fact that winning in the NFL playoffs is really, really easy.

Hawkpower wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run.

Wait, so your line is after we last made a SB we lost not last we won? Is just making the SB the goal or is winning one? Because it sounds like you're drawing an arbitrary line that suits this narrative.

It's extremely difficult to make the playoffs a lot and also have a strong winning record in the playoffs because unless you win the SB, you're taking a loss.

Pete has still won a playoff game in each of their last 4 appearances. That's quite good, period. There's not someone who just constantly gets to Conference Championships out waiting in the wings because that's either Belichik or they don't exist.

We should have lost in Minnesota, and we lost in 2018 against the Cowboys, not a single win that season. Pete does not have what it takes to get us to another Super Bowl. What concerns me is not that we're losing, it is HOW we're losing. We keep making the same mistakes each loss, we keep losing the same way and not adjusting. I highly doubt Pete ever brings us another Super Bowl again, and I doubt he even gets us an NFC Championship game.

Just to humor us, could you provide the list of coaches in the last few years that have a playoff record well over .500?

I'm struggling to come up with a long list....since you seem to think Pete losing games in the playoffs is an anomaly.

Thanks

Should be coaches who made it at least 4 of 5 years to be fair, too.

Hockey Guy wrote:Just for context, Bill Belichick was 9-8 in the playoffs in the 9 seasons between their 3rd & 4th SB titles.

This just illustrates the fact that winning in the NFL playoffs is really, really easy.

Andy Reid, even with his latest success, is 11-13

Pete is 11-9

pmedic920 wrote:

I’m not necessarily saying fire Pete, even though I think his asinine coaching and reluctance to change has cost us many, many times, but Bill O’Brien won 4 out of 6 division titles; that didn’t make him a good coach.

Spin doctor is plain and simple just a hater. Not one single positive post in years. Hope he had a $h!t Christmas...lol

Spin Doctor wrote:Pete is a great regular season coach. With Pete I feel like he makes worse teams play above their potential, and he makes good teams play below what they are truly capable of. He's a motivator and honestly he's created a great culture in Seattle.

My issue with Pete is he is dogmatic. He's ridgid in his approach, not only does he want to win, but he wants to win his way. We'll be doing things that work, specifically on offense and inexplicably go away from it. Game plans are often times lacking and in game coaching decisions often leave me befuddled, especially when it comes to clock management.

This is okay in the regular season, but in the playoffs it has bitten us very badly. We've under performed there for quite some time. Since our Super Bowl run we've lost more than we've won in the playoffs. What concerns me is we've lost the same way, each and every time. We've really dropped the ball there and turned what should have been wins into losses. We haven't learned from our losses in the post season thus far.

Maybe this year will be different, I don't know. I'm suspecting it won't be though -- especially with Wilson being off his game. I'm a bit of a different breed, I'm willing to have a potential nonce as head coach and go through losing seasons for the potential of a Super Bowl. I feel like we have the roster to accomplish a Super Bowl run, but I don't think Carroll is the guy to get us there. I think we need a fresh prospective and sometimes that is all a roster needs in order to get a Super Bowl and push a team over the top. Things could always be worse, but I feel like we've been caught in a circular loop that I don't see breaking under Carroll.

You do realize that this roster you speak of would go away right along with Pete if got canned right? You'd have 1 year maybe intact and from then on you no longer have the thing that draws a lot of the players to this roster right?

Flyingsquad23 wrote:Spin doctor is plain and simple just a hater. Not one single positive post in years. Hope he had a $h!t Christmas...lol

What a mean spirited post. I never wish ill will on posters even if I disagree with them. You really need to take a step back and examine yourself. You're wishing bad luck on somebody just because they happen to have a different opinion on football than you. You should be ashamed.

Ahhh the annual gloat posts by the kool aid drinkers gotta love em.
On a side note credit to Pete and ken Norton for turning the defense into an average defense instead of the dumpster fire it was the first half of the season. I still hope for a new coach. But Pete will keep us around 9-11 wins a year with first or second round exits and he’ll play out his contract imo. Can we just appreciate everyone’s opinion. We won the west let’s enjoy it like you positive patties say

hawksincebirth wrote:Can we just appreciate everyone’s opinion. We won the west let’s enjoy it like you positive patties say

No, there is no need or responsibility to appreciate ridiculous opinions. They are open to criticism and rejection. Not all opinions are equal in value, even in our politically correct world of everyone getting a trophy.

