HawkShack.com

I know this issue has been kicked around before but it drives me nuts that the Hawks take so long in their games to get their game in gear. Seems like we're playing from behind in most of our games. And those few times when we get ahead early we take the foot off the gas. I think some of that has to be laid at the feet of Wilson. When we are behind he gets much more active. But maybe he's hoping he won't have to carry the team every time they play but when it is apparent that isn't happening he take more on himself. What you guys think?

I think it's game planning and play calling that causes many of the issues with slow starts.
IMO, it would help if they went up tempo. I don't mean a hurryup Offense, but rather get in and out of the huddle quicker
and snap the ball with around 15 seconds left. That gives the team a sense of urgency and gets the opposing Defenses
tired out or at least makes them scramble to rotate players.

I don't know why people are so hung up on the slow starts. End of the game looks like any game. Most teams start slow as they figure out and adapt to each other's strategy. It would be like some team that scored a bunch of points in the first half complaining about slowing down at the end because they didn't score the same amount in the second half. Points come in bundles. Teams have to figure out what each other are doing and adapt defensively and offensively. Sometimes the game plan works out of the gate, sometimes it works later in the game after a slight change. That's just football.

“End of the game looks like any game”

What does that mean?

I think football is a game of momentum at times. It’s ok to start slow, but when you dig yourself a deep hole and don’t correct it until after halftime, that leaves very little margin for error. We’ve won a lot of those types of games, but not this time.

I-5 wrote:“End of the game looks like any game”

What does that mean?

I think football is a game of momentum at times. It’s ok to start slow, but when you dig yourself a deep hole and don’t correct it until after halftime, that leaves very little margin for error. We’ve won a lot of those types of games, but not this time.

This is my take, too. The coaching staff needs to make its adjustments at least a quarter earlier than they do. Relying on late-game heroics isn't a reliable strategy (ok, with Wilson it's somewhat reliable, but not reliable enough to compete for Super Bowls).

Being down 2 or 3 scores never helps and it means you can never play subs as your top players have to be in the game.
It would have been good for the team if Carson for example had only to play the 1st half or part of the 3rd quarter for
half the games instead of having to get beat up for 4 full quarters. It's a long season and the healthiest teams usually
end up in the championship games.

I-5 wrote:“End of the game looks like any game”

What does that mean?

I think football is a game of momentum at times. It’s ok to start slow, but when you dig yourself a deep hole and don’t correct it until after halftime, that leaves very little margin for error. We’ve won a lot of those types of games, but not this time.

It means the end score looks like any other game. You are exactly right. Momentum happens all the time. You can score 21 points in the first quarter, then not score another point the rest of the game and lose. Does that mean a fast start helped? you can score all your points in the second quarter and win if the other team can't get back into it? What does that mean? Fast start, slow start, middling start?

Football moves a lot. Points come in bunches. What would fans be happy with? Scoring all your points equally across every quarter every game? Getting all our points in the first half, then doing nothing the second half?

What is the ideal way to score points? If at the end of the game, the game was close then it was just football with all its swingy momentum. There's no way to counter it. Look at the Texans. They started fast and got smoked by the end. Green Bay started fast and barely won.

That's football. That's the game.

trents wrote:I know this issue has been kicked around before but it drives me nuts that the Hawks take so long in their games to get their game in gear. Seems like we're playing from behind in most of our games. And those few times when we get ahead early we take the foot off the gas. I think some of that has to be laid at the feet of Wilson. When we are behind he gets much more active. But maybe he's hoping he won't have to carry the team every time they play but when it is apparent that isn't happening he take more on himself. What you guys think?

So you dont think PC saying "We use the first half to test the defense" has anything to do with it? OR his mantra "you cant win in the 1st, 2nd or 3rd", or the fact his teams have always started slow.

THis is all PC

I think at least part of it is Pete's conservative mindset with regard to play calling and offense in general. He doesn't start opening the play book up until the team gets behind in the score and there is desperation.