Lets just say it...

[mykc14]

This loss can be directly attributed to Kam's holdout. Does anybody doubt we win this game if Kam plays? I don't. I know you have to overcome adversity and blah, blah, but this was a completely avoidable absence that has already cost us 1 game. The question is going to be how much will it cost. Don't get me wrong this team is a very good playoff caliber team without Kam, that will only get better as the season goes on and Bailey or whoever ends up playing SS improves, but so far 1 game goes to the Kam holdout.

Just to be clear:

* I am not saying the FO should give into Kam.
* I am putting this one mostly on Kam for his stupid, un-understandable, selfish, untimely holdout (like most Kam is one of, if not, my favorite Seahawk and I would welcome him back with open arms. He has always been more than willing to put his body on the line for the team. A year or two from now I would be much more willing to support him over the team, if he were truly underpaid)
* I also put JS/PC/KR at fault a little for not having an adequate backup here. IMO they didn't think he would be willing to lose game checks so they didn't think they would really have to rely on Bailey. When it became clear he was willing to lose game checks they began to search hard for a trade replacement.

[Anthony]

This loss can be directly attributed to Kam's holdout. Does anybody doubt we win this game if Kam plays? I don't. I know you have to overcome adversity and blah, blah, but this was a completely avoidable absence that has already cost us 1 game. The question is going to be how much will it cost. Don't get me wrong this team is a very good playoff caliber team without Kam, that will only get better as the season goes on and Bailey or whoever ends up playing SS improves, but so far 1 game goes to the Kam holdout.

Just to be clear:

* I am not saying the FO should give into Kam.
* I am putting this one mostly on Kam for his stupid, un-understandable, selfish, untimely holdout (like most Kam is one of, if not, my favorite Seahawk and I would welcome him back with open arms. He has always been more than willing to put his body on the line for the team. A year or two from now I would be much more willing to support him over the team, if he were truly underpaid)
* I also put JS/PC/KR at fault a little for not having an adequate backup here. IMO they didn't think he would be willing to lose game checks so they didn't think they would really have to rely on Bailey. When it became clear he was willing to lose game checks they began to search hard for a trade replacement.

yeah no sorry there were missed tackled by a lot of people, those stupid scripted plays, a dropped TD by "stone hand luke", and I can go on. If stone hands catches that TD we win, if some of the missed tackles are not missed we win, and those missed tackled were by dlineman and Lbs and some in the back field. So I do not think having Kam means we win. Would it help yeah but so would having Richardson. But does not mean we win.

[mykc14]

yeah no sorry there were missed tackled by a lot of people, those stupid scripted plays, a dropped TD by "stone hand luke", and I can go on. If stone hands catches that TD we win, if some of the missed tackles are not missed we win, and those missed tackled were by dlineman and Lbs and some in the back field. So I do not think having Kam means we win. Would it help yeah but so would having Richardson. But does not mean we win.

So your saying having Kam wouldn't have led to at least a 1 point difference in regulation? Of course all of those things happened, I am not saying they didn't attribute to our loss, but those types of things happen in every game. Also, people get hurt, I understand that, but getting hurt is not a personal choice to not show up. If he were hurt I would agree with your points but he is CHOOSING not to play. What usually doesn't happen is a player at Kam's level, and contract situation (3 years left, top 2 payed player at his position, etc), holding out. In the SB we lost Lane, IMO it was huge turn of events attributing to the loss, but I wouldn't say it was the reason we lost because that is a normal part of the game, not a guy being selfish.

[jshawaii22]

So, you're saying that Kam would of gained that 1 yard that Marshawn Didn't? Or that Kam would of stopped Russell from getting sacked 6 times? Or, is he now playing CB, too? Wow, that Dudes all over the field!

js

[RiverDog]

This loss can be directly attributed to Kam's holdout. Does anybody doubt we win this game if Kam plays? I don't. I know you have to overcome adversity and blah, blah, but this was a completely avoidable absence that has already cost us 1 game. The question is going to be how much will it cost. Don't get me wrong this team is a very good playoff caliber team without Kam, that will only get better as the season goes on and Bailey or whoever ends up playing SS improves, but so far 1 game goes to the Kam holdout.

