|
On February 02 2015 14:05 Craze wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2015 13:52 ZasZ. wrote:
Maybe now the Legion of Bandwagon Fans will retreat back into their caves, at least until next season. Are they still bandwagon fans if they come back after losing? At what point can they graduate from bandwagon fan to just fan? Always interested to hear the bullshit answers that people come up with for this.
Bandwagon fans are fair weather fans imo but I don't really care
|
I think the criticism of the play call is unfair, it was actually the right passing play versus the look that the Pats were showing. Post-snap the play was developing into a complete victory for the Seahawks:
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8z0jLiIYAMCtkV.jpg)
That's a touchdown 90% of the time, the Pats' rookie corner just made an incredible play on a pass that wasn't perfectly placed against a receiver that took a slightly wrong angle on his route.
|
It's not that it is a "bad look" but that it was just an overly risky play in the situation. 1 TO. Run the ball once, throw the ball on 3rd and do whatever you want on 4th (in this offense, run for god sake).
|
"Wasn't perfectly placed"??? You mean, thrown where most high school QBs would know not to place it?
|
As a casual Super Bowl viewer I have a question regarding the teams budgets.
I read a little through wikipedia, had a look at past results and was a bit surprised. I had been under the impression, that the league is designed to balance teams out over time.
There is a hard salary cap on NFL teams and the rookie draft should help weaker teams collect talents to catch up.
So how come certain teams like New England, Green Bay and Indianapolis are constantly at the top reaching the playoffs easily, while other teams like Oakland, St. Louis or Cleveland can't even get a positive win ratio once?
If all teams are 'equal', how is this statistically even possible?
|
Because all QBs aren't equal. It's basically as simple as that. And the good teams have better front offices and coaches that stick around for a while and chose the right people.
As for that interception, it almost seem disengenuous to call it anything other than one of the worst play calls in NFL history, all things considered. Marshawn 2 feet from the endzone... Beastmode himself!
|
On February 02 2015 16:00 cLutZ wrote:
"Wasn't perfectly placed"??? You mean, thrown where most high school QBs would know not to place it?
Well, exactly. Look at the image, that is basically a play-calling win. That result at that moment is exactly what any OC would want from that play, and if you show me that image and tell me it's the game determining play without telling me what the result is, I'd definitely expect a TD there. The receiver doesn't cut in sharp enough, and so the ball is placed where the receiver can't box out the corner.
|
Well, I mean, it shouldn't be above knee level under any circumstances.
|
Wilson 2015 is basically going to be Kaepernick of 2014. Already clear.
|
The Seahawks Off. Coordinater Derel Bevell actually went and blamed Lockett in his press conference several times, what a douche. Not representative of the leadership the organization values so highly from its personnel.
edit: FatChicks, I think we all can see that the play should have worked fine from there (it doesn't show that the DB is already jumping the route). Our disagreement is that the call was way too gutsy given the circumstances at the time and the team the Hawks have.
|
On February 02 2015 16:22 Craze wrote:
The Seahawks Off. Coordinater Derel Bevell actually went and blamed Lockett in his press conference several times, what a douche. Not representative of the leadership the organization values so highly from its personnel.
edit: FatChicks, I think we all can see that the play should have worked fine from there (it doesn't show that the DB is already jumping the route). Our disagreement is that the call was way too gutsy given the circumstances at the time and the team the Hawks have.
Carroll explains in one of his pressers, but basically they had 30 seconds and 1 timeout. That's time for 2 running plays, or 2 running plays and one passing play, if they sequence it so the passing play comes first or second. So obviously you try for 2 running plays and one passing play, and they decided to go pass-run-run, with the pass being a relatively conservative and "safe" quick slant.
The real mistake was made when they couldn't get lined up and had to burn their second timeout. With that second timeout, they could have just run it three times.
|
On February 02 2015 16:20 IgnE wrote:
Wilson 2015 is basically going to be Kaepernick of 2014. Already clear.
what in wilson's career, tonight or otherwise, would lead you to that conclusion?
|
Baltimore, USA22259 Posts
On February 02 2015 16:00 lord_nibbler wrote:
As a casual Super Bowl viewer I have a question regarding the teams budgets.
