Official Seahawks vs Rams game thread

[burrrton]

He does have 11 days.

8- we play a week from tomorrow (Christmas eve).

[Hawk Sista]

If Pete coached the Hawks to play the game based on what bad things "might" accidentally happen, we simply would NOT be headed back to our 5th playoffs in a row. Absolutely NOT!

Don't the Bevel haters and the Pete questioners ever get tired of themselves or embarrassed?? ever?? You do realize that under this crappy regime, we have as many 10+ win seasons as all the rest of Seahawk seasons throughout history...right? Is there any room for thinking that maybe, just maybe, Pete and company might know a little bit more about what it takes than you do? Of course, we get frustrated and make comments, but the constant complaints make me feel like I must be a Browns fan. Celebrate the victory, fellas. If it were so easy, everybody would be perennial playoff contenders.

We needed to beat the Rams. PERIOD! We have not done so in a few tries.... if there is an opportunity to pick up an easy first down, they should take it. And I disagree, if the Packers did that to us, I would hate them for it for sure, but I would think them wise. They once thought they had an insurmountable lead against us. uhhhh, not so much.

[c_hawkbob]

If Pete coached the Hawks to play the game based on what bad things "might" accidentally happen, we simply would NOT be headed back to our 5th playoffs in a row. Absolutely NOT!

Don't the Bevel haters and the Pete questioners ever get tired of themselves or embarrassed?? ever?? You do realize that under this crappy regime, we have as many 10+ win seasons as all the rest of Seahawk seasons throughout history...right? Is there any room for thinking that maybe, just maybe, Pete and company might know a little bit more about what it takes than you do? Of course, we get frustrated and make comments, but the constant complaints make me feel like I must be a Browns fan. Celebrate the victory, fellas. If it were so easy, everybody would be perennial playoff contenders.

We needed to beat the Rams. PERIOD! We have not done so in a few tries.... if there is an opportunity to pick up an easy first down, they should take it. And I disagree, if the Packers did that to us, I would hate them for it for sure, but I would think them wise. They once thought they had an insurmountable lead against us. uhhhh, not so much.

Thanks for handling the example for me there Sis.

[HumanCockroach]

Edit* My mistake, I thought this was about the Rams faking it while up on the Hawks..... Which we know has indeed happened.

[RiverDog]

If Pete coached the Hawks to play the game based on what bad things "might" accidentally happen, we simply would NOT be headed back to our 5th playoffs in a row. Absolutely NOT!

Don't the Bevel haters and the Pete questioners ever get tired of themselves or embarrassed?? ever?? You do realize that under this crappy regime, we have as many 10+ win seasons as all the rest of Seahawk seasons throughout history...right? Is there any room for thinking that maybe, just maybe, Pete and company might know a little bit more about what it takes than you do? Of course, we get frustrated and make comments, but the constant complaints make me feel like I must be a Browns fan. Celebrate the victory, fellas. If it were so easy, everybody would be perennial playoff contenders.

We needed to beat the Rams. PERIOD! We have not done so in a few tries.... if there is an opportunity to pick up an easy first down, they should take it. And I disagree, if the Packers did that to us, I would hate them for it for sure, but I would think them wise. They once thought they had an insurmountable lead against us. uhhhh, not so much.

I'm not sure who you're directing that at, sis, but I'm pretty much neutral on the Bevel hater meter and even noted that he did a really good job last night of squeezing 24 points out of our offense given how much trouble we've had with the Rams.

My big beef was on the fake punt, of which Bevel had nothing to do with.

[Hawk Sista]

My comments were directed to people who critique decisions as if they actually have any idea what it is like to call a game against a division foe on national TV. (Hint... your days as a Pop Warner assistant don't count.). Pete was criticized for the fake punt (which, btw, iced the game) and I think it is silly. The yards were there - it was something our ST staff saw as a Rams trend. How dumb would it be to punt the ball away when even I could have made a first down. I'm also airing my frustrations about people calling for heads. To me, it's ignorant and arrogant for all of the reasons I've stated.

[burrrton]

The yards were there - it was something our ST staff saw as a Rams trend. How dumb would it be to punt the ball away when even I could have made a first down.