Wanting PC replaced is a ridiculous opinion, and should be rejected outright.

That's my opinion.

Agree!

All I know from reading these forums, & don't attack me for my opinion, is that winning in the NFL is extremely easy. All the coaching staffs around the league need to do is read these forums & every team will go 16-0 & win the SB.

Seriously, it's so simple that coaches should be allowed to browse the forums on the sidelines to see what should be done next.

Getting the orders right at the MacDonald's drive-thru? Now, that is the real challenge.

hawksincebirth wrote:Ahhh the annual gloat posts by the kool aid drinkers gotta love em.
On a side note credit to Pete and ken Norton for turning the defense into an average defense instead of the dumpster fire it was the first half of the season. I still hope for a new coach. But Pete will keep us around 9-11 wins a year with first or second round exits and he’ll play out his contract imo. Can we just appreciate everyone’s opinion. We won the west let’s enjoy it like you positive patties say

Being happy over yet another division title and an 11-4 record isnt being a kool-aid drinker, its called being a rational and emotionally stable human being.

By the way, go ahead and take a poll around the league and see how many franchises would sign up quickly for a coach that gets them double digit victories and playoff appearances every year.

rsRyno wrote:

pmedic920 wrote:

I’m not necessarily saying fire Pete, even though I think his asinine coaching and reluctance to change has cost us many, many times, but Bill O’Brien won 4 out of 6 division titles; that didn’t make him a good coach.

Winning the weak AFC south with 9-7 records and winning what has been consistently the best division in the NFL repeatedly are two different things.

Pete Carroll is 143-94 in Seattle with a Super Bowl win
O'Brien was 52-48

Pete is considered to be a great coach for reasons beyond division titles. But you know this.

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:I believe we're .500 in the playoffs since winning the SB, which is quite good.

We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run.

Wait, so your line is after we last made a SB we lost not last we won? Is just making the SB the goal or is winning one? Because it sounds like you're drawing an arbitrary line that suits this narrative.

It's extremely difficult to make the playoffs a lot and also have a strong winning record in the playoffs because unless you win the SB, you're taking a loss.

Pete has still won a playoff game in each of their last 4 appearances. That's quite good, period. There's not someone who just constantly gets to Conference Championships out waiting in the wings because that's either Belichik or they don't exist.

We should have lost in Minnesota, and we lost in 2018 against the Cowboys, not a single win that season. Pete does not have what it takes to get us to another Super Bowl. What concerns me is not that we're losing, it is HOW we're losing. We keep making the same mistakes each loss, we keep losing the same way and not adjusting. I highly doubt Pete ever brings us another Super Bowl again, and I doubt he even gets us an NFC Championship game.

No coach is ever going to meet your expectations. It is statistically impossible. You are setting a standard that is completely unsustainable. Then you use this unrealistic expectation as a measuring stick to determine whether PC will be successful in the off-season.??!!!!????!!???

The playoffs are a "loser go home" format. It is not like regular season where there are a set number of games to be won or lost. Under the old format:

1. 12 teams made the playoffs.
2. 4 of those teams are guaranteed to be "one and done".....that is 33% of the teams.
3. The 4 top seeded teams that received a bye week could be "one and done" if they under perform.
4. Assuming the top 1 and 2 seeds all win, 4 teams will be "two and done".
5. If any of the top seeded teams lose, the "one and done" percentage increases.
6. Only 4 teams will make the Conference Championship Games (CCG).....that is only 33% of the teams that made the playoffs.
7. Assuming the top 1 and 2 seeded teams make the CCG, 2 of the teams will have a 1-1 playoff record for that season.
8. Only 2 teams will make the Superbowl....that is only 16.6% of the teams that make the playoffs.
9. EVERY team is capable of laying an egg in the playoffs....for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with coaching. Injuries, nerves, weather, away game, poor refereeing, bad bounces, etc can all impact a game's outcome.

In order for a coach to have a above .500 playoff record, they would pretty much need to get to the Conference Championship Game almost every time they reach the playoffs....however, even then, only 2 of the top seeded teams will be able to break .500.

Your claim that a coach that consistently has 10+ wins a season suddenly does not have "what it takes" to advance in the playoff is asinine. You are talking about the 6 best teams from each Conference. It does not take a genius to understand that stiff competition would be expected....even from the teams that just "squeaked in".

The coaching is not the problem......the problem is your unrealistic expectations.