I read a little through wikipedia, had a look at past results and was a bit surprised. I had been under the impression, that the league is designed to balance teams out over time.
There is a hard salary cap on NFL teams and the rookie draft should help weaker teams collect talents to catch up.
So how come certain teams like New England, Green Bay and Indianapolis are constantly at the top reaching the playoffs easily, while other teams like Oakland, St. Louis or Cleveland can't even get a positive win ratio once?
If all teams are 'equal', how is this statistically even possible?
Quarterbacks.
On February 02 2015 16:51 TheMusiC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2015 16:20 IgnE wrote:
Wilson 2015 is basically going to be Kaepernick of 2014. Already clear. what in wilson's career, tonight or otherwise, would lead you to that conclusion?
Wilson is a pretty mediocre/slightly above average QB with an amazing team around him. He isn't anything special. What in Wilson's career, tonight or otherwise, would lead you to a conclusion otherwise?
|
United States22883 Posts
On February 02 2015 16:00 cLutZ wrote:
"Wasn't perfectly placed"??? You mean, thrown where most high school QBs would know not to place it?
I look forward to Seattle mortgaging the franchise to give Wilson ridiculous money.
Seriously, the increased risk of an interception is really quite minimal and getting the extra play in is a huge deal. If Wilson were a better QB, regardless of Lockette taking a bad angle, it's a TD.
|
On February 02 2015 16:00 lord_nibbler wrote:
As a casual Super Bowl viewer I have a question regarding the teams budgets.
I read a little through wikipedia, had a look at past results and was a bit surprised. I had been under the impression, that the league is designed to balance teams out over time.
There is a hard salary cap on NFL teams and the rookie draft should help weaker teams collect talents to catch up.
So how come certain teams like New England, Green Bay and Indianapolis are constantly at the top reaching the playoffs easily, while other teams like Oakland, St. Louis or Cleveland can't even get a positive win ratio once?
If all teams are 'equal', how is this statistically even possible?
Three, maybe 4
One, quarterbacks, a great one that you keep under contract is going to make your team good to better for the better part of a decade. Two, coaching, a good to great coach is going to do the same. Management, a good to great gm and front office staff will do the same as the two above. The possible 4th, ownership, a good to great owner will help those other factors do even better.
|
On February 02 2015 16:07 FatChicksUnited wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2015 16:00 cLutZ wrote:
"Wasn't perfectly placed"??? You mean, thrown where most high school QBs would know not to place it? Well, exactly. Look at the image, that is basically a play-calling win. That result at that moment is exactly what any OC would want from that play, and if you show me that image and tell me it's the game determining play without telling me what the result is, I'd definitely expect a TD there. The receiver doesn't cut in sharp enough, and so the ball is placed where the receiver can't box out the corner.
Bevell himself said Lockette could have fought harder for the ball (which is a pathetic move by the OC).
Therein lies the problem. Your receivers all range between mediocre and bad. Your receivers are getting regularly beat all game. You are ranked 27th in the league in passing for a reason. There isn't a receiver on the team worthy of putting on the spot in that situation, let alone a converted track athlete who has EIGHTEEN career receptions. Plus Wilson is only a mediocre passer.
When it's between putting the ball in the hands of your WRs and putting it in the hands of the best player on the offense, in a situation custom built for him, then it's just plain stupid.
Also they burned way too much time between 1st and 2nd down to run that play if you're going to just throw the ball anyways. You had plenty of time to bring in your bigger unit. PCs explanation makes it look worse (which Steve Young also said).
Ultimately it's a failure to stick with what got you here. You win or lose the game on Lynch's back. Maybe even a RW run.
|
On February 02 2015 17:25 EvilTeletubby wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2015 16:51 TheMusiC wrote:On February 02 2015 16:20 IgnE wrote:
Wilson 2015 is basically going to be Kaepernick of 2014. Already clear. what in wilson's career, tonight or otherwise, would lead you to that conclusion? Wilson is a pretty mediocre/slightly above average QB with an amazing team around him. He isn't anything special. What in Wilson's career, tonight or otherwise, would lead you to a conclusion otherwise?