There's wisdom in that, but as we've said: we didn't *need* a first down there** and we've now lost the element of surprise, a requirement for those kinds of plays, for the foreseeable future.

It was risky (and we paid the price, btw), unneeded late in a blowout, and reduces the chances it will work when we actually *do* need it.

**And I think you all know this intuitively- we're you distressed about punting the ball back to them with 5 min left in the game up 3 TDs? I know I wasn't, and I fret more than anyone about such things.

[mykc14]

My comments were directed to people who critique decisions as if they actually have any idea what it is like to call a game against a division foe on national TV. (Hint... your days as a Pop Warner assistant don't count.). Pete was criticized for the fake punt (which, btw, iced the game) and I think it is silly. The yards were there - it was something our ST staff saw as a Rams trend. How dumb would it be to punt the ball away when even I could have made a first down. I'm also airing my frustrations about people calling for heads. To me, it's ignorant and arrogant for all of the reasons I've stated.

I agree with this 100%. We have no idea what goes into calling a game at that level, and for as bad as our O has looked at times over the Bevell era it has just as much to do with petes overall philosophy as it does Bevell's play calling. As far as the fake punt I don't have a problem with it at all. In some ways it might be a bit of a stick it to you moment against the Rams who have had multiple successful fakes against us, but I think overall it had more to do with the look that they were giving us and an opportunity to keep possession, not necessarily to score points and run up the score.

Burr- you are right that this shows one of our fakes in a non essential situation but I don't think that limits us in the future. Most fakes have other fakes off of them and at the NFL level they are schemed specifically for the look that an opponent is giving you. It is unlikely that we would have gotten the same look from another punt return unit. There other thing is now teams have to spend time looking at that, maybe even having a guy who normally bails immediately to go down and set up his block spy the punter for an extra second, giving our punt team just a little bit of a higher chance of making a play.

[Hawk Sista]

It wasn't our only fake, it was the one that film watching showed may well work against the Rams. Having teams practice to account for that may well open something else up.

Winning the game was essential. Putting the nail in the coffin was smart.

[HumanCockroach]

I honestly don't see this as any different from going for it up 20 to ice a game on 4th and one.

[RiverDog]

I agree with this 100%. We have no idea what goes into calling a game at that level, and for as bad as our O has looked at times over the Bevell era it has just as much to do with petes overall philosophy as it does Bevell's play calling. As far as the fake punt I don't have a problem with it at all. In some ways it might be a bit of a stick it to you moment against the Rams who have had multiple successful fakes against us, but I think overall it had more to do with the look that they were giving us and an opportunity to keep possession, not necessarily to score points and run up the score.

Burr- you are right that this shows one of our fakes in a non essential situation but I don't think that limits us in the future. Most fakes have other fakes off of them and at the NFL level they are schemed specifically for the look that an opponent is giving you. It is unlikely that we would have gotten the same look from another punt return unit. There other thing is now teams have to spend time looking at that, maybe even having a guy who normally bails immediately to go down and set up his block spy the punter for an extra second, giving our punt team just a little bit of a higher chance of making a play.

Offensive coordinator is perhaps one of the easiest occupations to second guess in all of sports. Almost every play can be critiqued after it happens, and as the saying goes, hindsight is 20/20. Plus as you said, although all of us have a pretty good concept of overall football strategy, like the wisdom of a fake punt with 5 minutes to go with a 3 TD lead, but not many of us, certainly not me, are close enough to the sport to understand all the nuances of an NFL offense well enough to offer an informed opinion about the performance of an offensive coordinator. I get the sense that you almost have to have done the job yourself to get a good enough understanding for you to develop a credible opinion.

That's why I've stayed relatively neutral on Bevell, even after the pick in SB 49.

[burrrton]

Burr- you are right that this shows one of our fakes in a non essential situation but I don't think that limits us in the future. Most fakes have other fakes off of them and at the NFL level they are schemed specifically for the look that an opponent is giving you. It is unlikely that we would have gotten the same look from another punt return unit. There other thing is now teams have to spend time looking at that, maybe even having a guy who normally bails immediately to go down and set up his block spy the punter for an extra second, giving our punt team just a little bit of a higher chance of making a play.

