Farewell from Hawktawk

Official Seahawks Forum, for the 12th man, by the 12th man.

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby Aseahawkfan » Wed May 31, 2023 1:17 pm

RiverDog wrote:You should have been here when Anthony! was posting. He was such a Russell Wilson brown noser that he claimed that Russell had zero responsibility for that INT.

I like to think of it like Brock Huard said: If the bench sends in a skunk of a play, it's up to the quarterback to not let it stink.


I don't much agree with that myself depending on how long the QB has been doing it. Russ was in year three, was just coming off a Super Bowl win, and I think believed in Bevell and Pete absolutely. He executed he play exactly as called. Does he have zero blame? No. I think he telegraphed it a little too much.

I still put the primary blame on Bevell. He was the OC. He is paid to know his personnel. He also had unique insight into a key player on the Patriots sideline as he knew Browner well. He also knew Lockett well. You don't ask players to do something that has such a low percentage chance of working because those players have never done anything like that before. Lockett had never caught a TD in tight quarters and was known for having bad hands and questionable route running ability which is why he wasn't some high paid receiver given he was 6'1" with 4.2 speed. Lockett was basically DK Metcalf physically before DK came to Seattle. The reason he wasn't making DK Metcalf money is because he never developed much beyond being a physical freak of nature. And Kearse was never gonna pick Browner, the 6'4" 220 lb. CB who we watched block three people by himself on a punt return, beat up that Green Bay receiver, and single handedly break up a read option play against Carolina and tackle the ball carrier. If Browner wasn't overshadowed by his insanely talented teammates and Kam Chancellor specifically, people would have pointed out how much of a huge, physical freak he was playing CB. Bevell looked at Kearse and went, "You run a pick on Browner." I'm still surprised Carroll didn't say, "What? No. Do not run that play. No way Jermaine is picking Browner. I brought that kid in. He's too big and physical. Come up with something else."

I'm sure it was more of a bang, bang moment of get a pass play in, take a shot, let's start thinking about the next play we're going run with Marshawn. The rest is history.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby RiverDog » Wed May 31, 2023 3:38 pm

RiverDog wrote:You should have been here when Anthony! was posting. He was such a Russell Wilson brown noser that he claimed that Russell had zero responsibility for that INT.

I like to think of it like Brock Huard said: If the bench sends in a skunk of a play, it's up to the quarterback to not let it stink.


Aseahawkfan wrote:I don't much agree with that myself depending on how long the QB has been doing it. Russ was in year three, was just coming off a Super Bowl win, and I think believed in Bevell and Pete absolutely. He executed he play exactly as called. Does he have zero blame? No. I think he telegraphed it a little too much.

I still put the primary blame on Bevell. He was the OC. He is paid to know his personnel. He also had unique insight into a key player on the Patriots sideline as he knew Browner well. He also knew Lockett well. You don't ask players to do something that has such a low percentage chance of working because those players have never done anything like that before. Lockett had never caught a TD in tight quarters and was known for having bad hands and questionable route running ability which is why he wasn't some high paid receiver given he was 6'1" with 4.2 speed. Lockett was basically DK Metcalf physically before DK came to Seattle. The reason he wasn't making DK Metcalf money is because he never developed much beyond being a physical freak of nature. And Kearse was never gonna pick Browner, the 6'4" 220 lb. CB who we watched block three people by himself on a punt return, beat up that Green Bay receiver, and single handedly break up a read option play against Carolina and tackle the ball carrier. If Browner wasn't overshadowed by his insanely talented teammates and Kam Chancellor specifically, people would have pointed out how much of a huge, physical freak he was playing CB. Bevell looked at Kearse and went, "You run a pick on Browner." I'm still surprised Carroll didn't say, "What? No. Do not run that play. No way Jermaine is picking Browner. I brought that kid in. He's too big and physical. Come up with something else."

I'm sure it was more of a bang, bang moment of get a pass play in, take a shot, let's start thinking about the next play we're going run with Marshawn. The rest is history.


I agree that the primary fault lies with the OC. Nevertheless, a good deal also rests with Russell. The way that play was designed, Kearse had to draw the safety to him by beating the cornerback, and once Wilson saw that Browner had stuffed him at the LOS, he should have known that the safety was free to jump the slant route to Lockette. He also shouldn't have led him like he did, rather throw the ball at Lockette's knees and make him go down for the ball.