Just to be clear:

* I am not saying the FO should give into Kam.
* I am putting this one mostly on Kam for his stupid, un-understandable, selfish, untimely holdout (like most Kam is one of, if not, my favorite Seahawk and I would welcome him back with open arms. He has always been more than willing to put his body on the line for the team. A year or two from now I would be much more willing to support him over the team, if he were truly underpaid)
* I also put JS/PC/KR at fault a little for not having an adequate backup here. IMO they didn't think he would be willing to lose game checks so they didn't think they would really have to rely on Bailey. When it became clear he was willing to lose game checks they began to search hard for a trade replacement.

Directly attribute? No, I'm not going that far. As they others have pointed out, there was a lot of things that didn't go right yesterday in all areas, offense, defense, special teams, and game management decisions. But make no mistake: Not having Kam was huge, and our chances of winning that game would have gone up exponentially had he been present, so I feel comfortable in saying that he in all likelihood cost us a win by not being there.

[mykc14]

So, you're saying that Kam would of gained that 1 yard that Marshawn Didn't? Or that Kam would of stopped Russell from getting sacked 6 times? Or, is he now playing CB, too? Wow, that Dudes all over the field!

js

No, I am not saying he would have done any of those things. I am saying if he would have played we wouldn't have needed any of those things. Is this really anything that groundbreaking or controversial? We aren't 1 point better with Kam, an all-pro, wrecking ball safety, possibly the most important part of our defense than we are with an undrafted player playing in his first NFL game? Honestly I thought it was obvious. Again, I am not saying that we COUNLD'T have won without him I am saying his holdout led to this loss. In other words if he played we would have won. Again, to me this is different than a player missing a game due to an injury, this is him selfishly keeping himself out. An injury is unavoidable, this holdout is not.

[Anthony]

No, I am not saying he would have done any of those things. I am saying if he would have played we wouldn't have needed any of those things. Is this really anything that groundbreaking or controversial? We aren't 1 point better with Kam, an all-pro, wrecking ball safety, possibly the most important part of our defense than we are with an undrafted player playing in his first NFL game? Honestly I thought it was obvious. Again, I am not saying that we COUNLD'T have won without him I am saying his holdout led to this loss. In other words if he played we would have won. Again, to me this is different than a player missing a game due to an injury, this is him selfishly keeping himself out. An injury is unavoidable, this holdout is not.

Let me help you if Stone hand Luke catches the pass that hits him in his chest then no Kam needed. That game was winnable without Kam. You really have no way of knowing what would have happened if we had Kam, might have helped might not have. We will never know what we do know is if Luke catches the pass game over. that is a fact.

[NorthHawk]

The premise of this thread is ridiculous.
We had opportunities to score or grind out the time but couldn't do it.

[HumanCockroach]

Wow, already with Wilson excuses Anthony, touch early. If Wilson delivers the ball in front of the receiver maybe he catches it, if Wilson walks in to a wide open endzone the who's fault it is becomes moot. Willson should have caught that ball, but Wilson should have thrown a better ball not one behind the receiver who is running the other way, or better yet, just jogged into the endzone and handed it to him.

[Hawktown]

Wow, already with Wilson excuses Anthony, touch early. If Wilson delivers the ball in front of the receiver maybe he catches it, if Wilson walks in to a wide open endzone the who's fault it is becomes moot. Willson should have caught that ball, but Wilson should have thrown a better ball not one behind the receiver who is running the other way, or better yet, just jogged into the endzone and handed it to him.

I agree, Russell should have ran that ball in instead of throwing it. I also didn't record it to take another look at it t see if there was something i was missing at the time. That would have won the game.

I also completely get where mykc14 is coming from. Kam should be ashamed of himself.

[mykc14]

Let me help you if Stone hand Luke catches the pass that hits him in his chest then no Kam needed. That game was winnable without Kam. You really have no way of knowing what would have happened if we had Kam, might have helped might not have. We will never know what we do know is if Luke catches the pass game over. that is a fact.

I don't really know what you are disagreeing with. I never said it wasn't winnable without him, in fact we should have won the game without him. The fact that you admit the game was still winnable, without our all-pro safety basically proves my point. If Kam weren't being selfish right now, sitting on his couch, then we win that game. Honestly I don't see how you could be arguing against that sentiment. I don't know if having Kam would have helped? Really? So explain to me any circumstance in which having Kam play instead of Bailey causes us to play worse.