Fair.

[Hawktawk]

Carroll said today he "doesn't expect people to understand the fake punt". He went on to say they were looking for it all game and he didnt care how much time was left.

Damn right I don't understand. I beg to disagree vehemently with the majority here. Smart football is having your punter pin the Rams on the ten with a 21 point lead with 5 to play and a defense that has absolutely controlled the game and KO'd the starting QB.
Dumb football is making your punter into a runner in a totally meaningless situation and getting him predictably KOd because he is not a ball handler or running back and is known for being reckless with his body.

Sort of like throwing over the middle from the one to your #5 receiver on second down with the super bowl on the line without even using a play action fake to the all pro running back.
I love me some Pete but these type of decisions have cost us maybe 2 more Superbowl titles in the past 5 years.

I'm not drinking the kool aid anymore.
Making the playoffs isn't good enough for the team that has been assembled here.

[HumanCockroach]

ROTFLMFAO ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[mykc14]

Carroll said today he "doesn't expect people to understand the fake punt". He went on to say they were looking for it all game and he didnt care how much time was left.

Damn right I don't understand. I beg to disagree vehemently with the majority here. Smart football is having your punter pin the Rams on the ten with a 21 point lead with 5 to play and a defense that has absolutely controlled the game and KO'd the starting QB.
Dumb football is making your punter into a runner in a totally meaningless situation and getting him predictably KOd because he is not a ball handler or running back and is known for being reckless with his body.

Sort of like throwing over the middle from the one to your #5 receiver on second down with the super bowl on the line without even using a play action fake to the all pro running back.
I love me some Pete but these type of decisions have cost us maybe 2 more Superbowl titles in the past 5 years.

I'm not drinking the kool aid anymore.
Making the playoffs isn't good enough for the team that has been assembled here.

Wow, no more kool aid for you. That's ok, I'll drink your portion.

Head coach: "a lot goes into a play like that, we were looking for it all game and finally got the opportunity so we pulled the trigger"

Fan: "your right I don't understand, which makes me right and you wrong. You may be any expert and one of the best coaches in the world, but i obviously know more about this than you."

LOL!!!

* Also, don't misunderstand, I am not saying you can't question a coaches decisions but to jump off the PC Train because of this call seems extreme. It also seems ironic that PC says you won't understand and then you prove him right but say that he is wrong.

[obiken]

You give the ball to Lynch and you have a punter punt. Pete just needs to own this one, there is no logical, or football reason for a fake punt unless you are in a desperate situation.

[HumanCockroach]

Or unless a first down allows you to ice a game and the defense is giving you one..... Oh, that's what happened? Crazy.....

[obiken]

Or unless a first down allows you to ice a game and the defense is giving you one..... Oh, that's what happened? Crazy.....

Human the game was iced.

[c_hawkbob]

If you only attempted fake punts when you absolutely had to they would never work. Special teams are as real a part of the game as offense and defense; they have their own Coordinator (often an assistant HC), they practice and study game situations and they have their reads, both team specific and play specific, just like real football.

The play was there. We took it. IT WORKED! It was the right call.

The fact that someone got hurt is a rear view mirror thing. You play to win, not to not get hurt.

And if that game was iced it was thin ice.

[Hawktawk]

21 points up at home with 5 to go against that team was thin ice? Bob..........Really?
Its easy to say in hindsight but that was a stupid play,period.

[NorthHawk]

From a risk/reward perspective it was not a good move at that point in the game.
However I believe you use plays like that heading into the playoffs just like you do in pre-season.
It's something to show you are capable of and willing to do so as to add to the amount of preparation for the other teams you might face.
The first down, I think was irrelevant, but showcasing the trick play (and the other we saw in the game) was for a reason other than to just extend the drive.

[c_hawkbob]

21 points up at home with 5 to go against that team was thin ice? Bob..........Really?
Its easy to say in hindsight but that was a stupid play,period.

Yes really. And you can spell out all the punctuation you want, it won't make it a "stupid play" in my estimation.

