Mothman wrote:
I agree that he probably believed he had a shot but on that play, I think if he had caught the ball he would have been flattened for a loss. It doesn't matter now anyway.
No big deal on the typo--it's just that I wasn't fully sure what you meant. During that whole drive Percy was really fired up. After his long run he collided w/ a dback pretty hard and I think it really got his competitive juices flowing to the point that he just wanted the ball in his hands. Both he and AD were really fired up at that point and we weren't able to capitalize on that.
He's certainly had his share of blowups but I think part of why the public gives him a pass is because he shows heart while out on the field. The whole trade fiasco was over very quickly and he returned to camp. Had he sat out for an extended period (I think he basically missed 1/2 a practice) maybe more would have been made of it.
In the Seattle game, the diva thing to do would have been to sit on the bench hurt. He was on crutches after the game but he played through the injury. Not only on offense but he was back at kick returner at one point. Good players are passionate. Look at Jared Allen on the sidelines. Should a player act that way to a coach? No, I don't condone that but I think to classify a guy as a "diva" when he's leaving it all out on the field is a bit unfair by Souhan.
S197 wrote:
He's certainly had his share of blowups but I think part of why the public gives him a pass is because he shows heart while out on the field. The whole trade fiasco was over very quickly and he returned to camp. Had he sat out for an extended period (I think he basically missed 1/2 a practice) maybe more would have been made of it.
In the Seattle game, the diva thing to do would have been to sit on the bench hurt. He was on crutches after the game but he played through the injury. Not only on offense but he was back at kick returner at one point. Good players are passionate. Look at Jared Allen on the sidelines. Should a player act that way to a coach? No, I don't condone that but I think to classify a guy as a "diva" when he's leaving it all out on the field is a bit unfair by Souhan.
I agree with this, but I think Souhan's article is pretty insightful. Actually, in the article he essentially sets out to answer why Percy doesn't get classified as a "diva" by fans and media. Percy's desire to win, and willingness to risk bodily harm to do so, earns him major respect. He could dissent in a healthier way, but I think he earns a right to voice his opinion and it should carry some serious weight.
Mothman wrote:Ponder's throw was bad but there was no real opportunity on that play. Had the pass been completed it was almost certainly going to be a loss as two unblocked defenders were coming straight at Harvin. Here it is all in it's ugly glory (with the overthrown ball circled in yellow):
That's a bubble screen, so if that ball is thrown better, Harvin is going to cut inside. The two guys you see unblocked aren't as big an issue, though clearly one of them should have been blocked by the outside WR. Even so, Harvin would cut inside the pulling lineman (Loadholt?), who would pick up the inside guy and the outside guy gets caught up in the traffic. The problem is that even if with those two ruled out (ie assuming Loadholt makes a good block), it's still not going for much. Seahawks have a a LB at the 7 already moving up and a DL getting free of a block in the middle of the field at the 12. I'd guess it would have ended up as a 3-4 yard gain. OTOH, it's Harvin, which means you just never know when he'll break a tackle or juke a guy out of his jock and turn that 3-4 into a TD.
My guess is Harvin is pissed at that point because he sees the space in the middle of the field, figures if he gets inside Loadholt's block, he can take that LB.
Look at Ponder on that play! He's way back on his plant foot and his lead foot is in the air. He's clearly falling backwards as he throws a bubble screen for jimminy christmas.
Demi wrote:
Probably same one who reported the schism two weeks before national media picked it up.
LOL!
By the way, for what it's worth, Judd Zulgad said the Harvin was upset about the playcalling and the the blow up was not about getting Ponder out of the game.
glg wrote:That's a bubble screen, so if that ball is thrown better, Harvin is going to cut inside. The two guys you see unblocked aren't as big an issue, though clearly one of them should have been blocked by the outside WR. Even so, Harvin would cut inside the pulling lineman (Loadholt?), who would pick up the inside guy and the outside guy gets caught up in the traffic. The problem is that even if with those two ruled out (ie assuming Loadholt makes a good block), it's still not going for much. Seahawks have a a LB at the 7 already moving up and a DL getting free of a block in the middle of the field at the 12. I'd guess it would have ended up as a 3-4 yard gain. OTOH, it's Harvin, which means you just never know when he'll break a tackle or juke a guy out of his jock and turn that 3-4 into a TD.
My guess is Harvin is pissed at that point because he sees the space in the middle of the field, figures if he gets inside Loadholt's block, he can take that LB.
I understand what you're saying about the two oncoming defenders in the shot I posted but there's no way Loadholt was going to get there in time to pick up the inside defender and spring Harvin. It looks possible in the still shot but it wasn't going to happen. Here's the play a split second later:
There is a significant difference between having a competitive and fiery personality (go back and watch old NFL films and you'll see those guys blow up when they were frustrated, too!), and being a diva.
Harvin is no diva.
"You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer." - Frank Zappa
Mothman wrote:
I understand what you're saying about the two oncoming defenders in the shot I posted but there's no way Loadholt was going to get there in time to pick up the inside defender and spring Harvin. It looks possible in the still shot but it wasn't going to happen. Here's the play a split second later:
As before, look at Ponder on this play. His lead leg is just coming back and down. He threw off his plant foot while leaning backwards. In fact, in the first image it looks like he's a punter.
As to the likely success of the play if the pass is good, I honestly can't say if Harvin has time to do anything with it. What I can say, though, is that is irrelevant when judging the various components involved. Ponder's sole job here is to deliver the pass. With that failing, we can't judge whether Harvin would have caught it and made a move, or Loadholt makes a block, or the Seattle defense shuts it down either short or even behind the LOS. None of those things can happen without an accurate throw.
VikingLord wrote:
As to the likely success of the play if the pass is good, I honestly can't say if Harvin has time to do anything with it. What I can say, though, is that is irrelevant when judging the various components involved. Ponder's sole job here is to deliver the pass. With that failing, we can't judge whether Harvin would have caught it and made a move, or Loadholt makes a block, or the Seattle defense shuts it down either short or even behind the LOS. None of those things can happen without an accurate throw.
That's just downright nonsense! Haven't you been reading the board lately? Throwing passes that close to the line of scrimmage doesn't require any real skill at all.
Yeah where'd he hear that?
Him and Pelissero getting worse and worse. Guess it gets them access though.
"No question about that" Nope, none at all. Case closed.