As blasphemous as this might sound in the modern era of statistical analysis (of which I am a huge fan), my answer to this question would be "the eye test" (ref: Simmons talking about Oden vs Durant back in the days of that draft). I do not believe that Wilson is as good as his record suggests he might be -- I made the joke with my friend I was watching the game with that he is/was Eli 2.0: get constant support from a stellar defense and run game, seem to do nothing for large stretches at a time, and then be good for 30+ yards out of the blue. However, it was a joke, and even in a joke, the "2.0" means something.
Because the other thing I said is how much I enjoy just watching Wilson play (note: I am/was a fan of neither horse in tonight's race). He makes a number of plays look effortless, for lack of a better word. And the *big* difference between him and Kaepernick is that this extends beyond running (and even in running, Kap might when a 40 yard dash, but I believe the grace Wilson has means more than a potentially high score in figure skating). Wilson can throw it 15-25 yards and look extremely good doing it. I've never once felt that way about Kaepernick watching him. I didn't care what the stats said when the 49ers made their run, I always felt like there was some type of regression inevitably lurking.
Wilson being above average would already suggest he's unlikely to be a 2015 version of that meltdown. And I believe he's that. And by only being above average, it's also very unlikely he's going to turn into some type of turret that looks half machine half man (see: Rodgers). But go back 10-12 years in a time machine and I'd be willing to bet the house that you could find a large number of posts exactly like this one with "Wilson" replaced by "Brady."
|
Hey Jibba at least Katy Perry finally look a lion to the super bowl
|
On February 02 2015 20:14 asymptotech wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2015 17:25 EvilTeletubby wrote:On February 02 2015 16:51 TheMusiC wrote:On February 02 2015 16:20 IgnE wrote:
Wilson 2015 is basically going to be Kaepernick of 2014. Already clear. what in wilson's career, tonight or otherwise, would lead you to that conclusion? Wilson is a pretty mediocre/slightly above average QB with an amazing team around him. He isn't anything special. What in Wilson's career, tonight or otherwise, would lead you to a conclusion otherwise? As blasphemous as this might sound in the modern era of statistical analysis (of which I am a huge fan), my answer to this question would be "the eye test" (ref: Simmons talking about Oden vs Durant back in the days of that draft). I do not believe that Wilson is as good as his record suggests he might be -- I made the joke with my friend I was watching the game with that he is/was Eli 2.0: get constant support from a stellar defense and run game, seem to do nothing for large stretches at a time, and then be good for 30+ yards out of the blue. However, it was a joke, and even in a joke, the "2.0" means something. Because the other thing I said is how much I enjoy just watching Wilson play (note: I am/was a fan of neither horse in tonight's race). He makes a number of plays look effortless, for lack of a better word. And the *big* difference between him and Kaepernick is that this extends beyond running (and even in running, Kap might when a 40 yard dash, but I believe the grace Wilson has means more than a potentially high score in figure skating). Wilson can throw it 15-25 yards and look extremely good doing it. I've never once felt that way about Kaepernick watching him. I didn't care what the stats said when the 49ers made their run, I always felt like there was some type of regression inevitably lurking. Wilson being above average would already suggest he's unlikely to be a 2015 version of that meltdown. And I believe he's that. And by only being above average, it's also very unlikely he's going to turn into some type of turret that looks half machine half man (see: Rodgers). But go back 10-12 years in a time machine and I'd be willing to bet the house that you could find a large number of posts exactly like this one with "Wilson" replaced by "Brady."
Eh, you can sticky the quote. Wilson is finished as a "top tier qb".
|
United States22883 Posts
On February 02 2015 20:38 Jaaaaasper wrote:
Hey Jibba at least Katy Perry finally look a lion to the super bowl
Ima kill you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
