Cliff Avrill: SB 49 ruined Seattle

Cliff Avril: Seahawks started questioning Pete Carroll after Super Bowl interception

Avril said on Dave Dameshek’s podcast that “a lot of guys got turned off” to Carroll when the Super Bowl ended with Russell Wilson throwing a game-losing interception to New England’s Malcolm Butler, rather than the Seahawks calling a handoff to Marshawn Lynch, which Seattle players thought would have given them a game-winning touchdown. Avril said that if the Seahawks had won that Super Bowl, which would have been their second in a row, they probably would have won another one after that, too, because the team would have been more united.

“If we win that Super Bowl I think we would have won another one,” Avril said. “I do think the team would have bought in more to what Coach Carroll was saying, instead of going the opposite way.”

Click to expand...

Carroll already got them a Super Bowl and got them to another one. If you didn't buy into him then, the problem wasn't him it was the players and culture.

lancerman said:

Carroll already got them a Super Bowl and got them to another one. If you didn't buy into him then, the problem wasn't him it was the players and culture.

Click to expand...

I agree. I can’t imagine a mutiny against Belichick after the Butler benching. Then again we got 5 rings

TommyBrady12 said:

I agree. I can’t imagine a mutiny against Belichick after the Butler benching. Then again we got 5 rings

Click to expand...

I knew someone would go there.

We are kidding ourselves if we don't think there are players on this current team who are still in a "WTF" state after the Malcolm issue.

The SEA decline is due to cap issues, aging players, mediocre drafting, injuries, crappy running game and O-line disasters.

I think it also lost a little bit of it's identity. It tried to become a passing team when its DNA is a power football team.

And if they won three in a row, they probably would have won a fourth because that's how it works I guess.

Wouldn't be the first so-called "potential dynasty" that the Pats have derailed.

It's amazing how little defensive players understand offense outside of their own assignments against it on a given play. That was the right call based on clock, TO's remaining, personnel groupings on the field and Lynch's high failure rate (80%) in those circumstances...it was just the wrong result. Wilson should have thrown it away. Belichick showed Carroll & Wilson what they wanted to see and the rest is history. Sometimes the other guy gets it right, that's football.

Football is a game of inches, the SB even more. In 99 out of 100 scenarios we lose that game, that's what is making me go through this last SB loss, because we were this close to lose both the Seattle and Atlanta games and we won so let's call it even as painfull as it was losing to the Eagles.

In the end it's not worth play What if games, it's painfull and it only matters the if scenario that really happened in the game.

maust1013 said:

It's amazing how little defensive players understand offense outside of their own assignments against it on a given play. That was the right call based on clock, TO's remaining, personnel groupings on the field and Lynch's high failure rate (80%) in those circumstances...it was just the wrong result. Wilson should have thrown it away. Belichick showed Carroll & Wilson what they wanted to see and the rest is history. Sometimes the other guy gets it right, that's football.

Click to expand...

The issue was you had a bunch of outspoken players and Lynch was their boy and Russell was the coaches pet so they viewed it as their legacy being tossed away because the coach chose his boy. Which is a terrible mentality to have

Ok, so they stopped listening to him and what did it get them? I think he does not know how stupid it makes the defense sound. This is a guy who was able to get all of you channeling your efforts towards superbowls and you lose one close one and all of a sudden you stop listening to him? Ok, I get it now actually. He is saying the players are quitters.

lancerman said:

The issue was you had a bunch of outspoken players and Lynch was their boy and Russell was the coaches pet so they viewed it as their legacy being tossed away because the coach chose his boy. Which is a terrible mentality to have

Click to expand...