[mykc14]

The premise of this thread is ridiculous.
We had opportunities to score or grind out the time but couldn't do it.

What exactly is ridiculous? I never said we couldn't have won the game so that argument doesn't prove anything. My point simply is if Kam weren't being selfish and played in yesterday's game then we win that game.

[obiken]

Sure but the Rams have their 2 best RB's out so if they are not there they are not there. I have said from the very beginning, based on my experience on these things is Kam will be back for game 7. The OL is the bigger concern for me.

[mykc14]

Sure but the Rams have their 2 best RB's out so if they are not there they are not there. I have said from the very beginning, based on my experience on these things is Kam will be back for game 7. The OL is the bigger concern for me.

Again, not talking about a player missing a game because of injuries, thats not on the player it happens. I am talking about somebody missing the game because they are being selfish,thats on the player, totally different.

[NorthHawk]

It's a ridiculous premise because there are too many variables to say with any confidence we would have won.

[obiken]

It's a ridiculous premise because there are too many variables to say with any confidence we would have won.

Exactly, as Churchill said, the terrible IFs compound.

[jshawaii22]

To me, there is only one person on a team that can really, positively be "The Difference Maker" and that is a Quarterback. That one position is clearly determinable if they F-UP or play out of their heads. It's very obvious. Every play starts and runs with a QB. He is also on TV 99% of the time.

As for D-Players, I watched the Texan's game and JJ Watt blow up KC for 4 quarters of a game and they still lost. It wasn't that close. But if he's such a 'difference maker, they should always win... right?
Defensive players as a group, just don't have that ability to be true game changers. You're putting too much into Kam's loss based on (I assume) one slip for the tying score.

By the way, if Kam was 'injured' instead of holding out, we would all be blaming the Offensive LIne, Bevil's predictable play calling, The Coach that screwed up with the non-onside kick call or even Russell ( and I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Russell spent too much time on the speaking and girlfriend circuit and not enough time working out this summer... he looked slow and he better learn how to throw a 'fade' to #88) or any other myriad of potential or real reasons we lost. We Blew the Game. It's just not because of Kam.

[Anthony]

Wow, already with Wilson excuses Anthony, touch early. If Wilson delivers the ball in front of the receiver maybe he catches it, if Wilson walks in to a wide open endzone the who's fault it is becomes moot. Willson should have caught that ball, but Wilson should have thrown a better ball not one behind the receiver who is running the other way, or better yet, just jogged into the endzone and handed it to him.

I did not make one wilson excuse at all. In fact I did not mention Wilson you did. Sounds to me more like you want to rag on Wilson. Hmm You are right how dare anyone expect an NFL receive to catch a ball that hits him in his chest. How dare they. LOL

[Anthony]

To me, there is only one person on a team that can really, positively be "The Difference Maker" and that is a Quarterback. That one position is clearly determinable if they F-UP or play out of their heads. It's very obvious. Every play starts and runs with a QB. He is also on TV 99% of the time.

As for D-Players, I watched the Texan's game and JJ Watt blow up KC for 4 quarters of a game and they still lost. It wasn't that close. But if he's such a 'difference maker, they should always win... right?
Defensive players as a group, just don't have that ability to be true game changers. You're putting too much into Kam's loss based on (I assume) one slip for the tying score.

By the way, if Kam was 'injured' instead of holding out, we would all be blaming the Offensive LIne, Bevil's predictable play calling, The Coach that screwed up with the non-onside kick call or even Russell ( and I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Russell spent too much time on the speaking and girlfriend circuit and not enough time working out this summer... he looked slow and he better learn how to throw a 'fade' to #88) or any other myriad of potential or real reasons we lost. We Blew the Game. It's just not because of Kam.

No you are the only one, 78% complt, 90 QB rating while running for his life. Yeah right

[mykc14]

It's a ridiculous premise because there are too many variables to say with any confidence we would have won.

Of course there are a ton of variables for any game, thats not what I am saying. Let me ask you: if Kam would have played do you think we would have had a better chance of winning? Do you think Kam's athletic ability, experience, etc are at least 1 point better than that of an undrafted player in his first game? I can say with confidence that he would make us at least 1 point better. Again, I am not saying we shouldn't have won this game without him, we should have, rather if he had played we more likely than not win that game. The fact that he isn't playing because he is being selfish is why it is he has a ton of blame in this game.

