Coaching has Nothing to do with Seattle Abusing the Broncos

[DogFace]

I'm very confused. What exactly is this thread about.
I've beard op's explanations and I'm more confused.
Let's start over. No. Let's don't.

 

[Moderately_Askew]

One of these days you are going to have to realize that sarcasm is hard to decipher on a message board or the internet in general.

 

[Carolina Cowboy]

Sorry OP. I respectfully disagree with your premise.

 

[khiladi]

And how is this not coaching?

Of course the coaches tracked his audibles and calls all year.

So because the players were schooled in it..that's not teaching?


Why do you think coaches are enjoying the high salaries like the players are?

Becuz the coaches are the difference b/w winning and losing.

That's why.

I never said it wasn't coaching, thus the point about Jason Garrett's 'coaching'...

 

[khiladi]

While it is abundantly clear that Seattle has talent, part of the reason they won, per Richard Sherman is precisely because they knew and understood what Peyton Manning was throwing at them. They understood the tendencies. He also mentioned the ability to adjust on Peyton's part with double-moves could have opened up their offense. If people don't understand how stopping one of the most prolific, if not most prolific offense ever, applies to Jason Garrett's offense and it's simplicity, then I don't know what to say.

Let's summarize:

Seattle has talented players, no doubt, but..
Sherman says that they studied what Peyton did and knew what he was calling, including his hand signals
Sherman says Denver could have been more effective if they adjusted, including giving some ways such as double-moves, thus the implication of ADJUSTING THE GAME-PLAN during the actual game

This brings me to the analogy to the excuses for our actual head COACH Jason Garrett and HIS OFFENSE and IT'S SIMPLICITY as compared to stopping one of the most prolific offenses ever.

This idea of the Garrett homers of just beating your men up front is what wins games is the reason why Garrett looks bad is just utterly ridiculous, i.e. he supposedly doesn't have the talent (which is BS) and he's hamstrung...

How on earth somebody doesn't understand the sarcasm in my point about coaching has nothing to do with it is utterly befuddling..

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

This entire thread reminds me of a Star Trek episode entitled, "A Piece Of The Action."

Capt. Kirk: The name of the game is called, uh... fizzbin.

Kalo: Fizzbin?

Capt. Kirk: Fizzbin. It's, uh... not too difficult.

Kalo: Mm-hmm.

Capt. Kirk: Each player gets six cards, except for the dealer, er, the player on the dealer's right, who, er, gets seven.

Kalo: On the right?

Capt. Kirk: Yes. The second card is turned up, except on Tuesday.

Kalo: On Tuesday.

Capt. Kirk: Mm-hmm.

Capt. Kirk: [exited] Ooh, look what you got, two jacks. You got a half fizzbin already!

Kalo: Hehe! I need another jack.

Capt. Kirk: No, no. If you got another jack, why, you'd have, er, a sralk.

Kalo: A sralk?

Capt. Kirk: Yes. You'd be disqualified.

Kalo: Oh.

Capt. Kirk: No, what you need now, is either a king and a deuce, except at night, of course, when you'd need a queen and a, and a four.

Kalo: Except at night.

Capt. Kirk: Right. Oh, look at that. You've got another jack!

[Kalo laughs]

Capt. Kirk: How lucky you are! How wonderful for you. Now, if you didn't get another jack, if you'd gotten a king, why, then you'd get another card, except when it's dark, when you'd have to give it back.

Kalo: If it were dark on Tuesday!

My head hurts.....