Even NE fans were constantly calling BB out and saying he sucked and should be fired in the middle of:

19 years
6 SB Championships
9 SB appearance
17 Division championships

Human nature. Some people aren't happy unless the world meets their irrational and unrealistic expectations.

Some people aren't happy. Shocker. Don't let their attempt to spread their misery bring you down.

Spin Doctor wrote:

Flyingsquad23 wrote:Spin doctor is plain and simple just a hater. Not one single positive post in years. Hope he had a $h!t Christmas...lol

What a mean spirited post. I never wish ill will on posters even if I disagree with them. You really need to take a step back and examine yourself. You're wishing bad luck on somebody just because they happen to have a different opinion on football than you. You should be ashamed.

While I do not condone his vitriol, it can be understandable. It gets pretty aggravating to constantly read posts from people that make unsubstantiated claims based on their "feels" and see them present those "feels" as fact. Then when called on it they say "hey man, I never said it was fact. It's only my opinion".

This team has had some great play this season....and some pretty poor play this season. That is something that is common with ALL teams. Not a single team had an easy road to the playoffs. They all fought injuries. They all played bad games. They all executed some plays poorly.

To claim that an NFL coach that constantly has 10+ win seasons, reaches the playoffs more times than not, and has made their team a competitor season after season....that this type of coach is "dogmatic", "rigid", or "does not have what it takes" to win in the playoffs....well, that does not seem to hold much reasoning nor logic. Constantly beating people upon the head and shoulders with your "feels" kind of gets old, especially when those "feels" seem to be lacking that reason and logic. But hey, I understand it if you just don't like PC. Heck, seeing as how many of us are Oregon and/or Washington fans, we were kind of ingrained to dislike a coach from USC.

Disagree.

It is near impossible to dislike Pete. The issue is PeteBall. Not Pete.

A problem is Pete is successful enough he does not need to change.

With Pete, he will always improve your roster. Grow/Build/Develop, whatever...

But that also means he is going to create rosters that seem better than results. Almost invariably.

The challenge is that without Pete you don't get those rosters.

So what do you want?
Great roster with incredible regular season success? Or lesser rosters with lesser regular season success but better results in the playoffs?

Is Carroll underproducing in the playoffs or overproducing in the regular season and so setting unreasonable postseason expectations?

Spin Doctor wrote:

Flyingsquad23 wrote:Spin doctor is plain and simple just a hater. Not one single positive post in years. Hope he had a $h!t Christmas...lol

What a mean spirited post. I never wish ill will on posters even if I disagree with them. You really need to take a step back and examine yourself. You're wishing bad luck on somebody just because they happen to have a different opinion on football than you. You should be ashamed.

First off I didn’t wish bad luck on you, I wrote that I hoped you had a bad Christmas. Then I clearly lol’d. If you consider that wishing ill will then I understand how you reach your opinions on the Hawks.

TwistedHusky wrote:Disagree.

It is near impossible to dislike Pete. The issue is PeteBall. Not Pete.

A problem is Pete is successful enough he does not need to change.

With Pete, he will always improve your roster. Grow/Build/Develop, whatever...

But that also means he is going to create rosters that seem better than results. Almost invariably.

The challenge is that without Pete you don't get those rosters.

So what do you want?
Great roster with incredible regular season success? Or lesser rosters with lesser regular season success but better results in the playoffs?

Is Carroll underproducing in the playoffs or overproducing in the regular season and so setting unreasonable postseason expectations?

What would producing “just right” in the playoffs look like to you over a 10 year span, and please explain why Pete doesn’t meet that standard.

Please feel free to reference other coaches last 10 years as a comparable so we have context

TwistedHusky wrote:Disagree.

It is near impossible to dislike Pete. The issue is PeteBall. Not Pete.

So what exactly is "Pete Ball"? Is that a term created to explain everything he does that you do not like?

With Pete, he will always improve your roster. Grow/Build/Develop, whatever...

But that also means he is going to create rosters that seem better than results. Almost invariably.

You just described EVERY team.

So what do you want?
Great roster with incredible regular season success? Or lesser rosters with lesser regular season success but better results in the playoffs?

So...you think a lesser team that preforms worse in the regular season would have better results in the playoffs????? Either I'm not quite understanding what you are saying, or that is some very twisted logic.

Is Carroll underproducing in the playoffs or overproducing in the regular season and so setting unreasonable postseason expectations?

