What Seahawks Fans Are Saying.....After the game

[Prime Time]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ams-knew-marshawn-lynch-would-get-ball-at-end

Rams 'knew' Marshawn Lynch would get ball at end
By Kevin Patra

A "miskick" highlighted the Seattle Seahawks' topsy-turvy opening week loss to the St. Louis Rams, but Marshawn Lynch getting stuffed short on fourth-and-1 in overtime was the exclamation point.

The parallels between Sunday's situation and the goal-line interception in Super Bowl XLIX were unmistakable.

Not only from an outsiders perspective -- where narratives reign supreme -- but Rams players said they knew that the Seahawkswould run the ball with Lynch on fourth-and-short after the heat coach Pete Carroll and coordinator Darrell Bevell took the past seven months for their decision to throw in the Super Bowl.

"It's fourth down, who (else) are they going to go to?" Michael Brockers said, per the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. "I think they kind of know what happens when you don't give Lynch the ball, so we knew it was going to him."

Brockers led the Rams' charge with Aaron Donald, penetrating deep into the Seahawks backfield to seal the Rams victory.

Throwing would have taken huge cojones from Carroll, which Brockers apparently didn't believe he had.

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=113562

With the vanilla play calling all afternoon, they knew most plays since we only use a small handful of them.
--------
It doesnt matter what he did there.If Lynch gets the 1st everyone says thats what we should have done against the Pats.

Personally I think it should have been a pass since our Oline against the Rams Dline wont win the power game at this point.We were able to get a lot of 4 or 5 yd passes all day against them.
------
That's because most of the game Bevell was looking at the back of the playbook and someone on the Rams sidelines had binoculars!
-------
The only criticism I'd make is running the play out of the read/option shotgun, or any play out of that formation in that situation.

There's a ton of stuff you can do out of a goalline set, and people, like, use the set in short yardage situations for a reason.

Trying to run a read/option on 4th & 1 is like entering a Lamborghini into a tractor pull; the read option preys on utlizing open space, and unless you're going to let your balls hang out and PA out of it and go over the top it's just the wrong formation in that situation (DL crashes down, LB matches with SS help crept down behind while you play single deep with CBs shading in to jam up and cover slants routes).
--------
I think EVERY team knows that in a short yardage situation with the game on the line, outside of Marshawn having a 30 yard day, he's getting the ball.
-------
You guys all off season kicked Bevell in the nuts for NOT handing the ball to Marshawn...............now you're kicking him the nuts FOR handing the ball to Marshawn.

Btw, it was a read option, Russell could have kept it and ran for the first down. If anything, Russell is more to blame than the play call. Obviously handing the ball to Lynch to get a yard is usually a good thing, but if we're handing out blame, let's not leave out Russell.
--------
Not sure keeping the ball would've worked. Long was sat just off right tackle waiting for Wilson.
---------
Rams DE stayed home, Russell would have been eaten alive for a loss of 5. The right read was giving it to Lynch.. and even then, well we saw what happened
---------
This place is out of control

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=113530

Normally I like to come here after a game and try to find some informed opinions on what happened. Right now this place is just non-stop whining because we lost a game that we often struggle with mightily. Last year Wilson threw for 300 and ran for 100 and we lost. Year before we had under 200 yds of offense and barely pulled out a win 14-13. Apparently no one remembers that we always struggle with the Rams. Looking through the forum there are 100 threads of whining. Let me sum up what these should be consolidated under.

Fire Bevell
Pay Kam
Buy an OL
Wilson sucks
It's not Wilson
Trade Graham if we can't use him
Williams sucks

Hopefully these threads clear out all the clutter because I am having a hard time finding anything worth browsing.
---------
It's insufferable. The first three or so weeks are always littered with problems while the teams figure things out.

We lost to a team that consistently plays us close whenever we visit them. We lost one game. Time to move on to the Packers.
---------
Yeah I usually avoid coming here after a loss (I'm here now, obviously). Everyone whining like little babies and exclaiming how to fix the game plan and coach a perfect game. People here overreact a little bit too much for a football game. Especially the first one of the season that we always seem to have problems with, and everyone knows it.