I believe you use plays like that heading into the playoffs just like you do in pre-season.
It's something to show you are capable of and willing to do so as to add to the amount of preparation for the other teams you might face.
The first down, I think was irrelevant, but showcasing the trick play (and the other we saw in the game) was for a reason other than to just extend the drive.

Great point.

[RiverDog]

From a risk/reward perspective it was not a good move at that point in the game.
However I believe you use plays like that heading into the playoffs just like you do in pre-season.
It's something to show you are capable of and willing to do so as to add to the amount of preparation for the other teams you might face.
The first down, I think was irrelevant, but showcasing the trick play (and the other we saw in the game) was for a reason other than to just extend the drive.

Losing the element of surprise of a fake punt was just one factor in the play call/decision by Ryan. There are two others: At that point in the game, you don't try anything cute that could blow up in your face and allow your opponent an opportunity to get back into the game. If the punter fumbles, as Ryan nearly did, and the Rams return it for a TD, you've instantly turned a 3 TD game into a 2 TD game. At that point, the Rams could have kicked off, stopped us with timeouts/2 minute warning, scored a quick TD then recover an onside kick. That's why teams protecting a 3 TD lead with 5 minutes left seldom throw the ball or call high risk plays. The risk did not outweigh the reward.

The other factor is that you expose your punter to injury on a play that you correctly point out was irrelevant. Ryan is not used to carrying the ball on a dead sprint, not used to getting tackled, not used to employing a hook slide.

Has Ryan been cleared of the concussion protocol yet? If he hasn't, then we may not have seen the ultimate repercussions of this play.

[HumanCockroach]

Human the game was iced.

Interesting, I don't remember them taking knees prior to the fake punt and easy first down the Rams handed them.

[HumanCockroach]

Why do you keep saying Ryan, RD? The call was from the sideline, and it ISN'T something they haven't done at the end of blowouts before. I'm surprised so many are pretending like taking an EASY first down is unique here. Seattle did the same to Buffalo just a couple years ago because of the look they gave.

Since many seem to have forgotten or something...

https://youtu.be/skKW0FMmRAk

[RiverDog]

Why do you keep saying Ryan, RD? The call was from the sideline, and it ISN'T something they haven't done at the end of blowouts before. I'm surprised so many are pretending like taking an EASY first down is unique here. Seattle did the same to Buffalo just a couple years ago because of the look they gave.

Since many seem to have forgotten or something...

https://youtu.be/skKW0FMmRAk

Cbob suggested that it could have been that Ryan might have made a split second decision when he saw "the parting of the Red Sea", and I think that very possible, perhaps even likely. But who's decision it was really wasn't my major point. It doesn't matter who's decision it was, it was in my opinion that for a number of reasons, it was unwise to run a fake punt at that juncture.

Your link was a bit different in that it wasn't Ryan that was running the fake, it was the up back. There isn't near the risk of a player that's unfamiliar with carrying the football fumbling vs. a player like a running back and the risk of a backup RB getting hurt isn't near that of a specialist like a punter.

[Hawktawk]

Losing the element of surprise of a fake punt was just one factor in the play call/decision by Ryan. There are two others: At that point in the game, you don't try anything cute that could blow up in your face and allow your opponent an opportunity to get back into the game. If the punter fumbles, as Ryan nearly did, and the Rams return it for a TD, you've instantly turned a 3 TD game into a 2 TD game. At that point, the Rams could have kicked off, stopped us with timeouts/2 minute warning, scored a quick TD then recover an onside kick. That's why teams protecting a 3 TD lead with 5 minutes left seldom throw the ball or call high risk plays. The risk did not outweigh the reward.

The other factor is that you expose your punter to injury on a play that you correctly point out was irrelevant. Ryan is not used to carrying the ball on a dead sprint, not used to getting tackled, not used to employing a hook slide.

Has Ryan been cleared of the concussion protocol yet? If he hasn't, then we may not have seen the ultimate repercussions of this play.

PC said they are taking a wait and see approach with Ryan but that players such as Kearse and Wilson have volunteered. He said they might have tryouts,
The man is very humorous and a great coach and leader. Nobody with a brain believes other wise.