All 20/20 hindsight, as like you said, it was a bang-bang play and there wasn't much time for a QB to analyze it once they got to the LOS. As I said earlier, the game clock was running with less than 25 seconds left, so there wasn't a lot of time to audible out of it, nor did he want to double clutch and risk getting sacked. He pretty much had to run what was called.

Will we ever stop debating that play?
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby Aseahawkfan » Wed May 31, 2023 6:23 pm

RiverDog wrote:I agree that the primary fault lies with the OC. Nevertheless, a good deal also rests with Russell. The way that play was designed, Kearse had to draw the safety to him by beating the cornerback, and once Wilson saw that Browner had stuffed him at the LOS, he should have known that the safety was free to jump the slant route to Lockette. He also shouldn't have led him like he did, rather throw the ball at Lockette's knees and make him go down for the ball.

All 20/20 hindsight, as like you said, it was a bang-bang play and there wasn't much time for a QB to analyze it once they got to the LOS. As I said earlier, the game clock was running with less than 25 seconds left, so there wasn't a lot of time to audible out of it, nor did he want to double clutch and risk getting sacked. He pretty much had to run what was called.

Will we ever stop debating that play?


There was no time to check to see what Kearse had done. That was never going to happen. That entire play was bang bang.

Not as long as people don't accept it was a bad play call from the beginning and that was what led to the outcome. The main lesson is never call in a bad play.

I don't see how anyone can argue Lockett was a good person to even remotely begin to think about running a route that tight. Lockett in his entire career caught two TDs. Both of them go routes. Lockett was cut from the team before because of his inability to run routes well and catch consistently. Lockett was a 6 foot 1 inch receiver with 4.2 40 game speed. When you have a receiver that physically gifted who can't even make your roster as the fourth string receiver, that means his route running and catching ability is equally opposite of his physical gifts as in he must be real bad in practice running routes and catching the ball to not make the team when he is bigger than most receivers and faster. Before anything else even crosses your mind, running Lockett into the middle of the defense on a precise route requiring a bang bang catch play should have immediately shut the play down. Once the OC decides to send Lockett on that route on that play, you've lost the ability to blame anyone else if the worst outcome happens. You're the one who asked a guy who had no business being asked to do that play on a suicide mission and you got the worst outcome.

That to me absolves everyone else including Lockett of responsibility.

We have no idea if Russ put the throw perfectly where it was supposed to be and Lockett didn't reach the mark because he doesn't run routes well. For all we know Russ executed that play to the exact point it was in practice and the point was not reached because all the other points of failure occurred whether Lockett not running the route as aggressively as needed as Bevell implied, Kearse not picking Browner, and the opposing CB making the perfect read.

So how can I possibly know Russell didn't execute the play perfectly throwing to the exact point he was supposed to throw? I can't know that.

What I do know with absolutely certainty is that Bevell chose a play with so many points of failure with personnel he had no reason to expect to succeed at doing something they had never done before in a high pressure situation at the most crucial point in the game. That's all I can know for certain. The rest is speculation as to how many points of failure occurred to make that play fail as badly as it did. I can't prove Russ made a bad throw. I can't prove Kearse ran the route to pull Browner wrong. I don't know if Lockett ran the route wrong or didn't reach the point of the catch at the right time. I can't know all of that.

That is why I blame Bevell and Pete to a lesser degree because he relies on Bevell's expertise for offense. Bevell created the points of failure possibility with a bad play call. The worst outcome ensued.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby RiverDog » Wed May 31, 2023 6:30 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:There was no time to check to see what Kearse had done. That was never going to happen. That entire play was bang bang.


It was a two step drop. He had time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7rPIg7ZNQ8

Also, note how high the ball was thrown, up at the shoulder pad level. That ball should have been put at his waist or lower.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby Aseahawkfan » Thu Jun 01, 2023 7:11 pm

RiverDog wrote:It was a two step drop. He had time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7rPIg7ZNQ8

Also, note how high the ball was thrown, up at the shoulder pad level. That ball should have been put at his waist or lower.


If you look at the play, he had to throw it like that to get it over the O-line. There was no open throwing lane to keep it lower. There was a mass of players in front of Russ to the spot he was supposed to throw to. Another example of how bad the play design was. Look at that set up, no room to run, no room to throw, had to get it over the top of a mass of O-line and D-line guys right in front of him to a WR with a secondary playing about 5 feet or so off the line.