[mykc14]

As for D-Players, I watched the Texan's game and JJ Watt blow up KC for 4 quarters of a game and they still lost. It wasn't that close. But if he's such a 'difference maker, they should always win... right?
Defensive players as a group, just don't have that ability to be true game changers. You're putting too much into Kam's loss based on (I assume) one slip for the tying score.

By the way, if Kam was 'injured' instead of holding out, we would all be blaming the Offensive LIne, Bevil's predictable play calling, The Coach that screwed up with the non-onside kick call or even Russell ( and I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Russell spent too much time on the speaking and girlfriend circuit and not enough time working out this summer... he looked slow and he better learn how to throw a 'fade' to #88) or any other myriad of potential or real reasons we lost. We Blew the Game. It's just not because of Kam.

Lets look at that Watt example. Lets say he decided to hold out this year and didn't play in the Texans game. In his place was an undrafted player playing in his first NFL game. The Texans go on to lose in OT. Is it crazy to say the Texans probably would have won had he played? Him dominating a game and still losing doesn't disprove my point.

I am not saying we don't blame all of those other things. Had we played better we would have won. I have never said it's 'Just because of Kam.' I am saying that had Kam played we probably would have won. The reason Kam didn't play was because he is being selfish, choosing not to play. I would never blame an injured player for a loss but Kam isn't injured.

[NorthHawk]

"Of course there are a ton of variables for any game, thats not what I am saying. Let me ask you: if Kam would have played do you think we would have had a better chance of winning? Do you think Kam's athletic ability, experience, etc are at least 1 point better than that of an undrafted player in his first game? I can say with confidence that he would make us at least 1 point better. Again, I am not saying we shouldn't have won this game without him, we should have, rather if he had played we more likely than not win that game. The fact that he isn't playing because he is being selfish is why it is he has a ton of blame in this game."

Of course more talent gives you a better chance to win.
Your opening statement:
"This loss can be directly attributed to Kam's holdout. Does anybody doubt we win this game if Kam plays? "

The reality is a lot of things would have changed and we don't know if they would have been for the better in all cases that counted for points for or against.
A stumble here, a penalty there, routes by Ram receivers or different play calls - everything changes and we can't categorically say they would have ended up being for the benefit of the Seahawks.

But he's not playing so it's just the same as saying we would have won if we still had Unger at Center or Tate at WR with his YAC which is ridiculous.

[mykc14]

Directly attribute? No, I'm not going that far. As they others have pointed out, there was a lot of things that didn't go right yesterday in all areas, offense, defense, special teams, and game management decisions. But make no mistake: Not having Kam was huge, and our chances of winning that game would have gone up exponentially had he been present, so I feel comfortable in saying that he in all likelihood cost us a win by not being there.

To me directly attribute doesn't mean the only reason. It means there is a direct connection between a players (or coaches) choices/actions and a loss. An in game example of this, for me, would be like a player getting a personal foul penalty knocking us out of field goal range when we were down by 1 with 5 seconds left on the clock. For the most part I don't blame coaches or players for losses as long as they are out there doing their jobs. To me, just like you and others have pointed out, there are too many variables to cast too much blame on coaches or players including the fact that we don't know what plays were called, if a player made a mistake, etc. Also, I tend to believe that the coaches and players are trying their hardest and if they are they shouldn't be 'blamed' for losing. That's not to say that underachieving players and coaches shouldn't be replaced or talked about. A perfect example is Bevel's play calling which often leads much to the imagination, but isn't nearly as bad as Knapps was when he was here. With all of that being said when a player selfishly chooses not to play because of some unreasonable request/belief/etc they can directly attribute to a loss even if they didn't play in the game.

[mykc14]

But he's not playing so it's just the same as saying we would have won if we still had Unger at Center or Tate at WR with his YAC which is ridiculous.

It's not the same. Those players are not part of the team. They are not choosing to sit out. They couldn't have helped the Hawks win if they wanted to. Kam, on the other hand absolutely could have. Again, I am not saying it 'guaranteed' a win I am saying a win would have been much more likely. Like the example I gave River Dog: If we were in field goal range, down by 1, with 3 seconds left and a player committed a personal foul (for being an idiot) knocking us out of field goal range. IMO that player would have 'directly attributed' to a loss. Is it guaranteed we would have won, in that situation? No? But a 45 yard field goal that our kicker makes 85% of the time is pretty close.