But this right here ^^^^^^^nails it right on the head. Excellent points you make RD.
The loss of that trick play from the bag 2 weeks before the playoffs in an utterly MEANINGLESS situation was a far bigger blow to Seattle's ST arsenal than making any opposing ST coach spend a few extra minutes in the film room.
Its a ridiculous argument to make.They are thanking Seattle for showing that.
And likewise attempting the play was a far higher risk of making the game closer than the actual reward including a snoozing punter and near turnover.
For his golden leg and throwing arm ball security has been an issue with Ryan just fielding snaps sometimes. It made no sense. Pete was trying to have a "whats your deal" moment with a hated opponent after being pantsed so many times on ST over the years by them.

I love Pete. I hope hes gotten his hormonal moment out of the way for the season

[mykc14]

PC said they are taking a wait and see approach with Ryan but that players such as Kearse and Wilson have volunteered. He said they might have tryouts,
The man is very humorous and a great coach and leader. Nobody with a brain believes other wise.

The loss of that trick play from the bag 2 weeks before the playoffs in an utterly MEANINGLESS situation was a far bigger blow to Seattle's ST arsenal than making any opposing ST coach spend a few extra minutes in the film room.
Its a ridiculous argument to make.They are thanking Seattle for showing that.

I love Pete. I hope hes gotten his hormonal moment out of the way for the season

I really think you are overstating the 'surprise' of this play. The Hawks didn't do anything tricky the Rams were doing something dumb. If another team is stupid enough to continually give the Hawks that look they can still easily run that play. Conversely the Hawks would never run that play against any other look so they didn't really waste anything as it is very unlikely they were going to get that look again. Having that look on film does nothing to hurt any trick plays the Hawks might use i the future.

Also, I am not arguing that an opposing special team coach is going to be burning the midnight oil to stop this play I am saying that a player, who normally would bail early to run down and set up a block now has to wait an extra split second, giving our guys a little bit more of an advantage covering a punt. I also am saying that the Hawks surely have other fakes in their playbook, probably even a fake that works well if a team is prepared to stop the one that they already have shown.

[HumanCockroach]

Do people honestly believe that a team can't run a trick play again if it's been shown( interesting that they have run double passes numerous times over the years, flee flickers, RB passes etc, etc, etc)? There's dumb, then there's dumb, then there's DUUUUUUMMMMMBBBBB.

If the Cards give Seattle the same look this week, the same fake, will indeed work just as well or better, the idea that "it's been shown" is a moronic statement.....

The same with EVERY play they run, offensively, defensively, or ST... Are there seriously people believing Seattle has to reinvent plays every week in order for them to work, and unveil them on gameday? A "trick" play is simply a play, it isn't a staple, but it isn't a fricken unicorn either.

[RiverDog]

I really think you are overstating the 'surprise' of this play. The Hawks didn't do anything tricky the Rams were doing something dumb. If another team is stupid enough to continually give the Hawks that look they can still easily run that play. Conversely the Hawks would never run that play against any other look so they didn't really waste anything as it is very unlikely they were going to get that look again. Having that look on film does nothing to hurt any trick plays the Hawks might use i the future.

Also, I am not arguing that an opposing special team coach is going to be burning the midnight oil to stop this play I am saying that a player, who normally would bail early to run down and set up a block now has to wait an extra split second, giving our guys a little bit more of an advantage covering a punt. I also am saying that the Hawks surely have other fakes in their playbook, probably even a fake that works well if a team is prepared to stop the one that they already have shown.

mykc;

In a game where about the only way an opponent could get back into it would be via some sort of turnover, who would you trust to run the ball helter skelter down the middle of the field: Your punter or a running back/receiver type?

I'm glad Cbob remembers Garo Yepremian. That's who Ryan reminded me of, and the game situation was very similar.

And of those two options, ie a punter or a backup RB ala HC's link from 2012 (Michael Robinson?), which player is (1) more susceptible to injury and (2) that you could least afford to lose in your playoff stretch?