Oh well, at least it's a place to vent! After all, we're venting about the venting.
--------
I find it amusing. Makes me feel more intelligent than I am.
----------
Yeah this place is especially crazy today. I didn't realize the 2015 season was already over because of one game
---------
Golden Retriever puppies are cute
102 Days until Christmas
Wish it was warmer outside
Shock Top Belgium White has a nice taste
Primetime TV shows return starting in a week
The thought of skydiving scares me
Grilled pineapple is amazing
More people should check out .net IRC during NFL games
Its only week 1
I LOVE my HAWKS!!!
---------
Maybe all the late comers to the bandwagon are not used to a team falling flat and having some question marks.
----------
Venting is flat out needed, not just expected

They got out coached all day long, and gave up 34 points. The standard is very high here.
I have zero doubt they still end up winning 10 or 11 games. But nothing wrong with being angry about the way they gave that game away. Which is exactly what they did.
---------
Yeah man this place is crazy. The same yahoos that were predicting 16-0 and saying RW will be MVP and the defense will easily replace Maxwell/Kam and calling out "experts" who have anything less then glowing to say about seattle are the same numskulls who now say this team has 8-8 talent, and we should drop graham, and the coaches are all morons....

People, WE NEVER PLAY WELL against STL IN STL. The last 3 years have all been ugly down there. It's to be expected. Weird stuff happens at 10am in that dome. Just CHILL

The emotional swing next week is going to be epic, should we lose and go 0-2 its doom and gloom city, but if we win, again they're will be people ripping talking heads for talking about a team not named seattle. Good grief.
--------
I want to wear their rib cages as a hat.
--------
http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=113516

Anyone else give less of a crap about this loss than normal?

I was upset but its just week 1...and the rams always do this crap. Watch next week they will lose by 21 points against the Redskins...its what they do.
---------
I've accepted it. St. Louis in St. Louis is always tough. We'll bounce back.
---------
I care more.

I hope they move to LA. I hope that racist garbage pail of a city has seen its last professional season
---------
Going into St. Louis on a 10am game where weird things happen? You expect the ball to sometimes bounce weird and to lose.

I am going to be really really annoyed if we end up worse this year than the 49ers though. Please don't let that happen.
----------
The only thing that is getting to me is that Russell seems to be afraid to throw the ball against the Rams.
---------
On the flip side, props to the Rams and that fierce defense. Those guys are ballers.
---------
Russell is now 0-3 at St. Louis at 10am. So the loss isn't a shocker. It did SUCK, but not unexpected.
--------
We made Foles look like Rodgers that is very worrisome for next week.
--------
I think the Rams will win the division.
---------
Rams played a heck of a game, they deserve the credit, they were the better, more prepared team yesterday.

It's not that often that you can say that, but it was clear the Hawks were outcoached.

 

[…..]

I think the Rams will win the division.

:eek:

 

[DCH]

Grilled pineapple is amazing

Hell yes it is. Give this Seahawks fan some props. Unless he's grilling with gas. Then just whack him with a propane tank.

 

[RamzFanz]

We look like an 8-10 win team, with our schedule, this year. I'm ready to settle for a rebuilding year. I'm not saying the sky is falling, just trying to set my mind up for a possible reality….

…which means I'm officially [relatively] emotionally detached until I see evidence that we can compete for a championship. Hopefully, I can be rational going forward with this mindset. I hope I'm wrong.

Annnnnnnnnnd the bandwagon is emptying! ONE LOSS! "emotionally detached" after ONE LOSS! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaHAHAHAHA!

 

[DaveFan'51]

I was upset but its just week 1...and the rams always do this crap. Watch next week they will lose by 21 points against the Redskins...its what they do.

YAH! RIGHT! HaHaHaHa

Keep Think that way! Your going to be " Sleepless in Seattle!" The Night before the Rams come to Town and you know it!!

 

[lordbannon]

I love how they were raving about how Clark was going to kill us, and then after the fact everyone is wondering whether he even played. I just checked the snap counts for SEA, and he was in for 72 defensive snaps without making an appearance in the box score.

 

[blue4]

A racist city? Gee thanks Ferguson.

