It was pure torture watching that game yesterday. What a frigging embarrassment.
RiverDog wrote:I haven't seen any replays of that last play that destroyed our last viable chance to get into FG range and it's not clear who's decision it was not to spike the ball to give us at least a couple of plays to complete a short sideline pass or for Russell scramble to get us 5 or 10 measly little yards, but it not only was ill advised, Russell was acting as if he needed to make a huge play when in reality all he needed was 10 yards.
Has he lost his head? Where was his internal clock and situational awareness? Are their too many Anthony's blowing smoke up his hind end causing him to believe that he's a super hero?
Don't get me wrong, I love Russell to death as he is far and away the best QB this franchise has ever had and has been directly responsible for the best football played in our 40+ years, but that last play was horrid, both in concept and in execution, and we lost our last chance of winning because of it. I don't mind him not spiking the ball so much as if he's going to run a play hoping to catch them off guard and it's not immediately obvious that we've caught them with their pants down, then unload it and live for another down.
It was pure torture watching that game yesterday. What a frigging embarrassment.
Hawk Sista wrote:that was a VERY frustrating few seconds, for sure. Especially since we never should have been in the position to need to score at that point of the game at ALL. There is so much blame to go around (Had Walsh made just one and we would have kicked the extra points, etc..), but I have to say that even though RW had this "I'm going to have to win this thing all by myself" mentality that irritated me all day. Not sure if it was Russ or Bev, but really, 4 singles scores a run too. Strike out or home run, like the commentator said, is so true.
idhawkman wrote:I have to rewatch that last play because it took too long to call that one word play. Simple as that. Riv is right in that if they had just spiked it, it would be fine but it took forever to get that last play called and snapped.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Are you kidding me? Leave it in the kicker's hands after he goes 0-3? I'd be thinking just like Russell that day too. That sorry kicker cost us the game. I'm going to put the ball in his hands at the end? I know publically the team isn't going to throw the kicker under the bus, especially Russell. In game, you know those guys, especially Russell, had to have that on their mind. TD or lose was likely why Russ did what he did. Screw that kicker. Not sure why we signed him and I hope we don't keep him. 0-3 at home is unacceptable.
The "have to win this thing myself" mentality is often a result of highly competitive (and successful) people and is made worse by the underperformance of the OL and subsequent lack of a run game.
Clear up the issues along the OL and I'm sure you will see a different QB.
The play calling wasn't doing him any favors, either and maybe caused that desperation which resulted in going for big strikes instead of methodical marching down field.
mykc14 wrote:Riv, do you listen to the announcers during the game? I can't stand them overall but sometimes you get some interesting tidbits and this is one of them. They spent a lot of time discussing this after the Houston win. We don't spike the ball in our 2-min offense. All of our 2 min plays are one word audibles and it takes just as much time to get up and call the play and run it than it would to call the play and spike it (according to PC). It also doesn't allow the defense a chance to huddle. It's crazy that in 2 weeks we saw how well it can work (Houston was clearly confused on that last play when Jimmy caught the TD) and how poorly it can work yesterday. RW had nobody open, except maybe Luke early, but he probably wasn't looking at him since he was trying to get something along the sideline.
.Seahawks4Ever wrote:OMG Mr. POPE. are YOU out of YOUR MIND to mention Wilson's height or lack of it to be a problem ????????????????? People in this forum consider such talk to be sacrilegious and the epitome of treason. You will lucky to only be labeled Anthony Jr. They are going to lecture you about how it is all about "passing Lanes" and how even Randy Johnson couldn't even see OVER the O-Line and yada, yada, yada. Oh, and FORGET mentioning that maybe Wilson can't see a receiver because of his height they will post until they are blue (Seahawk blue i'm sure) in the face that it is all about "timing" and THATS how RW knows when to chuck the ball... Believe me, I heard it all. My mistake was that Wilson actually turned out to be pretty darn good and has over come his height issues, at least, they don't crop up as often as I had imagined when he was first drafted.
What I think RW needs is a decent O-Line but will ever have one with Pete & John in charge?? I doubt it.
