Hypothetical Question . . . Margin of victory

[bbsplitter]

I am happy with the score, I would have just liked to see a little more consistent offense. Sustained drives through all four quarters, and avoiding the typical starting slow crap. But I was happy with the game overall.

 

[McGruff]

The Bears are not a tomato can. No team in the NFL is a cupcake. They are all varying degrees of good.

 

[Ozzy]

The bears played a decent game against GB to open the year albeit with Cutler. Not sure how much better he is than Clausen but I agree, the Bears aren't the worst team of all time.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Wanna see more red zone TDs and fewer red zone FGs. Think they'e getting closer actually.
.
.
.
Now about the first half production..........

 

[Hawks46]

4 FG'S and 1 TD I think is where the criticism comes from. Our red zone play hasn't been up to task. We seem to move the ball decent with an open field but had multiple passes dropped or vanilla running plays called when it mattered.

This.

Don't get me wrong, it's a good, quality win. We were great on ST and defense.

Personally, I look for progression. I wasn't unhappy with a 10 point loss at GB because we got better than the first week, where we lost by 3. We showed progress.

Against the Bears, we didn't show enough progress on the offensive side of the ball for it to be all sunshine and kittens for me. Seriously, 19 points and 1 TD against a team giving up over 30 points a game (at home!) isn't anything to write home about.

That's where margin of victory gets me. Yup, 26-0 is great. But you can't count on a ST TD every game, so if you took that away and were at 19-0, it's still good, but more like "meh" against that Bears team. Don't forget, we're talking about one of the worst teams in the league, minus their starting QB, AND minus their best WR.

 

[Overseasfan]

Defense and ST were incredible, almost couldn't have been better. The offense is still a work in progress though, the question is how long will this take? There were definitely improvements, so will the O be rolling next week or do we have to wait for late into the regular season for that?

Let's just say I'm happy with the result but I'm not completely confident in us making a stellar comeback at this point. If we win against Detroit (a team that is currently only marginally better than the Bears) in convincing fashion as well and manage to squeeze a w out of Cincinnati then I'll start to feel like we're completely back on track.

 

[Spin Doctor]

What I, myself am displeased with is the execution on the offensive side of the ball. I've said this in several other threads, I'm not looking for a world beater offense. I want an offense that can prolong drives, convert on third downs, and take advantage of mistakes by the defense. I also want a offense that can pick things up when the defense has its occasional struggles. I can guarantee you that this is what Carroll is looking for from his offense as well. This doesn't mean a team that hangs 50 burgers every week.

In the Bears game the Seahawks offense looked putrid for all but a few drives. They constantly had short fields to work with, and they had a lot of opportunities that were missed. Yes we won, but the performance of the offense against a bad Bears team is a bit disconcerting. There will be times this year that the Hawks offense must step up, I'm not sure at this point if they can.

 

[Schadie001]

I would have to agree with those who are in the we should have destroyed them category. I listened to ESPN this morning and they were talking about the margin of victory the Cards have put up in three games. They are +77. Yes, plus 77 no other team comes close. So, when you are supposed to be the cock of the walk in the NFC West, 2 time defending Conference Champs, 2 SB's in two years I would have expected us to have flat out destroyed Chicago at home. We should have been able to at least hang 35 points on them to nothing. But we are pitiful as usual in the red zone. To me it didn't feel nor look like we destroyed them. No one is talking about our 26-0 victory over an absolutely awful Bears team. They sure are talking about the 47-7 ass kicking the cards put on the 9ers though. The Cards hung 48 against the Bears and I have to believe we are a more complete team then the Cards. But their Offense is flat lighting it up.

 

[kearly]

It was a very conservative game by both teams. Chicago had a backup QB and quite frankly is eyeing the #1 overall pick. Seattle was 0-2 and knew that the only way they could lose this game was if it turned into a weird game. So when the Bears had a chance to punt, they did. When Seattle had a chance to kick a FG, they mostly played to ensure 3 points.

I think if Seattle was 2-0 in this game they would have probably been less paranoid and taken more shots. (Seattle also had 2-3 drops in this game, including a couple in the red zone. They also had a very promising drive that was impacted by a lack of play clock before the half.)

Pete is all about winning, he doesn't care if we win 58-0 or with a Fail Mary. He just wants to win. Seattle executed a game plan that maximized their chances of winning the game and won by 26 points. Which by the way was a bigger margin of victory than about 60% of the guesses in Aros' prediction thread. Even when weighed against pre-game expectations, Seattle came out slightly ahead.

 

[scutterhawk]

4 FG'S and 1 TD I think is where the criticism comes from. Our red zone play hasn't been up to task. We seem to move the ball decent with an open field but had multiple passes dropped or vanilla running plays called when it mattered.