 

[LACHAMP46]

http://www.fieldgulls.com/football-...f-fisher?_ga=1.165125623.935427610.1441726110

• 
  Seahawks lose to Rams: A look at what St. Louis thinks of Seattle's passing game
  By jacobstevens
  
  @jacobstevens on Sep 14, 2015, 10:17a 176 176
  
  
  
  
  Jeff Curry-USA TODAY Sports
  
  
  This article is not a good news article. It's not a doomsday article. It's not about the story of the game. The story was being guest to a team built to play Seattle tough, where sloppy play for both teams kept the result in question until the end.
  
  This is about the defensive game plan the Rams used against Seattle. It's not about the execution of the game plan, but the implications it has on Seattle. The very fact that St. Louis took this approach tells us things about Seattle. And although nothing is condemning, in that nothing is chronic or unfixable, it doesn't say nice things about the Seattle Seahawks.
  
  St. Louis played remarkably soft coverage against the receivers. I won't show you the plays where the Rams simply played very soft coverage, of which there were two dozen.
  
  I'm only going to show you the plays where one or more receivers were left completely uncovered in the short zones.
  
  
  
  
  
  These are plays where all six underneath zones are covered. They lined up with a cover 2 look but one safety would move up to the top of an uncovered receiver's route, 12 yards deep. The game started out this way, it includes Seattle's first two plays.
  
  Jimmy Graham's presence did not warrant a change in these coverages:
  
  
  
  
  
  Bringing one safety up to cover the 6th underneath zone left one guy deep. The Rams almost never left base personnel, and the two safeties and two corners still shared quarters deep coverage. Three defenders owning both underneath and deep could spell trouble, but two Seattle's receivers would need to first beat the underneath zone, at up to 15 yards depth, before they could take advantage of the vertical burden.
  
  
  
  
  
  Trips sets did not dissuade them. 6-underneath zones were still all covered, and the threat of a screen for some cheap short yardage pickups was ignored.
  
  
  
  
  
  The 4th one here isn't a true trips set. But it was a very creative zone changeup. Two linebackers feign pressure, then drop, which is not all that exotic, but James Laurinaitis will drop more diagonally toward the strong-side set than usual, while the safety switches with him to take middle field.
  
  The free safety mostly stayed 16 yards back from the LOS. You can see both safeties here, which could morph into a true cover 2 shell or a cover 1 robber easily. Marshawn Lynch and read-option did not compel the Rams to add another body to the box. Nor did Jimmy Graham, or even Graham and Luke Willson together.
  
  
  
  
  
  The linebackers mostly tended to drop first and come up for run support second, which seems counter-intuitive for defending a running team like Seattle. There seemed to be some exploitable open field on the ground because of this, although Lynch and Russell Wilson combined for barely 100 yards total. The Rams trusted their defensive line.
  
  That was also the first play I've shown you without an uncovered receiver in the first 10 yards. It may seem exaggerated. May seem the Rams just played a little off coverage because they were scared of Seattle's potential for a deep strike. But they genuinely disregarded the short passes.
  
  
  
  
  
  Like, really disregarded.
  
  
  
  
  
  That's Jimmy Graham. It's 3rd & 4.
  
  There is a zone blitz happening here, where an LB is stunting while a DT is making a late drop. The safety over the slot is theoretically in position for any pass that comes his way, whether to Graham or Lockett. That St. Louis didn't deviate from their base personnel, but were comfortable using their safeties and linebackers against anyone, no matter who might enter the zone, was surprising to me. Graham and Lynch pose some real formidable mismatches.
  
  This might shine a bad reflection on Seattle's strong aversion to turnovers. The cost of such strong aversion may be that mismatches aren't exploitable. One-on-ones were available all over the place, all day, and Graham slipped out on a route for most of Seattle's snaps. A mismatch and a one-on-one is the kind of advantageous potential that some teams' entire offenses are predicated on. Such as Asshole Face's. His primary tactic was mismatch creation before Jimmy even came to town. But Seattle didn't take shots on the one-on-one mismatches that surfaced.
  
  This one's telling. It's 3rd & 6.
  
  
  
  
  
  3rd & 6 is the threshold for many coaches, especially the more traditionalist ones, for a green light for calling a blitz. Pittsburgh hated 3rd & 5. Too close to call the extra pressure. Now that Keith Butler has replaced Dick LeBeau I don't know if that's still true, or how much it's still true in the league today. But the 6-man pressure on 3rd & 6 shouldn't surprise anyone, and it's not the telling part. Actually that Gregg Williams called such pervasive 2-deep 5-underneath zone is surprising, as we didn't see a lot of blitzing. But this was one.
  