With all due respect, some of you guys are really missing the central points. The surprise factor ranks about #3 on the top 5 reasons why you don't want to run that particular play at that particular moment.

I'm glad Cbob remembers Garo Yepremian. That's who Jon Ryan reminded me of, and the game situation was very similar.

[Hawktawk]

It was a fairly unique fake in that it involved the punter running the ball. Conversely its usually a pass.
Like Carroll said of the pass to Wilson "we've been waiting 5 years to run that". It was also a very questionable decision that worked very well in that Wilson was not injured.

Point being they aren't going to be able to pull Ryans play out of the book for a while cause it isn't going to be available.NOBODY WILL GIVE THEM THE LOOK!!!!He might not be available either.
I wish it hadn't happened. Pete probably wishes it hadn't happened too. He said "either you are always competing or you aren't" I completely agree but sometimes discretion is the better part of valor.
His overthinking has cost him big time in an otherwise amazing career.A national championship, a chance to play in the NFC championship after the 2012 season (he admitted blowing the win in Atlanta after winning the Superbowl the following year). And of course the play that shall live in infamy.

And HC showing off the play 2 weeks before the postseason in a meaningless situation was what was dumb.Completely unnecessary and dumb as hell with a concussion to prove it.
Proof is in the concussion.
Go ahead and justify it all you like .You're not looking like a mensa candidate either.

[HumanCockroach]

And you RD seem to be missing the entire point of why you do it. Can a team get back into the game without the football? No? Then take the easy first down, grind off more time, and remove all chances for them to do it.

The only "bad" decision on the entire play, was Ryan's choice not to slide down prior to people being near him. Not the choice to run the play, not the choice to keep the ball in the offenses hands, not the choice to take the gift first down St.Louis graciously was giving, not the choice to have your punter ( a punter by the way who's thrown, run and carried the ball multiple times in his career)run the ball. You're looking for fault, but ultimately the ONLY poor choice was the one to continue to run until tackled.

[mykc14]

mykc;

In a game where about the only way an opponent could get back into it would be via some sort of turnover, who would you trust to run the ball helter skelter down the middle of the field: Your punter or a running back/receiver type?

I'm glad Cbob remembers Garo Yepremian. That's who Ryan reminded me of, and the game situation was very similar.

And of those two options, ie a punter or a backup RB ala HC's link from 2012 (Michael Robinson?), which player is (1) more susceptible to injury and (2) that you could least afford to lose in your playoff stretch?

With all due respect, some of you guys are really missing the central points. The surprise factor ranks about #3 on the top 5 reasons why you don't want to run that particular play at that particular moment.

The remarks about it 'ruining a surprise' was a direct response to another poster. Given the options you offered I would obviously rather have a RB handle the ball in that situation. The problem with that is the play probably doesn't work with a RB getting the ball. The play worked because the Rams return team was bailing early. Snapping the ball to a RB or any other trick probably doesn't work. You would also hope your punter is smart enough to slide before he takes a big hit, which he might have been planning on doing before he bobbled the ball.

[HumanCockroach]

It was a fairly unique fake in that it involved the punter running the ball. Conversely its usually a pass.
Like Carroll said of the pass to Wilson "we've been waiting 5 years to run that". It was also a very questionable decision that worked very well in that Wilson was not injured.

Point being they aren't going to be able to pull Ryans play out of the book for a while cause it isn't going to be available.NOBODY WILL GIVE THEM THE LOOK!!!!He might not be available either.
I wish it hadn't happened. Pete probably wishes it hadn't happened too. He said "either you are always competing or you aren't" I completely agree but sometimes discretion is the better part of valor.
His overthinking has cost him big time in an otherwise amazing career.A national championship, a chance to play in the NFC championship after the 2012 season (he admitted blowing the win in Atlanta after winning the Superbowl the following year). And of course the play that shall live in infamy.

And HC showing off the play 2 weeks before the postseason in a meaningless situation was what was dumb.Completely unnecessary and dumb as hell with a concussion to prove it.
Proof is in the concussion.
Go ahead and justify it all you like .You're not looking like a mensa candidate either.