How exactly is he under-performing in the playoffs???? His post season record is very comparable to ANY modern era NFL coach. Just because returning to the SB has eluded him, that does not mean he is under-performing in the play-offs.

You set you own expectations. Stop trying to blame PC for not clearing the high bar you set.

Nunya,

If you really don't know what 'PeteBall' is then you haven't been paying attention to this team for a while. I think the more likely answer is you know but are feigning ignorance to create your argument. There are enough references to PeteBall on here you can figure it out.

On the other points you questioned?

Let's be clear. Yes all teams grow/build/improve. But Pete is an expert program builder. There is a difference.

He is adept at building and developing key contributors IN season. That means many things but primarily it means that the roster on Day 1 will significantly improve by end of season. It also means that lower level draft picks have a much higher % chance of being significant contributors than most teams usually realize at those levels. Both are exceptional, both are benefits that Pete brings, and not sure why or how you would pretend this is normal when it isn't.

Sure it happens to all teams. But not with the degree and consistency Pete delivers. It is almost assured depth multiplier.

With Pete, you are going to be better at the end of the year in key areas that you were not great at in the earlier games. He also is going to find some unheralded player and turn him into an exceptional contributor yearly.

Not even sure what your argument would be, or how you are disputing that.




But, teams with high ranked rosters tend to do better in the playoffs. We should be doing better in the playoffs than we have since our SB loss when contrasted to how our roster would be ranked.

Pete's playoff success is fairly good. But not since the SB loss.

Reasonable expectations? What is reasonable for a team with a top 2 QB and fairly highly ranked roster?

A single divisional playoff win in the past half decade maybe?

To the Pete haters..He won't be around but a few more years at most.
The man got us our SB win and it should have been two but all I see is
spoiled people who don't know what it's like to go through coach after
coach trying to get a good one..
I know trust me and so do others in here..I love PC but that offense gets
to me sometimes too..It works lot more than it doesn't so I can deal with
that

TwistedHusky wrote:Nunya,

If you really don't know what 'PeteBall' is then you haven't been paying attention to this team for a while. I think the more likely answer is you know but are feigning ignorance to create your argument. There are enough references to PeteBall on here you can figure it out.

On the other points you questioned?

Let's be clear. Yes all teams grow/build/improve. But Pete is an expert program builder. There is a difference.

He is adept at building and developing key contributors IN season. That means many things but primarily it means that the roster on Day 1 will significantly improve by end of season. It also means that lower level draft picks have a much higher % chance of being significant contributors than most teams usually realize at those levels. Both are exceptional, both are benefits that Pete brings, and not sure why or how you would pretend this is normal when it isn't.

Sure it happens to all teams. But not with the degree and consistency Pete delivers. It is almost assured depth multiplier.

With Pete, you are going to be better at the end of the year in key areas that you were not great at in the earlier games. He also is going to find some unheralded player and turn him into an exceptional contributor yearly.

Not even sure what your argument would be, or how you are disputing that.




But, teams with high ranked rosters tend to do better in the playoffs. We should be doing better in the playoffs than we have since our SB loss when contrasted to how our roster would be ranked.

Pete's playoff success is fairly good. But not since the SB loss.

Reasonable expectations? What is reasonable for a team with a top 2 QB and fairly highly ranked roster?

A single divisional playoff win in the past half decade maybe?

I think you are overestimating some of our rosters.

We've had some good teams in the last 5 years, sure, but we also have had some teams going in without key pieces (last year) and some other teams that were seriously flawed that probably in all honesty reached their peak in rounds 1/2.

Making it to a conference championship game is a special feat. Takes things clicking on all levels plus a bit of luck.

Not making one in the last 5 years is hardly a definition of failure by any rational human being.

TwistedHusky wrote:Nunya,

If you really don't know what 'PeteBall' is then you haven't been paying attention to this team for a while. I think the more likely answer is you know but are feigning ignorance to create your argument. There are enough references to PeteBall on here you can figure it out.

Sure, I have seen people say "Pete Ball", but there are about 50 different descriptions of what "Pete Ball" actually is, depending on who you ask. People seem to throw that term out there as if it was some failed unique game management style. In reality, "Pete Ball" is basically a tried and true approach to the game of football. Balance between run & pass. Be efficient in both the run & pass. Control the ball. Control the clock, especially when you have the lead. There is nothing that PC does that is any way unique or earth shattering.

On the other points you questioned?