  Anyway what's telling is it's 3rd & 6, Seattle went empty, and St. Louis drops one LB and has 4 underneath zone defenders. That's 4 guys for 5 receivers. And you can see those defenders camped out at the 1st down m-- well, no, actually you can't, because they're playing 3 yards deeper, so we can't use that announcer cliche.
  
  It's at this point that we should realize the Rams didn't care about giving up short passes, even to Graham one-on-one in a mismatch. It may seem the Rams were very concerned with the deep passing game.
  
  Except there was no deep passing game. Seattle thew no deep strikes. Part of the explanation is that the Rams defended deep so well, sure. But also St. Louis put a safety over the top of otherwise-uncovered routes, forsaking the short stuff. Which meant that safety, and the corner on the same side of the field, were vulnerable to double-moves. In ultra-soft quarters coverage, there was no second-level help behind them.
  
  And also because Seattle just did not even attack deep. At all.
  
  
  
  
  
  That's not very encouraging. All 4-yard routes on 1st and 17. Here we have two receivers uncovered. It's hard to see, but there is a Ram corner over Lynch. The Fox score graphic is covering him. Jermaine Kearse is uncovered next to him. This is zone defense so there won't be much YAC unless there's a mistake, but sometimes you just take what you can get. At the bottom is Tyler Lockett. His DB is 10 yards off and Ty's already made his break.
  
  NFL DBs can break on a pass really fast. 10 yards doesn't produce the kind of YAC you might expect. But this is as open as you could ever hope for. A catch-in-stride pass could do some real, real damage here, especially with a dangerous playmaker like Lockett. But this was a curl so I wouldn't expect much if he got the ball here.
  
  So, not very encouraging. Of course the Rams were playing so deep maybe you just want to attack underneath all day.
  
  This play resulted in a sack.
  
  It wasn't a bad sack. When you reach midfield and then get backed up twice due to penalties, when there's 17 yards to go, you might not want to zip it to the first short route that breaks open, unless pressure is coming and there's no where else. But if you have time to wait to see if the 12 yard routes will break open, it's good to wait when you can. This is a strong tendency Russell Wilson has. He loves attacking deep, responsibly, when he can.
  
  But there are no 12-yard routes here. This is just one play, so I wouldn't get too worked up. But it modestly conflicts with his tendency to try to go deep if he has time. He had time. But this was all he got: 4-yard routes. So he hesitated, which he often does when his first read is open but short and he still has time.
  
  The hesitation is why this was a sack. So it was a bad sack, actually. I don't think Wilson's tendency is bad, but it might be a problem that he's not always able to situationally break the tendency when it's warranted.
  
  
  
  
  
  There were 6 sacks. You probably knew that. 3 weren't bad. OK they were all bad. But 3 weren't due to bad play from Wilson. This is another one. Wilson reads Fred Jackson until he makes his break, then tries to scramble through the hole between Gary Gilliam and JR Sweezy.
  
  The protection was good. The receivers run 12-yard routes, which is nice because almost everything else was shorter.
  
  
  
  
  
  These are the three strong-side receivers on the play. The free safety was preoccupied with Graham, in this case. Kearse was breaking open and was waving his arm to Wilson, but Wilson didn't read that side of the field until he attempted his scramble, and got sacked before he could do anything.
  
  QBs rarely read all 5 routes. Many offenses have the QB eliminate 2 routes in pre-snap. They tend to eliminate 2 contiguous routes, so he can progress through the remaining three easier. A lot of plays are built around this three-read progression, often building them into a triangle.
  
  So not reaching the Kearse progression isn't necessarily a problem. On this play, Wilson looked at Tyler Lockett, read the Fred Jackson check down, and decided checking down wasn't worth it. That's too bad.
  
  There's a case to be made that using his legs to frustrate defenses can get them to shift their coverages, and ultimately open up more things later in the game. But 30 seconds left before the half, trailing, in the orange zone, doesn't seem like a good time to sacrifice plays to set up opportunities later. This was a play left on the field.
  
  Here is the third bad sack (bad meaning, Russell Wilson bad (but not meaning, "Our quarterback's a bad man" as Michael Robinson said)).
  
