HawkShack.com

I've seen a lot of discussion on this on other sites and the easy thing would be for me to jump on the bandwagon (hehe) and complain about Pete's game management, which I've done so often in the past.

But I felt that he made the right call in going for them. We had to assume that it was going to be a low scoring game and that we might not get very many opportunities, especially with the way our offense has been performing and has been performing all year long. He had to show some confidence that the defense would hold and not turn it into a basketball game.

Comments?

I was against the first 2 point try - and still am.
I think that's the wrong move at that point with the score as it was.
The 2nd one was a no brainer as the first one failed.

The problem of going for 2, for us, is that our red zone offense is so bad why would we put it out there to try and score 2 when we are almost guaranteed 1. I imagine that our current offense would be well below 50% on 2 point attempts throughout an entire season so our odds of making it just don't work out to benefit us. I know you aren't talking about always going for 2 but our offense isn't good enough right now to go for 2 unless we absolutely have to.

I didn't like it. Seattle was clearly gaining momentum and there was plenty of time left.. The benefit of the extra point with a successful attempt was outweighed by the bummer factor of missing it in that situation.

I've got Two Words for you: Jimmy Graham... (OK, more then two, but what the he!! did we sign him for?)

Graham didn't have a particularly good game on Sunday, but early in the year the Offensive "Brain Trust" seemed to want to turn him into a blocker.
Talk about a stupid idea...

NorthHawk wrote:Graham didn't have a particularly good game on Sunday, but early in the year the Offensive "Brain Trust" seemed to want to turn him into a blocker.
Talk about a stupid idea...

The stupid idea was the Graham trade. It's looking worse and worse. Graham had perhaps his worst game of his career last Sunday, with 3 catches on 8 targets and two drops, plus as we all know, the guy couldn't block his shadow. In the meantime, Max Unger has started all 10 games for the Saints and Stephone Anthony, the player they chose with our #31 overall, is their starting MLB. There's no question who came out holding onto the long end of the stick on that deal, at least to this point.

RiverDog wrote:
The stupid idea was the Graham trade. It's looking worse and worse. Graham had perhaps his worst game of his career last Sunday, with 3 catches on 8 targets and two drops, plus as we all know, the guy couldn't block his shadow. In the meantime, Max Unger has started all 10 games for the Saints and Stephone Anthony, the player they chose with our #31 overall, is their starting MLB. There's no question who came out holding onto the long end of the stick on that deal, at least to this point.

Wilson has played the best ball of his career when throwing to no name guys and spreading the ball all over the field. Graham has been a much better teammate than Harvin was but the offensive dysfunction has been the same when Russ feels like he has to force feed Graham the ball or get asked about it later.Now Graham is having the drops to boot.

When I heard the news I was ecstatic like most of the fan base and most of the pundits around the league.So was PC and JS. It hasn't remotely worked out like I thought.

Its a weird one.

Mathieu from the Cards said recently that we didn't use Graham as creatively as the Saints.
His comment said that they didn't have to do anything special to cover him and didn't think we created any mismatches.
That really speaks to the OC and the bland game plan he drew up.
They paid a premium price (not only money) to get him here, then don't create plays that take advantage of the abilities he has demonstrated since he's been in the league.
It's not that we have to throw to him 10+ times per game, rather the quality of the plays to create that mismatch over and above trying to make him into a blocker.