Let's be clear. Yes all teams grow/build/improve. But Pete is an expert program builder. There is a difference.

He is adept at building and developing key contributors IN season. That means many things but primarily it means that the roster on Day 1 will significantly improve by end of season. It also means that lower level draft picks have a much higher % chance of being significant contributors than most teams usually realize at those levels. Both are exceptional, both are benefits that Pete brings, and not sure why or how you would pretend this is normal when it isn't.

Except it IS normal. Every team has undrafted players that have found success.

Sure it happens to all teams. But not with the degree and consistency Pete delivers. It is almost assured depth multiplier.

I think you would be surprised at how well some other coaches develop players. However, I do agree that PC seems to have regular success. Not all coaches will be as successful as PC has been, but his "talent" is not unique. Maybe rare, but not unique.

With Pete, you are going to be better at the end of the year in key areas that you were not great at in the earlier games. He also is going to find some unheralded player and turn him into an exceptional contributor yearly.

Not even sure what your argument would be, or how you are disputing that.

So basically, you are saying that PC is doing what is expected of an NFL coach? Continue to coach throughout the season? Teach players how to more efficiently play their position?

So what is my argument? Nothing. I'm not sure why you are going on about PC's skill at developing players. I never once contested that point. Yes, he is good in this area.

But, teams with high ranked rosters tend to do better in the playoffs. We should be doing better in the playoffs than we have since our SB loss when contrasted to how our roster would be ranked.

Don't even know what you are saying here. All it does is create more questions than answers: Ranked by who? How ranked? Ranked pre-season or post regular season? Based on individual stats or someone's opinion?

Please provide data that suggests high ranked rosters do better in the playoffs.

From my experience, teams with decent defenses, teams that have a decent and balance run/pass offence, and a sprinkling of decent Special Teams play....and are able to continue their decent play during the playoffs, are the teams that do better in the playoffs.

Pete's playoff success is fairly good. But not since the SB loss.

Reasonable expectations? What is reasonable for a team with a top 2 QB and fairly highly ranked roster?

A single divisional playoff win in the past half decade maybe?

Since the 2014 SB loss, there has been 5 seasons. One of those season, the Seahawks never even made it to the playoffs (2017).

2015 - Entered as the 6th seed with a 10-6 record. Beat the #3 seed (Minnesota) in the Wild Card round. Lost to the #1 team (Carolina) in the Divisional Round.

2016 - Entered as the #3 seed with a 10-5-1 record. Beat the #6 seed (Detroit in the Wild Card Round. Lost to the #2 seed (Atlanta) in the Divisional Round. This was the first season without Lynch and we struggled finding a replacement.

2018 - Entered as the #5 seed with a 10-6 record. Lost to the #4 seed (Dallas) in the Wild Card round. First season without the LOB.

2019 Entered as the #5 seed with an 11-5 record. Beat the # 4 seed (Philadelphia) in the Wild Card round. Lost to the #2 seed (Green Bay) in the Divisional round. Went 1-3 in the last 4 games of the regular season, mainly because of injuries. RB corp was so depleted that Lynch was brought out of retirement.

So it looks like we won against the teams we should have won against and lost to team we should have lost to (except the 2015 Vikings and the 2019 Eagles, who we beat even though they were seeded higher).

EDIT - Note: Since our SB win in 2014, no team seeded #3 or lower has made the SB.

As far as RW being the "top 2 QB", that is debatable, depending on what metric a person uses. Myself, I think it is silly to "rank" QB after a certain point. Sure, a person can point at stats and claim one QB is better than another just because they threw 1 more TD in the regular season, but the "line" is very thin.

A QB is either elite, or he is not. Just in the NFC during those seasons, there was Rodgers, Brees, Prescott, Ryan, Stafford, and a number of QBs with the potential of being "elite" if they were more consistent. It is a huge stretch to beleive a team should win more playoff games just because they have an "elite" QB. Those "elite" QBs are often playing against other "elite" QBs.

Some would say that Rodgers is a better QB than RW. When was the last time Rodgers won a SB? When was the last time he even won a Conference Title. Many will say that Marino was one of the best QBs. How many SB rings does he have?