  
  
  
  
  Not only do we have another open receiver that Wilson directly read as open, but hesitated, perhaps considering trying for something deeper since he seemed to have enough protection for the time being (a time that would instantly cease), but we also have one of the better zone beaters Seattle ran today. With the Rams sitting in near-constant unilateral underneath zones, even over trips sets, Doug Baldwin breaking open underneath here is about the best thing you could hope for, and it's exactly what the play was intended to do.
  
  I'm not sure what caused Wilson to not take this throw. My best guess and defense for him is he might have thought he could wait for a split second longer to see if something deep and better might open up. The problem with that is the time-sensitivity for this route. Baldwin's already made his break, so the pass is already late at this snapshot. If Wilson threw here, Baldwin could make the catch. He could still have some room in front of him -- he's just reached the numbers -- to try to cut upfield a bit. The other two receivers could also begin blocking for him, if they recognize a pass to Baldwin occurred.
  
  This was already late, but at least those things could happen. If Wilson took this throw a half-second later, still beating the pressure by Aaron Donald on the edge at the top, the receivers would have run past the defenders they could block. The defenders would be breaking on Baldwin, and Doug would be left with no space in front of him to make any real play at shaking the DBs.
  
  It's also 3rd down. Seattle had drives that extended to STL35, STL39, STL7, STL9, and STL17, and yielded 9 points. They did also score a TD & 2-pt conversion on a 63-yard drive, but that's too many red zone and orange zone problems. This sack here wasn't one of them; this was in Seattle territory. And they converted 42% of 3rd downs, which is actually not bad. But St. Louis converted 54% so that's a bummer.
  
  
  
  
  
  Here's Lynch and Graham on one side of the field together. I expected putting this pair on one side would dictate coverages quite a bit and get defenses in position for Seattle to do what they wanted on the other side. But we just have a linebacker dropping into underneath coverage. There are a number of established ways to attack 2-deep 5-underneath. Two go hand-in-hand: spread horizontally to stretch the safeties horizontally. That should open up room to turn some TE curls into seam-rippers. Seattle didn't try that today.
  
  The complimentary piece to that is to stretch the flat vertically. Here we see Seattle's in position to do that. We have zone coverage, and Graham's able to drive the coverage back before breaking outward, himself, and that should leave some extra room for Lynch. Repeated success in the flat is a good way to frustrate the underneath defenders to cheat a little bit, maybe opening up something deep. The Rams were steadfast in their 2-deep 5-underneath zone, today, so it was going to be hard to coax them out of it.
  
  Another good zone beater is a corner route, especially one from the slot or TE. This LB's in the right spot for a good corner break, but if Graham broke his route off a little shallower -- something that's often inadvisable and gets QBs to throw picks -- he could break away from his zone defender, have plenty of space to the sideline, and have a great angle that would be hell for the safety.
  
  But Seattle didn't employ the established ways to beat the coverage that St. Louis refused to deviate from. Even their beloved zone floods were not in fashion today. I don't know why.
  
  
  
  
  
  I have screenshots for 33 different plays exhibiting the dramatic soft zone the Rams played today, where at least one receiver was fully uncovered in the first 10 yards. Showing them all would be overkill. What we've seen, is not so much that St. Louis was playing prevent defense and worried about Seattle's deep attack. Rather, what we've seen is a disregard for Seattle's short passing game.
  
  I think the Rams see Wilson disregard the short passing game.
  
  I think they see him check down a little too late, skip open receivers and scramble instead. And above all I think they see him hesitate, or not process fast enough, and not take what's there, so they felt there was no threat to Seattle killing them underneath, the way New England or Denver might. And the aversion to turnovers keeps the deeper stuff from being too much of a threat.
  
  I think the Rams figured, the one place on the field they really needed to concern themselves was intermediate. And they figured they could do it without regard for what super star athlete might line up where.
  
  That surprises me, and it's certainly a bad reflection on Seattle's passing game. I don't think the passing game is doomed. No other defensive line should be as good as St. Louis at home. Seattle's not in midseason form yet. That's unfortunate, but I still think they can get there.
  