Russ is a short QB. It's another example of Bevell not understanding how difficult that throw was for Russ to go up over the scrum and arc the ball down to keep the throw low.

Bad play design and another point of failure Bevell did not account for.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby RiverDog » Fri Jun 02, 2023 3:42 am

RiverDog wrote:It was a two step drop. He had time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7rPIg7ZNQ8

Also, note how high the ball was thrown, up at the shoulder pad level. That ball should have been put at his waist or lower.


Aseahawkfan wrote:If you look at the play, he had to throw it like that to get it over the O-line. There was no open throwing lane to keep it lower. There was a mass of players in front of Russ to the spot he was supposed to throw to. Another example of how bad the play design was. Look at that set up, no room to run, no room to throw, had to get it over the top of a mass of O-line and D-line guys right in front of him to a WR with a secondary playing about 5 feet or so off the line.

Russ is a short QB. It's another example of Bevell not understanding how difficult that throw was for Russ to go up over the scrum and arc the ball down to keep the throw low.

Bad play design and another point of failure Bevell did not account for.


If he couldn't put it right on spot, he should have just held onto the ball and air mailed it out the back of the end zone and live to play another down. I'm not going to excuse Russell for that pick ala Anthony.

And you're preaching to the choir about the bad play design. And I've never accepted the premise that we had to throw on that down, although it was a good choice as the Pats had their heavy package in as they were expecting us to run. I would have rather gotten Russell out of the pocket with some sort of run/pass option.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby MackStrongIsMyHero » Fri Jun 02, 2023 6:45 am

"It's too late. Tonight. To drag the past out into the light."

Hurts to talk about it, but I agree it was poor play design. If they wanted to pass, I don't know why they didn't come out in a 2 TE set with PA called, and I assume they could easily have a run audible if it looked right. I also completely agree making a run for it and then throwing out the back of the end zone was also a viable option.
User avatar
MackStrongIsMyHero
Legacy
 
Posts: 1094
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:26 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, LA 70802

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby NorthHawk » Fri Jun 02, 2023 8:26 am

Remember that at that point, Wilson was one of the most dangerous QBs with the ball in his hands.
So a roll out where he could run, pass, or throw it away would have been the proper call for a pass play as it would put pressure on the Defense who was stacking in the middle. What would a DB/LB do if he's matched up with a slot recevier and Wilson was also his responsibility? Would he drift back and cover or press on the QB which would leave the receiver open? The play they called didn't create any mismatches or pressure on a quick 1 step drop and throw (it is designed to be a 1 step drop, but we see Wilson shuffling a little to get a better throw, a 2 step drop would have taken him back about a yard and a half to 2 yards).
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 10648
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby MackStrongIsMyHero » Fri Jun 02, 2023 9:10 am

Go and watch the 2-pt play LSU ran to win the game against Alabama last season. As much as I can't stand LSU, it was a clinic for the type of play in short yardage goal to go that gives the opposing defense everything to think about stopping. The Seahawks gave the Patriots nothing to think about on that play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUxLRWy6WdU
User avatar
MackStrongIsMyHero
Legacy
 
Posts: 1094
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:26 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, LA 70802

Re: Farewell from Hawktawk

Postby obiken » Fri Jun 02, 2023 1:42 pm

NorthHawk wrote:Remember that at that point, Wilson was one of the most dangerous QBs with the ball in his hands.
So a roll out where he could run, pass, or throw it away would have been the proper call for a pass play as it would put pressure on the Defense who was stacking in the middle. What would a DB/LB do if he's matched up with a slot recevier and Wilson was also his responsibility? Would he drift back and cover or press on the QB which would leave the receiver open? The play they called didn't create any mismatches or pressure on a quick 1 step drop and throw (it is designed to be a 1 step drop, but we see Wilson shuffling a little to get a better throw, a 2 step drop would have taken him back about a yard and a half to 2 yards).


Thats what I say! A roll out right or left I could have lived with, but a SLANT pass with a 5-10 5/8 QB, just killed me!!
obiken
Legacy
 
Posts: 3962
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 4:50 pm
Location: Wilsonville, Oregon 97070

Previous

Return to Seahawks Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 106 guests