[NorthHawk]

We had too many opportunities for more points that might have increased our chance to win to attribute the loss on one player on Defense.

[Hawk Sista]

This loss can be attributed to:

RW throwing a pick that lead to a FG
An oline that gave up a lot
A defensive secondary that was a shell of its former self (& for good reason)
The Rams are good
The tackling from the linebackers and DBs SUCKED
Bailey fell
We let them convert two 3 & 15 yarders....both leading to points

Had Kam been there, we likely win. But fix any one of the above and we also likely win.

[c_hawkbob]

This loss can be attributed to:

RW throwing a pick that lead to a FG
An oline that gave up a lot
A defensive secondary that was a shell of its former self (& for good reason)
The Rams are good
The tackling from the linebackers and DBs SUCKED
Bailey fell
We let them convert two 3 & 15 yarders....both leading to points

Had Kam been there, we likely win. But fix any one of the above and we also likely win.

Agreed. Attributable to any of several things, but not solely attributable to any single thing. It is ever thus.

[mykc14]

This loss can be attributed to:

RW throwing a pick that lead to a FG
An oline that gave up a lot
A defensive secondary that was a shell of its former self (& for good reason)
The Rams are good
The tackling from the linebackers and DBs SUCKED
Bailey fell
We let them convert two 3 & 15 yarders....both leading to points

Had Kam been there, we likely win. But fix any one of the above and we also likely win.

I agree with all of that, but those are types of things that happen every game. IMO, Kams selfish holdout is something that contributed to the loss that is beyond a physical mistake, mental lapse, coaching mistake, etc. Those happen and are expected. Kam's actions in this holdout are beyond what happens in a typical game. His presence would have made the difference and he CHOSE to stay home and hurt the team. All of the above mentioned contributing factors weren't somebody choosing to hurt the team. His choice to hurt the team is what makes this stick out more than those, IMO.

[mykc14]

Agreed. Attributable to any of several things, but not solely attributable to any single thing. It is ever thus.

It certainly is ever thus, but like I mentioned to Sis, those are things that happen every game. They are not a player choosing to hurt his team, which is what Kam is doing.

[mykc14]

We had too many opportunities for more points that might have increased our chance to win to attribute the loss on one player on Defense.

Again, not saying his absence was the only reason we lost or that we shouldn't have won without him.

[THX-1138]

That loss cannot be attributed to Kam's holdout. If we are going to start thinking like that then we had better fold our tents and start band wagonning whatever successful team comes down the pike.

There is eventually going to be a team without Kam. And Beast. And Wilson. And Earl. I am perfectly ready for it in Kam's case; as a matter of fact I've kind of mentally written him off. Until I see otherwise, he isn't a member of the Seahawks. As a matter of fact I don't consider him to be an NFL player anymore because if it were up to me the Hawks would sit on Kam 's contract til he either came back with his tail between his legs or was forced to retire. Anyway, I don't blame this loss on Kam any more than I blame it on Steve Largent or Mike Holmgren. Kam isn't a Seahawk. We have a 50/50 secondary right now. It needs to be fixed along with the completely atrophied offensive line. I honestly can't see Kam coming back now and playing worth a darn. How is he going to be into it from a mental standpoint? He has to be harboring a lot of animosity towards the FO and I doubt he would be playing hard, and he certainly doesn't seem to grasp the financial implications of his decisions. I'm having a hard time seeing him as being worth the trouble if he comes back but that is probably me playing mind games with myself so that I won't GAF one way or the other.

I'm willing to roll the dice with Chancellor's holdout. Put him on ice, for the rest of his playing days if they have to. Time to rebuild the secondary with the personnel we have. I'm an old timey Seahawks fan. I've seen crappy football before and although I don't wish to see it again it won't be the end of the world and I won't stop watching.

[The POPE]

Ok,the pope will say it. secondary was horrendous, o-line ditto. Play calling questionable. This is a veteran team, but look at all the changes and problems this year.
secondary---the only veteran starter for the legion of boom that logged any preseason time was Sherman. Thomas was not game ready, bailey is no Kam And Williams got his 1st start in the system. Add a new d coordinator and this is the result. With or without Kam this will get better, the legion of Boom was not built in a day.