  One last note, this one about the defense. First, Bobby Wagner really had a poor game. I don't know why. There's definitely a lot of blame to spread around for this game, but that's not really important, Bobby's game just really stood out and I didn't know where else to mention it. But going back to that 3rd & 6 threshold a lot of teams have for blitzing, I just wanted to cut Dion Bailey some slack here and suggest that Kris Richard's blitzing ways we saw in the preseason isn't doing itself any favors.
  
  
  
  
  
  St. Louis uses a 3 & 1 formation here, which is known for putting single-high safeties in a bind. That's why Seattle likes it. Earl Thomas tries to play this one with integrity, I mean I would understand if he cheated toward the 3 receivers a little bit because Lance Kendricks is a TE. Bailey's step-kick isn't incredible, he could have put himself in better position to avoid the slip. But it was just a slip. He had to defend both the underneath 1st down attempt, and deep, with Thomas single-high. A flat defender would have served Bailey well, here, made his job easier. But the flat defenders were all called to pressure.
  
  Not thrilled with that one.
  

 

[Merlin]

The real surprise is how well the Rams OL picked up their guys in pass pro. They did far better against a great defense than I expected, I'd say they played "inspired" to be honest. Wasn't perfect, but it wasn't the train wreck I expected.

But anyway many of those Seahawks fans are idiots. Russell Wilson is a great player and if they can't see that they just don't know the game. Their defense struggled, yes, but I'll bet they play great ball the rest of the way. Too many excellent players on that defense to panic unless you're a bandwagon jumpin moron fan.

There is a chance they underestimated Cigs and Foles, not to mention the young OL. I think we see a better and more focused Shehawks team in their house. Of course hopefully by then the Rams offense will be better with Gurley killin it from the backfield. So we'll see.

It's a shame in a way that winning creates such a dumb fan base though. I almost feel sorry for them. Almost.

 

[jap]

The real surprise is how well the Rams OL picked up their guys in pass pro. They did far better against a great defense than I expected, I'd say they played "inspired" to be honest. Wasn't perfect, but it wasn't the train wreck I expected.

Well, to be sure, they do practice against a pretty good defense themselves.

 

[Merlin]

Well, to be sure, they do practice against a pretty good defense themselves.

Indeed brother. But I was still terrified lol.

 

[jap]

Indeed brother. But I was still terrified lol.

You may recall our DL guys were giving the rookie OL kids their props this pre-season. I don't think our DLers were being overly generous: they meant it when they said these kids were going to be good.

 

[JUMAVA68]

:eek:

A Seattle fan that actually gets it amazing they do exist

 

[Mackeyser]

That was a really nice breakdown with pics and everything.

This week we basically face the opposite type of running team. Instead of the running team that play actions to intermediate/long shots, Washington runs to set up checkdowns/screens/short passes. The deep ball is pretty rare with Cousins and his deep threat is out.

 

[Mojo Ram]

My eye test says that the Seahawks OLine wasn't as awful as everyone says they were yesterday. They were simply outclassed by the best DLine in the NFL.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Oh and guess who became the richest ROD cash member overnight by going all-in on the Rams straight up...
1. Mojo Ram
$104,874
2. -X-
$91,135
3. Prime Time
$85,521
4. DaveFan'51
$82,433
5. RamFan503
$75,564

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I think his playcalling is a little off sometimes but relying on an aging RB and a QB who can't throw out of the pocket because he's 5'2 looks a little silly when there's no investment on the OL.

How can he call a good game when his QBs so limited to where he can throw? The Rams were giving him the middle to short middle where he cannot see over the line to throw too. That takes a lot of options away when your QB cant see.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I love how they were raving about how Clark was going to kill us, and then after the fact everyone is wondering whether he even played. I just checked the snap counts for SEA, and he was in for 72 defensive snaps without making an appearance in the box score.

Yep they were talking like Frank Clark was going to tear us a new one. I remember him at Michigan. He was a decent DE but not the monster that you would expect. He isn't that great.

Never put a lot of stock into Preseason. Some guys are trying real hard, others are barely trying.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I don't have a direct quote but I recall reading the prognosis of one former RoD member and it went something like this.

The Rams will have no answer for Lockett. They will have no answer for Graham. And Frank Clark will be running free and hitting Foles yadda yadda yadda.

Anyway that was his normal gloom and doom, and as usual it was all wrong.