Austinslater + Vedathemoor + sammyc521 + the Seahawks Twitter
sammyc521 last edited by sammyc521
@Veda-the-Moor @sammyc521 here is my concern. 3rd-6 and we run it essentially giving up with hopes that field position/defense will hold them. IF they get that fumble call right ATL has a good chance to win the game so we got lucky there. What if they rule it not a fumble?...
By being conservative and assuming this defense will hold them you allowed them a chance to get back in the game. Why not go for another score when offense is now the strength of your team and finish them? That's my concern. It seems flawed with our current team..
With our old defense? It was genius. We don't have that defense anymore. We got lucky and we seemed to have a couple of times this year so it worries me moving forward. Pete is a hall of famer. He may also not be taking the right approach with this team. Both can be true.
So I had to go back and see when this 3rd & 6 happened (4th quarter, our 2nd possession in the quarter). The Seahawks take the ball over at 3:08 with the Falcons down 10 points with only 2 timeouts left after the Falcons fail their on-side kick attempt.
3:07 1st & 10 Carson rush 3 yards (ATL 49)
3:03 ATL Timeout (1 left)
3:03 2nd & 7 Carson rush 1 yard (ATL 46)
2:54 Penalty on the field (Holding Sea - stops the clock - ATL declines the penalty which should have restarted the clock)
2:54 3rd & 6 Carson rush 0 yards (ATL 45)
2:49 ATL Timeout (0 left)
2:49 Dickson Punts to the ATL 14
2:41 ATL takes over with no timeouts and just the 2-minute warning
To me, that is the best outcome - trading their two timeouts and punting. I don't want to argue "if the Seahawks didn't get the fumble" because that's a fool's errands - I don't want to talk about what could have happened which would have altered the game down the stretch. The fumble happened, Freeman wasn't down and we recovered - 3rd turnover of the game for Seattle's DEF.
The run on 3rd down forces ATL to use their last timeout which is invaluable. Everything else (with a 10-point lead) is meaningless because time is against them. If it was a one-score lead, I would be in favor of being more aggressive with Wilson to convert a 1st down on 3rd & 6th.
Veda the Moor last edited by
Wish I had known this was already here. LOL.
The fumble was 2 possessions earlier..so is irrelevant. Yes, if the past was different, then everything else would be different and if it was a 1 score game then yes, Seattle would have been dumb to run their final series that way.
What is more interesting to me is the series BEFORE that.
If the Seahawks were just playing it safe the entire half.. then we would expect all runs or safe passes.
Seattle took over with 12:43 left in the 4th, with a 13 point lead. Took over inside their 10.
First down they ran to get space.
2nd down and 7 , Russell throws from his goal line out to the 28. Not a safe throw.
Then on their next first, they THREW the ball. Deep strike to Lockett that missed. It was a home run ball that if thrown on target would have given us the ball around the Falcon 25. Doesnt sound conservative to me.
Their was a penalty anyway.. so its 1st and 20.. conservative play call is a draw to get some yards back and keep the clock going, right? So they pass it and get 12.
2nd and 8.. we can justify a run there, right? get 4 yards and then its 3rd and 4 and we can even run on 3rd! But.. they pass it and get to the Falcon 47.
A run picks up 8. 8!
Another run gets the first down.
Now..by this point there is 8:34 left.. we are the Falcon 37. Up by 13. Cant get conservative..even though suddenly the run game is back. So, they pass.
Ok..so..2nd and 12. Pass AGAIN. No protection Russ is in trouble immediately..technically not a sack because he gains a yard but its not the designed play.
3rd and 12.. Offensive Pass Interference.
So.. if we had run it.. (hell..even though they passed it.. ) Seahawks get killed for being too conservative. But the 3 straight pass plays resulted in 2 sacks basically and a penalty. That killed the drive. Had those been runs..?
3rd and 21..do they give up? No. They pass to get into field goal range.
Veda the Moor last edited by
But..how about..the drive BEFORE that? Was that super conservative?
Their 2nd possession.. 3:30 left in the 3rd.
1st down. Run. 1 yard.
2nd down.. pass from empty set.. not even a running back back there. Doesnt sound conservative to me.
3rd down, 3 to go. This was a run, but it was run with 4 WR on the field and would have worked except that Fant did NOTHING to stop the RDE crashing.
Previous drive, by the way, there was a run that WIlson audibled to.. nullified by penalty. Then a run. Then Russ running for his life. Then a sack.
So .. passing is the cure all but sacks and lack of protection doomed 2 of 4 drives. Im not anti pass. Im against the false narratives that the Seahawks got super conservative.
The defense just kept everyting in front of them.. making Atlanta run huge amount of plays, running out clock. Its a common technique PC uses.. its very much a "rope a dope"...and it works very well. The common stat being thrown around now.. Seahawks are 7-0 in the Pete Carroll era when the opposing QB throws for over 400 yards.
sammyc521 last edited by
So @austinslater25 because Twitter doesn't allow for a full conversation without it splintering into multiple thoughts I want to clear some of air.
Pete has a philosophy that has led him to be the winningest Seahawks coach based on controlling the ball and playing a solid defense. This year, we seeing that tested because he doesn't have an all-world defense but he's got an MVP-QB (who's always been there - just never released).
This means that he will play the conservative approach when it comes to 4th down and territory opportunities. When the kicker lines up for a 50+ yard FG the intention is that the kicker will make it based upon how they've been kicking in practice and warms up; there was a reason why Blair Walsh never attempted a 50+ yard FG until the last game of the year.
When you're super aggressive you get to reap the rewards like Freddie Kitchens tried to do in the Browns game... but that aggressiveness also lead to them playing sloppy with the ball and turning it over multiple times (with no pressure on the QB).
Pete's teams need to be disciplined and they need to execute. If they do that they succeed; after both losses the teams have talked about not executing as one of their biggest flaws.
What would change my mind that the game has passed Pete by or that it's time for a change is when the team he has is unable to match his philosophy. Until that happens, I'm still strapped to this rollercoaster called the Seahawks.
sammyc521 last edited by
Thoughts on 4th Down:
No coach is perfect and he's my philosophy on 4th and short (3-yards or less):
Things I need to know in advance:
- Is my kicker doing well in warm-ups?
- Is my defense rested?
- How's my offensive line holding up?
- How many scores am I up?
- How much time is left?
- Does the opposing team have timeouts left?
If my kicker is doing well in warm-ups, he's kicking FGs all game long unless weather changes dramatically from warm-ups to game-time.
If my defense is rested, I expect them to execute. Keep the ball infront of you and don't give up the big-play. Wrap up the runner. If my defense is a sieve, then I would lean into going for it on 4th down if I'm near mid-field. (I strongly disagree with pete going for it on 4th down in the Saints game when we were deep in our end of the field- I would have punted).
If my offensive line is protecting well, I may consider attempting a play with Russell if we're near mid-field. Otherwise we're punting.
If I am up 1+ score (7+ points) I am punting all day long or attempting FGs if it's within my kicker's range. If I'm down scores, I go for it if we're at the 50-yard line; anything under 40 in myside of the field I am punting it away.
If I need to bleed the clock, I am running the ball, telling my QB to take a sack rather then give up the ball and I am looking for plays in the middle of the field - crossing routes all day!
If my opponent has timeouts, I need to find ways to force them into use. Their timeouts give them power if they get the ball back which I need to influence.
The only time that Pete has pissed me off on 4th down this year in the Saints game. Attempting FGs if Myers is making them is never a bad plan. The results are never what anyone wants. I have yet to see Pete go for it on 4th deep on his side of the field.