But don't fear, I will be on US soil in a week, and am willing to hear confessions for all those Hawks who have sinned and need a little divine intervention. Kam -- come see me, we can work this out.
During the 4th quarter comeback on Sunday, I thought we may be seeing a divine intervention. Turns out the Hawks were just running with the devil.

The pope

[mykc14]

.
I am perfectly ready for it in Kam's case; as a matter of fact I've kind of mentally written him off. Until I see otherwise, he isn't a member of the Seahawks. As a matter of fact I don't consider him to be an NFL player anymore because if it were up to me the Hawks would sit on Kam 's contract til he either came back with his tail between his legs or was forced to retire. Anyway, I don't blame this loss on Kam any more than I blame it on Steve Largent or Mike Holmgren. Kam isn't a Seahawk. We have a 50/50 secondary right now. It needs to be fixed along with the completely atrophied offensive line. I honestly can't see Kam coming back now and playing worth a darn. How is he going to be into it from a mental standpoint? He has to be harboring a lot of animosity towards the FO and I doubt he would be playing hard, and he certainly doesn't seem to grasp the financial implications of his decisions. I'm having a hard time seeing him as being worth the trouble if he comes back but that is probably me playing mind games with myself so that I won't GAF one way or the other.

Although I am not ready to write him off yet I am also willing to move on from him. I agree about almost everything you said, which is why part of the blame has to lye with the FO for not having an NFL ready backup in place. IMO they thought he would be back by game 1 and therefore weren't really too worried about Bailey. It wasn't until the week before the season that they were 'scrambling' to find a safety to trade for, finally landing on McCray.

[mykc14]

Ok,the pope will say it. secondary was horrendous, o-line ditto. Play calling questionable. This is a veteran team, but look at all the changes and problems this year.
secondary---the only veteran starter for the legion of boom that logged any preseason time was Sherman. Thomas was not game ready, bailey is no Kam And Williams got his 1st start in the system. Add a new d coordinator and this is the result. With or without Kam this will get better, the legion of Boom was not built in a day.

But don't fear, I will be on US soil in a week, and am willing to hear confessions for all those Hawks who have sinned and need a little divine intervention. Kam -- come see me, we can work this out.
During the 4th quarter comeback on Sunday, I thought we may be seeing a divine intervention. Turns out the Hawks were just running with the devil.

The pope

Thank you pope, and I think you are right about the secondary. ET will soon be himself, whoever replaces Kam will improve with experience, and the players will improve in the new system.

What I would like is for Kam to confess that he was being selfish, fire his agent, and get his arse back on the field. Any help in that regard would be greatly appreciated (actually all I really want is the back on the field part, don't care too much about the rest).

[monkey]

Lets just say it... This loss can be directly attributed to Kam's holdout.

No, no I won't just say that.
My goodness, that is some far reaching "reasoning" that you use to come to that conclusion.

[mykc14]

No, no I won't just say that.
My goodness, that is some far reaching "reasoning" that you use to come to that conclusion.

Wait... is that smiley face laughing at my reasoning? Because if he is my reasoning takes offense to that. Also, I asked you to just say it, come on... just do it... everybody else is... just... say... it. Ok fine you don't have to but you know a part of you wants to.

[RiverDog]

This loss can be attributed to:

RW throwing a pick that lead to a FG
An oline that gave up a lot
A defensive secondary that was a shell of its former self (& for good reason)
The Rams are good
The tackling from the linebackers and DBs SUCKED
Bailey fell
We let them convert two 3 & 15 yarders....both leading to points

Had Kam been there, we likely win. But fix any one of the above and we also likely win.

Stupid decision to try a pooch kick at the opening of overtime.

Bad play call on 4th and one in overtime.

Bennett still lines up offside too much.

I need a note pad to take down all the plays that could have changed the outcome.

But I do agree with the spirit of the premise in the OP. Not having Kam more than likely cost us this game.

[HumanCockroach]

Grow up Anthony. You brought up stone hands Willson, I pointed out the throw was behind him, and that Wilson could have walked the ball in, which you AGREED with, then later responded again ( as well as the asinign claim in the line thread) . You want to bury your head, be my guest, but at least stop trolling.

[Zorn76]

The only reason threads like this pop up is when it's after a disappointing loss.

[mykc14]

The only reason threads like this pop up is when it's after a disappointing loss.

That's true this thread would not make much sense if we would have just won.