Oh, and this game was lost when John and Petr decided to pinch pennies again, this time by letting SH go and bringing in Blair (not Steve LOL) Walsh a known LOSER.
Seahawks4Ever wrote:OMG Mr. POPE. are YOU out of YOUR MIND to mention Wilson's height or lack of it to be a problem ????????????????? People in this forum consider such talk to be sacrilegious and the epitome of treason. You will lucky to only be labeled Anthony Jr. They are going to lecture you about how it is all about "passing Lanes" and how even Randy Johnson couldn't even see OVER the O-Line and yada, yada, yada. Oh, and FORGET mentioning that maybe Wilson can't see a receiver because of his height they will post until they are blue (Seahawk blue i'm sure) in the face that it is all about "timing" and THATS how RW knows when to chuck the ball... Believe me, I heard it all. My mistake was that Wilson actually turned out to be pretty darn good and has over come his height issues, at least, they don't crop up as often as I had imagined when he was first drafted.
What I think RW needs is a decent O-Line but will ever have one with Pete & John in charge?? I doubt it.
Oh, and this game was lost when John and Petr decided to pinch pennies again, this time by letting SH go and bringing in Blair (not Steve LOL) Walsh a known LOSER.
RiverDog wrote:
To answer your first question, I watched yesterday's game in a LV bar and they didn't have the audio for the Hawks game on, and I attended the Houston game in person, so at least as it applies to those two games, no, I did not listen to the announcers.
I would have preferred that we spiked the ball, but that wasn't my main beef. My main beef was that Russell screwed around too long looking for a receiver. He seems to do that a lot
Not that it's beat up on Russell time, but there was another instance where he lost track of the game situation when he kept the ball on a called running play and as he was about to be tackled behind the LOS, he has a brain fart and instinctively throws the ball away, and our tight end (I think it was Luke) was called for blocking downfield on a passing play, which is what he was supposed to be doing.
mykc14 wrote:
I don't disagree at all. I don't know if I like the philosophy personally, but it did work perfectly last week and I would find it a bit hypocritical to praise the strategy last week and then complain about it this week (not saying any of you did this).
Of course if they would have spiked it the clock would have stopped with about 17ish (just off of memory could be off) seconds left, but that's not the issue. It's a philosophical issue, it's not like they made a mistake in the moment that was the plan going into it and they executed the plan exactly how they were supposed to (up to the execution of the actual play). The issue was either the plan was bad (if it were bad this week then it was also bad last week) or the play itself was bad/executed poorly by the players (this is certainly true here as RW didn't have anybody open, he didn't throw it away like he should have, and somebody got through the OL). I wouldn't be supprised to see us do the same thing, philosophically speaking, when we get in another similar situation.
I might get lambasted for saying this, but I think the Skins won this game more than the Hawks lost it.
mykc14 wrote:As far as the situation you're talking about I know it looks bad but it is much better for him to throw the ball away and take an offensive PI call than to take a sack in that particular situation. A sack means that you lose the yards (5-7 yards), lose the down and the QB takes a hit. An OPI call means you lose the yards (10) but you get the down back and the QB doesn't take a hit. When you run the read option the QB is going to mid-read the play sometimes and give the ball when they should keep it and keep the ball when they should give it...
Don't get me wrong RW was bad on Sunday, the sack on that second to last play was inexcusable, but IMO he actually did the right thing by throwing the ball away on the OPI...
RiverDog wrote:I don't have the replay available to see the down and distance or the precise yards lost, but my impression was that he was only going to lose a couple of yards by eating it, so we're talking about a 7 or 8 yard difference, ie 2nd and 12 vs. 1st and 20 or (or whatever the down/distance was). Most teams would rather have the shorter yardage to gain vs. the extra down. Plus I don't think Russell's throwing the ball away saved him from a potential hit vs. just eating it. The play would have stopped at the same point in both scenarios.
idhawkman wrote:He was just about to cross the LOS so it was only 2 or 3 yards at the most.
jshawaii22 wrote:if you're watching and just saw what I saw... WTF Russell is right. Too bad Doug didn't get the TD! That was Russell at his (concussed?) best!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests