Play-by-play Passing game review | Page 4

dj43 · 2016-09-26T12:41:41-07:00

Here are the passing plays from yesterday. I've added a couple of related plays as well that demonstrate some issues. I will leave my commentary until the end. Yard marker - down/distance - result Own 25 - 1/10 - Gabbert scrambles right for 1 yard following obvious mix up in the backfield where Hyde split out left and Gabbert faked RO to no one. Someone was on the wrong play. Gabbert should have realized Hyde was not there and made a correction. ??? O 26 - 2/9 - 2 yard completion to McDonald in right flat. Good throw. Patton came open for about 7 yard gain just as Gabbert released the ball to McDonald. All receivers ran routes short of the Line to Gain. O 28 - 2/7 - 5 yard completion to Kerley who flattened his route short of the LTG though he had room to continue angle. Bad route. No one else open. ___ O34 - 1/10 - 12 yard completion to Smith on slant route. Ball was low causing Smith to drop to his knees to make the catch. Higher ball might have allowed 3-5 YAC. Thomas was closing quickly. O45 - 1/10 - 2 yd completion to McDonald on right. Streater runs an up to create space and is covered. All other routes are short of LTG. O49 - 3/4 - incomplete to Kerley short of LTG. Smith flashed open for sufficient yardage for 1st just as Gabbert released to Kerley. Would have been a tight window but not difficult pass to throw. ____ following Graham fumble S29 - 1/10 - 18 yard completion to Celek over the middle. Good route. Good throw. More aggressive route patterns by all. ?? - 3/4 - Complete to Draughn in flat who ran his route short of the LTG. No one else open on TV screen. ___ O25 - 2/4 - 6 yard completion to Celek. All others covered well. O39 - 2/8 - 17 yard completion to Kerley on left sideline. Good route. Good throw. SS47 - 3/17 - 12 yard completion to Smith. Seattle covered all the deep routes. Seattle "gave" SF the shorter completion and made the tackle short of LTG. ___ O25 - 2/4 - Incomplete swing pass to Draughn in right flat. Ball hit him in helmet as he looked back too late to make catch. Perfect pass would have been catchable but Seattle had it well defended. Would not have gained positive yardage. ___ O35 - 1/10 - Incomplete to Patton on left sideline as Shead forced Patton to sideline on ball thrown 2 yards inside. 50/50 ball that Patton was not strong enough to get to. Patton really wasn't open but at least is was something deeper down the field than most of previous attempts. O39 - 3/5 - Completion to Celek for 3 yards. Looked like a "give up" pattern. None of receivers ran routes beyond the LTG and Seattle had them all covered. ___ O47 - 3/4 - Incomplete intended for Patton. Gabbert under immediate pressure from Wright who hits him just as he releases. All 4 receivers were gathered along the LTG made it easy for Seattle to defend. Head scratcher play design. ___ O27 - 2/8 - Incomplete intended for Celek 15 yards up the field. Chancellor ran the route better than Celek and easily knocked it down. Patton and Kerley almost collided just off the LOS on what appeared to be a rub route. Kerley almost fell down trying to avoid contact with Patton. Very poor execution. O27 - 3/8 - Patton fails to hold very catchable ball that winds up in Wagner's hands for pick. Another pattern with most running short patterns. Streater and Smith are stacked on right and both covered easily by Seattle. ___ O25 - 1/10 - Gabbert leaves pocket early and rolls right, then has to throw it away. No one was open that was visible on screen. O25 - 2/10 - No one open. Gabbert scrambles for 4 yds. O29 - 3/6 - Immediate A gap pressure forces Gabbert to throw away. Streater was knocked off slant route at LOS destroying any hope for what appeared to be the primary read. ___ O46 - 3/3 - Complete to Smith for 17. Good route. Good throw. S17 - 3/4 - Incomplete as Gabbert throws to corner but Kerley runs up. Patton almost knocked down at LOS by Seattle DB. ___ S47 - 1/10 - Incomplete intended for Patton on left sideline. It appeared Gabbert was attempting back shoulder throw while Patton continued deeper. Ugly! S47 - 2/10 - complete to Patton on curl route where he comes back for 9 yard gain. S33 - 1/10 - 17 yard catch and run to Streater. S9 - 2/9 - complete to Hyde for 2 yards in left flat. COMMENTS: Seattle's secondary has made a lot of teams look bad for years, still the lack of aggressiveness of pass play calls is puzzling. Numerous times there did not appear to be any attempt to get receivers open beyond the LTG. I don't know if that is Kelly not trusting the players or attempting to set up other plays or something else. It just never looked like there was any commitment to attacking football. For the most part, the OL continues to provide good pass protection, hence, the lack of any significant attempts to send receivers down the field is frustrating. Can't blame it on the OL (Isn't that a pleasant change from last year?) Finally, we all knew before the season started that WR and QB were the weakest areas of the team, and this game did nothing to dispel that reality. Each side took turns in making the other side look bad. Baalke appeared to recognize the WR issue in the off-season with the signing of Eric Rogers to provide size and quality, but he went down with an ACL. Simpson had the size but not the hands. Ellington was considered an important cog but he is hurt. (In hindsight I fault Baalke for not re-signing Anquan Boldin as he would have been just the guy to do battle with Chancellor but we didn't know Rogers, Simpson AND Ellington would go down.) We now are left with Patton, who was likely the #3/4 guy had everyone else stayed healthy, along with Smith, something of a one trick pony, and two cast off guys (Kerley & Streater) who are now seeing significant reps. That reality does not leave Kelly and the QB much to work with. Baalke may be working the waiver wires but bringing in another new WR or two is not the answer. If there were any quality players out there other teams would not be letting them go. The best we can hope for is better chemistry and understanding between WRs and QB as the weeks go by. It is what it is. As to Gabbert, as I said above, each side of the WR/QB tandem is taking turns making the other seem worse. That was the case again yesterday. Yes, a pin point passer like Brady might have completed another 4 or 5 passes yesterday but we don't have Brady and that is who it would have taken on some throws yesterday. Gabbert didn't have any really horrible passes yesterday nor did he have anything that really made you stand up and cheer. He was just a little off target on some throws that should have been completions or been more productive as to YAC on others. Once again he looked timid at times when I wanted to see him just throw it down the field, however, as I looked closer, Seattle wasn't giving any easy targets. A long throw down the field did not appear to accomplish anything more than just a desperate effort to show Gabbert had enough arm to do so. The lack of quality receivers may be forcing him to play more timid than we would like. Whatever the case, it sucks. The QB always gets more blame and more credit and that is the case here. Sometimes it was the QB, others the WR and all the while Seattle was making it difficult for both. I also have to question the coaching and play calls. When I see receivers bumping into each other or having to swerve to avoid contacting one another on basic routes, I have to scratch my head. It it hard to accept that guys that have played 3-4 years are still not executing routes any better. Are these guys just that dense or are they not being coached up well? I don't know the answer but the results show up on the field. Also, the number of plays in which there were no receivers running any routes deeper than 10 yards is crazy. Seattle's LBs have great speed and cover ability and their DBs are also good, hence, when you back all those guys into such a small area, there is no chance of any YAC. Just too much vanilla yesterday. If the WR and QB play is contributing to each other's lack of effectiveness, many of the route calls yesterday were also contributory. This was a pretty pathetic example of NFL offense. When the all22 film comes out we may see there were more opportunities than what I have listed above, however, too much of the time all the receivers were still on the screen. It was like playing football in a phone booth. No chance.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:03 PM

#46

Dsoto87
Veteran
Posts: 6,328

Thl is legit and I don't think a single soul here believes that you put any bias into your breakdowns.

One of the few guys who's opinions I fully trust.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:05 PM

#47

northoakland510
Veteran
Posts: 2,513

I think what bothers me most is we have known for years we needed receivers with size and Baalke never made it a priority.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:05 PM

#48

TheWooLick
Veteran
Posts: 44,707

Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
He turned himself around to get the pass, that ball should lead him and he should be in a position to see the field and keep running as he catches it.
There was no chance of YAC because it was a poorly executed pass that should have been easy.

Thanks for this thread. I agree on that play there was nothing Gabbert or Vance could do for RAC. Chancellor was playing off coverage which is the best way to attack a flat route. Watch the throw, take the proper angle, smash the WR. On a route like that, the defender needs to be in a trail position for RAC to take place.

Regardless of result, do you think the ball was thrown where it should be or was it a poor throw? Even with a little more space there would have been little a receiver could have done with that pass IMO.

I hope we are talking about the same play. I am referring to Gabbert's first pass of the game. It was Double Slants to his left, Curl-Flat (I think) to his right. SEA is in man coverage.
Double Slants can beat man coverage. Curl-Flat is a zone buster.
Two things to take note of. Notice the yellow LB lined up out wide with Hyde. This screams man coverage. Chancellor is off coverage against Vance. Any flat route that is being defended by a safety that is able to attack downhill has no chance of working unless the safety misses the tackle.

Had Gabbert looked to Double Slants, he would see that orange LB defeats the inside slant. The other slant, can't tell who, beats his man off the LoS and that should/would have been the target.

My main point, and I think the basis of this string of quotes, is that Gabbert could have placed this throw perfectly one foot in front of the numbers and it would not have mattered because it was the incorrect read. The correct read is to the Double Slants, not the Curl-Flat which is what Gabbert targeted. This is a case of incorrect read not bad ball location to the target.

I was thinking of one that was on the far side of the field. Sorry for the confusion. That pass was definitely more of a bad decision rather than a poor throw.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:08 PM

#49

dj43
Moderator
Posts: 38,358

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
He turned himself around to get the pass, that ball should lead him and he should be in a position to see the field and keep running as he catches it.
There was no chance of YAC because it was a poorly executed pass that should have been easy.

Thanks for this thread. I agree on that play there was nothing Gabbert or Vance could do for RAC. Chancellor was playing off coverage which is the best way to attack a flat route. Watch the throw, take the proper angle, smash the WR. On a route like that, the defender needs to be in a trail position for RAC to take place.

Regardless of result, do you think the ball was thrown where it should be or was it a poor throw? Even with a little more space there would have been little a receiver could have done with that pass IMO.

I hope we are talking about the same play. I am referring to Gabbert's first pass of the game. It was Double Slants to his left, Curl-Flat (I think) to his right. SEA is in man coverage.
Double Slants can beat man coverage. Curl-Flat is a zone buster.
Two things to take note of. Notice the yellow LB lined up out wide with Hyde. This screams man coverage. Chancellor is off coverage against Vance. Any flat route that is being defended by a safety that is able to attack downhill has no chance of working unless the safety misses the tackle.

Had Gabbert looked to Double Slants, he would see that orange LB defeats the inside slant. The other slant, can't tell who, beats his man off the LoS and that should/would have been the target.

My main point, and I think the basis of this string of quotes, is that Gabbert could have placed this throw perfectly one foot in front of the numbers and it would not have mattered because it was the incorrect read. The correct read is to the Double Slants, not the Curl-Flat which is what Gabbert targeted. This is a case of incorrect read not bad ball location to the target.

Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:08 PM

#50

Afrikan
Veteran
Posts: 23,669

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by audick:
What is the fundamental problem? I can't wait to see the all-22 because it looks to me like our weak receivers were blanketed the whole game. This is due to lousy personnel and atrocious play-calling. Throw in the fact that Gabbert is scattershot and it's a perfect storm. Why does anyone care about putting Kap in? Watch him look just as bad, or worse. Neither quarterback is accurate, so who cares?

Lol. Pretty much.

you've been loling and LMAO alot regarding Kaepernick... you used to be one of the most ra ra 9er fans on here.

it's going to be so weird to see you celebrating if/when Kaepernick actually plays well under Kelly.

I might be doing some loling myself.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:10 PM

#51

northoakland510
Veteran
Posts: 2,513

Originally posted by thl408:
I hope we are talking about the same play. I am referring to Gabbert's first pass of the game. It was Double Slants to his left, Curl-Flat (I think) to his right. SEA is in man coverage.
Double Slants can beat man coverage. Curl-Flat is a zone buster.
Two things to take note of. Notice the yellow LB lined up out wide with Hyde. This screams man coverage. Chancellor is off coverage against Vance. Any flat route that is being defended by a safety that is able to attack downhill has no chance of working unless the safety misses the tackle.

Had Gabbert looked to Double Slants, he would see that orange LB defeats the inside slant. The other slant, can't tell who, beats his man off the LoS and that should/would have been the target.

My main point, and I think the basis of this string of quotes, is that Gabbert could have placed this throw perfectly one foot in front of the numbers and it would not have mattered because it was the incorrect read. The correct read is to the Double Slants, not the Curl-Flat which is what Gabbert targeted. This is a case of incorrect read not bad ball location to the target.

Thl is that one of the quick hitter plays where the pass has to come out that quick? There wasn't much pressure should he had waited a little longer?

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:12 PM

#52

jcs
Veteran
Posts: 39,887

Originally posted by dj43:
Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

The lack of passing game falls on three groups in order. QB, Coaching, WR's. They are all bad at this point. It's crazy to look at last seasons games and realize that Geep got more out of the offense with a worse Oline than Chip has with his College level system.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:15 PM

#53

jrouter4949
Veteran
Posts: 2,738

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I rarely saw a ball that I thought was put int he right spot. Just because a pass is caught it doesn't mean it was a good pass. He needs to put the ball in a place that gives the receivers a better shot at YAC. He put his receivers in poor position on catches a lot yesterday.

What did you think of the WR play?

It is also the case that if the WR is not running the route the QB anticipates, the ball will not appear to be in the best spot.

I don't think the WRs are great but they are not the problem with Gabbert's accuracy. Take that second pass of the day, was that one that was thrown short of Vance that he had to turn back for? He had no chance of making anything of that throw.
Gabbert is not delivering the ball accurately, that is almost all on him.
Are we talking about the same play?

I listened to the first half on the radio with Tim Ryan commenting. He is always on the critical side and he called it a good throw. When I got home I watched the entire game, then watched it again for the summary above, and then just looked at that specific play again after reading your comment. Yes, McD twisted his body back a bit but the ball was there on time, and, Chancellor knocked him out of bounds as soon as he turned back. There was NO CHANCE, NONE whatsoever to make any YAC on that play. It appeared to be a design play to spread the Seahawk defense for upcoming plays.

He turned himself around to get the pass, that ball should lead him and he should be in a position to see the field and keep running as he catches it.
There was no chance of YAC because it was a poorly executed pass that should have been easy.

If that is the way you see it, then I have nothing further.

DJ this guy is being a prick,and He has nothing to add to a very well article you have written,I never once read ANYTHING you have written to show your dislike for Kap....geeesh shaking my head, and yes I think it is time to see what Kap can do.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:16 PM

#54

NCommand
Hall of Fame
Posts: 123,365

Originally posted by northoakland510:
I appreciate the time you put into breaking the offense down. I would like to know why are we not running any motion to get a favorable match up. We can only assume, but Chip is calling plays to the strength of the quarterback. I do not think Chip or Gabbert trust Gabbert to push the ball down the field.

One thing Bellichek did with his PS QB was use his mobility (move the pocket even though they have a quality OL), ran fly sweeps, reverses, pitch outs, RO's, rub routs, etc. Then as he got more confidence, opened up the playbook a bit. Gabbert is almost like a rookie who you need to scheme success and build him up and get him into a rhythm.

[ Edited by NCommand on Sep 26, 2016 at 3:17 PM ]

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:19 PM

#55

TheWooLick
Veteran
Posts: 44,707

Originally posted by jrouter4949:
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I rarely saw a ball that I thought was put int he right spot. Just because a pass is caught it doesn't mean it was a good pass. He needs to put the ball in a place that gives the receivers a better shot at YAC. He put his receivers in poor position on catches a lot yesterday.

What did you think of the WR play?

It is also the case that if the WR is not running the route the QB anticipates, the ball will not appear to be in the best spot.

I don't think the WRs are great but they are not the problem with Gabbert's accuracy. Take that second pass of the day, was that one that was thrown short of Vance that he had to turn back for? He had no chance of making anything of that throw.
Gabbert is not delivering the ball accurately, that is almost all on him.
Are we talking about the same play?

I listened to the first half on the radio with Tim Ryan commenting. He is always on the critical side and he called it a good throw. When I got home I watched the entire game, then watched it again for the summary above, and then just looked at that specific play again after reading your comment. Yes, McD twisted his body back a bit but the ball was there on time, and, Chancellor knocked him out of bounds as soon as he turned back. There was NO CHANCE, NONE whatsoever to make any YAC on that play. It appeared to be a design play to spread the Seahawk defense for upcoming plays.

He turned himself around to get the pass, that ball should lead him and he should be in a position to see the field and keep running as he catches it.
There was no chance of YAC because it was a poorly executed pass that should have been easy.

If that is the way you see it, then I have nothing further.

DJ this guy is being a prick,and He has nothing to add to a very well article you have written,I never once read ANYTHING you have written to show your dislike for Kap....geeesh shaking my head, and yes I think it is time to see what Kap can do.

I added that I felt like Gabbert was inaccurate on many of his throws including the completions.

A week or two ago dj43 said that his favorite GIF was the one of Kaepernick from last year when he didn't see Smith waving his arms. He also crapped on Kaepernick after yesterday's game int his very thread. Some sort of FTFY dig on Kaepernick's game last year against the Cardinals. I like dj43's posts but he is definitely biased against Kap.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:20 PM

#56

dj43
Moderator
Posts: 38,358

Originally posted by Afrikan:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Bummer for the CK fans too: "Chip Kelly on Kaepernick: "I don't think he's ready to go full-time"

You are not a CK fan?
I am a Niner fan which means I am also a CK fan, it is a shame you are not.

Could you please post Gabbert's completion percentage? All I have is the one that shows up in the box score which you think is not real.

Your problem is you are so QB focused you don't appear to recognize any other component of the game.

Do you have any comment on the design and sequencing of the pass plays that Kelly?Modkins called? Do you disagree with my observation that the majority of the play calls were designed to gain 10 yards or less?

Your problem is that you dislike Kaepernick so much that you will do anything to make excuses for Gabbert's play which has been perhaps the worst of any starter in the NFL this year. Gabbert is the same player he has always been.

Who is fixated on what? I put up a lengthy post that detailed every pass play and all the visible components of those plays with observations about each...and all you can talk about is the play of the QB. You have yet to even acknowledge anything else was said.

Now, as I said above, nothing further from me.

Oldman used to do that for Alex, but it was obvious he had a bias in his approach/agenda.

and you've been doing the same...

and the same was being done in the film threads last year.

If it smells like BS, it will be called out... especially when we keep seeing the same garbage s**t, yet someone is telling us differently.

Disagree with me if you see it differently. I have no problem with that. Just cite actual plays that prove the point. Remember, I started the thread with the recollection that everyone and their cousin noted that "our WRs and QBs were the weak spot on this team and this game did nothing to dispel that reality."

[ Edited by dj43 on Sep 26, 2016 at 3:21 PM ]

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:21 PM

#57

jrouter4949
Veteran
Posts: 2,738

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I rarely saw a ball that I thought was put int he right spot. Just because a pass is caught it doesn't mean it was a good pass. He needs to put the ball in a place that gives the receivers a better shot at YAC. He put his receivers in poor position on catches a lot yesterday.

What did you think of the WR play?

It is also the case that if the WR is not running the route the QB anticipates, the ball will not appear to be in the best spot.

I don't think the WRs are great but they are not the problem with Gabbert's accuracy. Take that second pass of the day, was that one that was thrown short of Vance that he had to turn back for? He had no chance of making anything of that throw.
Gabbert is not delivering the ball accurately, that is almost all on him.
Are we talking about the same play?

I listened to the first half on the radio with Tim Ryan commenting. He is always on the critical side and he called it a good throw. When I got home I watched the entire game, then watched it again for the summary above, and then just looked at that specific play again after reading your comment. Yes, McD twisted his body back a bit but the ball was there on time, and, Chancellor knocked him out of bounds as soon as he turned back. There was NO CHANCE, NONE whatsoever to make any YAC on that play. It appeared to be a design play to spread the Seahawk defense for upcoming plays.

He turned himself around to get the pass, that ball should lead him and he should be in a position to see the field and keep running as he catches it.
There was no chance of YAC because it was a poorly executed pass that should have been easy.

If that is the way you see it, then I have nothing further.

Me either.
Carry on telling us how great Gabbert has been.

This crap needs to stop. Nowhere anywhere did he say Gabbert has been playing great. Add something other than a box score and it might actually help the discussion.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:21 PM

#58

NCommand
Hall of Fame
Posts: 123,365

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
He turned himself around to get the pass, that ball should lead him and he should be in a position to see the field and keep running as he catches it.
There was no chance of YAC because it was a poorly executed pass that should have been easy.

Thanks for this thread. I agree on that play there was nothing Gabbert or Vance could do for RAC. Chancellor was playing off coverage which is the best way to attack a flat route. Watch the throw, take the proper angle, smash the WR. On a route like that, the defender needs to be in a trail position for RAC to take place.

Regardless of result, do you think the ball was thrown where it should be or was it a poor throw? Even with a little more space there would have been little a receiver could have done with that pass IMO.

I hope we are talking about the same play. I am referring to Gabbert's first pass of the game. It was Double Slants to his left, Curl-Flat (I think) to his right. SEA is in man coverage.
Double Slants can beat man coverage. Curl-Flat is a zone buster.
Two things to take note of. Notice the yellow LB lined up out wide with Hyde. This screams man coverage. Chancellor is off coverage against Vance. Any flat route that is being defended by a safety that is able to attack downhill has no chance of working unless the safety misses the tackle.

Had Gabbert looked to Double Slants, he would see that orange LB defeats the inside slant. The other slant, can't tell who, beats his man off the LoS and that should/would have been the target.

My main point, and I think the basis of this string of quotes, is that Gabbert could have placed this throw perfectly one foot in front of the numbers and it would not have mattered because it was the incorrect read. The correct read is to the Double Slants, not the Curl-Flat which is what Gabbert targeted. This is a case of incorrect read not bad ball location to the target.

I was thinking of one that was on the far side of the field. Sorry for the confusion. That pass was definitely more of a bad decision rather than a poor throw.

"OK all...everyone run straight ahead and all turn at 5 yards...5 yards short of the marker. Ready? Go!"

[ Edited by NCommand on Sep 26, 2016 at 3:22 PM ]

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:22 PM

#59

thl408
Moderator
Posts: 33,329

Originally posted by northoakland510:
Thl is that one of the quick hitter plays where the pass has to come out that quick? There wasn't much pressure should he had waited a little longer?

I think it is. Based on the depth of the routes, I think it's three step timing. If Gabbert waits longer, then the Curl just stands there, the Flat route runs out of bounds, the slants might be more open downfield, but slant routes versus man coverage are normally most open when the WR initially completes his break inwards.

Sep 26, 2016 at 3:24 PM

#60

dj43
Moderator
Posts: 38,358

Originally posted by Joecool:
I don't understand rewatching this one play by play.

The reason I do it is because when I am watching the game for the first time I am usually focused on the ball to see the overall result. Re-watching it allows a better understanding of how it succeeded or failed. There were a lot of failures in this one but for various reasons, including the fact Seattle is just a more talented team.

We learn as much from failure as from success.