And you're assuming that another team was going to anyway( or that by NOT giving them that look, that it doesn't make them susceptible to ANOTHER fake). I don't need to justify anything. Professionals called and ran a play, one that worked, and will work again, despite your continued insistence that it won't. Football doesn't work like that, never has and never will. I don't profess to be smarter than people doing something I have never done ( at least at that level) I leave that to people like you.

[Hawktawk]

HC I'd like a do over. I respect your opinion greatly . If the reporters are asking PC the question it's a valid controversy and smart people can disagree. I will concede except for the injury nobody including me would be questioning it. Last of all I apologize for the way I sometimes treat people in an Internet forum differently than I would if we were having a beer and talking Hawks .
Anyway merry Christmas to you and all the Hawks fans. Congrats to Pete and the Hawks on another division title.GO HAWKS!!!

[HumanCockroach]

Don't mistake my position. It isn't a particular call I cared for, that said, it worked, had a solid thought process ( at least IMHO) and I HONESTLY don't view any play regardless of who is or isn't carrying the ball to be anything other than another play... Hence, I simply can't get up in arms about people playing at or coaching at a level I dreamed about, making a decision at a level I can't grasp. I absolutely refuse to call a play dumb, no matter the outcome. In this instance, I understand the thought process, and can accept it.

Ryan not sliding after gaining twenty or so yards absolutely baffles me, but that said, it isn't a coaches fault, or a lack of thought involved ( at least not that I can see as an outsider).

I just refuse to accept "they're dumb" or "they don't know what they're doing" kind of blanket statements.

Anyway, hope you and yours ( and everyone else and theirs) has a fantastic Christmas or holiday season...

[Hawktawk]

Fair enough

[RiverDog]

And you RD seem to be missing the entire point of why you do it. Can a team get back into the game without the football? No? Then take the easy first down, grind off more time, and remove all chances for them to do it.

The only "bad" decision on the entire play, was Ryan's choice not to slide down prior to people being near him. Not the choice to run the play, not the choice to keep the ball in the offenses hands, not the choice to take the gift first down St.Louis graciously was giving, not the choice to have your punter ( a punter by the way who's thrown, run and carried the ball multiple times in his career)run the ball. You're looking for fault, but ultimately the ONLY poor choice was the one to continue to run until tackled.

The reason Ryan didn't get down was because he was too busy recovering his unforced fumble, which is one of the reasons why he shouldn't have been carrying the ball in the first place.

But I do recognize your point about a gift first down being the most sure way to win the game, but even if I agreed that it was the smart play, Ryan should have gotten down IMMEDIATELY after getting 5 yards past the sticks, and since he kept running well beyond the first down marker, I can only assume that either the coaches did not give him those directions or that it was not a called play (Cbob's parting of the Red Sea). Ryan was either poorly coached by not having it been made clear that he should get down once he got the first down or was allowed to exercise his own judgment and allowed to run helter skelter down the center of the field. Either way, our coaches phucked up (IMHO).

[mykc14]

Riv- it doesn't have to be the coaches that phucked up. Couldn't it also be that Ryan was told to go down as soon as he got the first down but he saw how much green was in front of him and took it upon himself to just keep going. Sometimes players are coached up to do the right thing but they just don't do it correctly in the game. As much as they might want to try, coaches, especially in today's NFL, can't simulate game situations very well. Maybe Ryan was just trying to make a play.

[RiverDog]

Riv- it doesn't have to be the coaches that phucked up. Couldn't it also be that Ryan was told to go down as soon as he got the first down but he saw how much green was in front of him and took it upon himself to just keep going. Sometimes players are coached up to do the right thing but they just don't do it correctly in the game. As much as they might want to try, coaches, especially in today's NFL, can't simulate game situations very well. Maybe Ryan was just trying to make a play.

Yes, it could have been Ryan that screwed up. But this wasn't Ryan's first rodeo. He's the oldest, most experienced player on our team. I would have to assume that if he were told to get down 5 yards past the sticks, that's what he would have done.

I think the chances that it was Ryan that forgot what his coaches told him or was being insubordinate are about the same as the Rams coming back from 3 TD deficit with 5 minutes left.