I also subscribe to this notion. If he had said that, I would agree with him and then bash him albeit mildly.
This parallels the Butler's issue in the last super bowl a bit. Listening to Dola and then Brady, BB may have some resentment on his hands and needs to navigate carefully. Some players may decide to just come do their job and collect paychecks because after all what are they really doing this for? The extra effort you always need to win Super Bowls will be hard to get from those who experienced the Butler's situation. This is a kid who did everything the Patriots way and look how he was treated in the end. I hope BB address the team like he did after 4 and 2.

fair catch fryar said:

Wouldn't be the first so-called "potential dynasty" that the Pats have derailed.

Click to expand...

Just ask Ricky Proehl.

robertweathers said:

I knew someone would go there.

We are kidding ourselves if we don't think there are players on this current team who are still in a "WTF" state after the Malcolm issue.

The SEA decline is due to cap issues, aging players, mediocre drafting, injuries, crappy running game and O-line disasters.

I think it also lost a little bit of it's identity. It tried to become a passing team when its DNA is a power football team.

Click to expand...

I'm sure there are some guys who are questioning Bill right now. But questioning a coach and tuning him out altogether are two different things. I can't see this patriots team going in the same direction as Seattle, despite the Butler situation. Bill has a proven track record of winning, Carroll does not. If Carroll had 2 or 3 super bowls before SB 49, then I think it's a different story in Seattle. Seattle players have no respect for Pete.

lancerman said:

The issue was you had a bunch of outspoken players and Lynch was their boy and Russell was the coaches pet so they viewed it as their legacy being tossed away because the coach chose his boy. Which is a terrible mentality to have

Click to expand...

The issue was that team was physically talented but mentally weak. Ironically that initially made Carroll the right coach for them as a young team. His tenure in NY & NE showed he isn't a great coach for a veteran team, win or lose there and they still would have begun unraveling

TommyBrady12 said:

I'm sure there are some guys who are questioning Bill right now. But questioning a coach and tuning him out altogether are two different things. I can't see this patriots team going in the same direction as Seattle, despite the Butler situation. Bill has a proven track record of winning, Carroll does not. If Carroll had 2 or 3 super bowls before SB 49, then I think it's a different story in Seattle. Seattle players have no respect for Pete.

Click to expand...

Agree completely. I think Stinky Pete is a very good coach but his tolerance threshold for insubordination and "not rowing the same way" is higher than Bill's. I think that tends to allow discontent to grow roots.

I was watching Dan Marino, A Football Life the other day and there was a play in which Marino overruled Jimmy Johnson on a play call.

I venture to say if Tom a coach or a defensive player was doing that on a consistent basis as they have lost confidence and trust in BB's judgement and confidence in his leadership they would be taking an Uber out of Foxboro.

The reason Seattle didn't get more rings is evidenced by the lack of resilience that Avril speaks to, without knowing it. If they were a multi-ring team, they would have bounced from that SB, and leadership would have emerged to get them through it.

robertweathers said:

I knew someone would go there.

We are kidding ourselves if we don't think there are players on this current team who are still in a "WTF" state after the Malcolm issue.

Click to expand...

The difference is Belichick won’t allow the “WTF?” culture on his team. Carroll has never really “had his team” the way Belichick does.

Belichick isn’t a cheerleader or players coach. Carroll tries to be both

You’re reference to cap issues also highlights Belichicks skills over Carroll’s

PatriotsReign said:

The difference is Belichick won’t allow the “WTF?” culture on his team. Carroll has never really “had his team” the way Belichick does.

Belichick isn’t a cheerleader or players coach. Carroll tries to be both

You’re reference to cap issues also highlights Belichicks skills over Carroll’s

Click to expand...

Agree. I'm sure there are players that will always wonder what BB was thinking when he benched MB but those lingering sentiments will not cloud the player's execution on the field or be a problem in the locker room.

If they are....they are gone

Sometimes things go your way and sometimes it doesn’t. If you can control every outcome, then sports and life in general becomes meaningless. People who can’t transfer that burden become angry and look for blame. What happens, happens. There are no what ifs. Losers get stuck in what ifs. You can’t change the past. Move on. Win the next one.

I say it is too bad. THAT game has been ovah for a long time.