While you can say that "we should be winning more playoffs games", history does not support your claim.

hawksincebirth wrote:Ahhh the annual gloat posts by the kool aid drinkers gotta love em.
On a side note credit to Pete and ken Norton for turning the defense into an average defense instead of the dumpster fire it was the first half of the season. I still hope for a new coach. But Pete will keep us around 9-11 wins a year with first or second round exits and he’ll play out his contract imo. Can we just appreciate everyone’s opinion. We won the west let’s enjoy it like you positive patties say

Yeah, there are annual gloat posts only because the negative nancy's are proven wrong, annually.

& when I say "proven wrong" I realize that can't be done because it's impossible to have a serious discussion about coaching & reasonable expectations when there are a bunch of posters who are on the record as saying they just want PC fired & don't care if the move even works out, they're just ready for a change.

Seriously, this is a thing on this board.

This crap reminds me of the movement to move on from Arsene Wenger of my Arsenal Gunners & since he retired it has been a straight downward death spiral & this year they are in some danger of being relegated out of the Premier League, something that has never happened in the history of the team & they are the only team never to have been relegated in the history of the PL.

You'd think winning in professional sports was easy reading this place.

Nunya wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:

pinksheets wrote:

Spin Doctor wrote:We're below .500 since the 2015 season and our last Super Bowl run.

Wait, so your line is after we last made a SB we lost not last we won? Is just making the SB the goal or is winning one? Because it sounds like you're drawing an arbitrary line that suits this narrative.

It's extremely difficult to make the playoffs a lot and also have a strong winning record in the playoffs because unless you win the SB, you're taking a loss.

Pete has still won a playoff game in each of their last 4 appearances. That's quite good, period. There's not someone who just constantly gets to Conference Championships out waiting in the wings because that's either Belichik or they don't exist.

We should have lost in Minnesota, and we lost in 2018 against the Cowboys, not a single win that season. Pete does not have what it takes to get us to another Super Bowl. What concerns me is not that we're losing, it is HOW we're losing. We keep making the same mistakes each loss, we keep losing the same way and not adjusting. I highly doubt Pete ever brings us another Super Bowl again, and I doubt he even gets us an NFC Championship game.

No coach is ever going to meet your expectations. It is statistically impossible. You are setting a standard that is completely unsustainable. Then you use this unrealistic expectation as a measuring stick to determine whether PC will be successful in the off-season.??!!!!????!!???

The playoffs are a "loser go home" format. It is not like regular season where there are a set number of games to be won or lost. Under the old format:

1. 12 teams made the playoffs.
2. 4 of those teams are guaranteed to be "one and done".....that is 33% of the teams.
3. The 4 top seeded teams that received a bye week could be "one and done" if they under perform.
4. Assuming the top 1 and 2 seeds all win, 4 teams will be "two and done".
5. If any of the top seeded teams lose, the "one and done" percentage increases.
6. Only 4 teams will make the Conference Championship Games (CCG).....that is only 33% of the teams that made the playoffs.
7. Assuming the top 1 and 2 seeded teams make the CCG, 2 of the teams will have a 1-1 playoff record for that season.
8. Only 2 teams will make the Superbowl....that is only 16.6% of the teams that make the playoffs.
9. EVERY team is capable of laying an egg in the playoffs....for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with coaching. Injuries, nerves, weather, away game, poor refereeing, bad bounces, etc can all impact a game's outcome.

In order for a coach to have a above .500 playoff record, they would pretty much need to get to the Conference Championship Game almost every time they reach the playoffs....however, even then, only 2 of the top seeded teams will be able to break .500.

Your claim that a coach that consistently has 10+ wins a season suddenly does not have "what it takes" to advance in the playoff is asinine. You are talking about the 6 best teams from each Conference. It does not take a genius to understand that stiff competition would be expected....even from the teams that just "squeaked in".

The coaching is not the problem......the problem is your unrealistic expectations.

Great post.
Everyone wanting Pete gone knows this. They can't or won't admit that what they really want is a coach and a team that puts up great stats on offense. They want a team their team to get a lot of attention in the social media world and the fantasy world. Some of them would choose those things above winning games. I imagine some fans just hate Pete's style and are willing to risk being bad for a decade or more just to see something different. I can't understand that at all. Those fans will tell you they only feel that way because they know for a FACT, that Pete can't win again, but it's just an excuse to justify what they want and know is an irrational opinion. Forget your outline above that shows just how hard it is to get to the SB in any given year. I would have so much more respect for those opinions if they were just honest about what they truly want and why. All of the excuses and circular logic they use is just nonsense to avoid having to backup an opinion that doesn't make sense in any way shape or form.