Instant Classic

[Runscott]

I can see how people feel the Hawks got lucky. I'm even beginning to doubt my own logic, as no one agrees with me.

I wonder if it isn't just the fact that I was at the game, watching all of these plays as they unfolded, entirely from the perspective of a Seahawks fan who wanted a miracle. Just prior to the last Wilson interception, I was thinking: "You have to execute perfectly to win this game." When he threw that interception I DID think it was over, but I still kept thinking "What do they now have to do?"

I always think that way - as long as there is a path to winning, that's what I'm thinking about. So even after the interception, I'm thinking we have to get 3-and-out and then score quick. That's what happened. Now, it was fortunate that McCarthy didn't try for a first down, but not lucky. At that point we had 2:09 left, and a time-out. I'm thinking "Kick it out of the end-zone, get a 3-and-out, then you have about 35 seconds left." It's happened before, and it's do-able. So the onside-kick was NOT a no-brainer. And apparently, Carroll thought it gave Seattle a better chance. A 15% play gives them a better chance? Perhaps he was taking his team's state of mind and physical abilities into consideration, and not thinking about the odds. Perhaps he had run the onside-kick in practice and felt very confident about it? Who knows. But it worked. No one would argue that the following touchdown was lucky, but I get it concerning the 2-point conversion. It was a wild heave toward his receivers in the end-zone;however, he probably was just hoping to get it in the area and his receiver would out-jump/out-fight the defense. Turned out he didn't need to.

Anyway, very interesting discussion - thanks.