It doesn't sound like you're taking into account, the closer they get to the red zone, the more condensed the Defenses area of coverage.
The Offensive Line is still piecing it all together, Lynch was played sparingly (too much as far as I'm concerned), so the New Running Backs were left to pound the rock.
Rawls and Jackson did a pretty damn decent job of moving the chains, and that's another aspect of the running game that needed to be evaluated.
I was heartened by some of the positives in this game, and the negatives are something that I believe will be ironed out as the Season progresses.
With all the comings and goings on the Seahawks Offense, there's 0 continuity, so I expect we're going to see some misfires.
I think it's also a bit unrealistic to expect an explosive Offense right out of the starting blocks.
That's why I choose to take in the positives, and try not to let the fixable negatives dictate my mood.

 

[KiwiHawk]

Ignore the score for a moment. If I told you that the opponent was held to 48 total passing yards, and for the first time in 35 years were forced to punt on every possession, of which they had 10, wouldn't you - if you are completely honest with yourself - expect our offense, equipped with a 100-yard rusher, an $87-million QB, an elite tight end, an exciting rookie receiver, and the dependable Baldwin and Kearse, to score more than one touchdown?

 

[Recon_Hawk]

Ignore the score for a moment. If I told you that the opponent was held to 48 total passing yards, and for the first time in 35 years were forced to punt on every possession, wouldn't you - if you are completely honest with yourself - expect our offense, equipped with a 100-yard rusher, an $87-million QB, an elite tight end, an exciting rookie receiver, and the dependable Baldwin and Kearse, to score more than one touchdown?

I would, but I'd also expect the offense to play super conservative knowing it would only take a FG to win the game.

 

[KiwiHawk]

Ignore the score for a moment. If I told you that the opponent was held to 48 total passing yards, and for the first time in 35 years were forced to punt on every possession, wouldn't you - if you are completely honest with yourself - expect our offense, equipped with a 100-yard rusher, an $87-million QB, an elite tight end, an exciting rookie receiver, and the dependable Baldwin and Kearse, to score more than one touchdown?

I would, but I'd also expect the offense to play super conservative knowing it would only take a FG to win the game.

When was this known? The first quarter? Did someone go forward in time to see the final outcome?

 

[KiwiHawk]

I will admit this is a difficult time of year for me, because I am a fan of two sport, NFL and Rugby, and the Rugby World Cup is currently on. In Rugby you don't play conservative against a lesser opponent; you put them to the sword.

Any PC crap about not running up the score is for pee-wee football, not Pro. If pros don't want to surrender 50 points, they should consider not sucking.

 

[capncrunch]

It was a very conservative game by both teams. Chicago had a backup QB and quite frankly is eyeing the #1 overall pick. Seattle was 0-2 and knew that the only way they could lose this game was if it turned into a weird game. So when the Bears had a chance to punt, they did. When Seattle had a chance to kick a FG, they mostly played to ensure 3 points.

I think if Seattle was 2-0 in this game they would have probably been less paranoid and taken more shots. (Seattle also had 2-3 drops in this game, including a couple in the red zone. They also had a very promising drive that was impacted by a lack of play clock before the half.)

Pete is all about winning, he doesn't care if we win 58-0 or with a Fail Mary. He just wants to win. Seattle executed a game plan that maximized their chances of winning the game and won by 26 points. Which by the way was a bigger margin of victory than about 60% of the guesses in Aros' prediction thread. Even when weighed against pre-game expectations, Seattle came out slightly ahead.

These are strong points. The drops if caught probably lead to touchdowns instead of field goals. The ones to Lockette and Rawls were very nice passes. The deep ball to Lockett was very nice though well defended. We probably could have pushed for more points in the fourth quarter if we needed to and lost an offensive possession with a kick return. I also think with some time the end zone route to JG will end up being a touchdown more times than not. I'm looking forward to seeing our offense against the Lions. I have very high hopes.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Pretty clear this terrible offense is going to be a theme after games, and that is even more disappointing when you consider the size of the contract we are paying for a QB that is barely breaking 250yd per game - even with an all world TE recently one of the big investments.

But considering the make up of the line, not sure any QB can complete passes when under siege - and four sacks by the hapless bears D is not really a confidence booster.

Nothing the Hawks do against the Lions will quell those concerns. If they play well and shell the Lions, it will just be a potential sign the Lions suck. If they play the Lions close, it is going to be a huge issue too.

So it will be the 5 game stretch after the Lions that defines things, notably the Cincy and Cards games. If they cannot beat the combination of Cincy +the 10am gremlin when you consider the QB for the Bengals is Dalton, then they probably have some work to do. Though beating 4 of 5 of the Bengals, Panthers, 49ers, Cowboys and Cards will go a long way toward showing this team is back on track. And to get home field against the Cards we will almost have to beat them twice, so beating the Cards is going to be imperative.

Getting all that done will put this team back on the winning path.

Conversely missing those milestones likely means the team has some work to do.

 

[Bigbadhawk]

I will admit this is a difficult time of year for me, because I am a fan of two sport, NFL and Rugby, and the Rugby World Cup is currently on. In Rugby you don't play conservative against a lesser opponent; you put them to the sword.

Any PC crap about not running up the score is for pee-wee football, not Pro. If pros don't want to surrender 50 points, they should consider not sucking.

If i was to truly believe we played conservative this game then I would not have expected us to not punt on 4th downs twice and go for it. Btw we were 2 for 2 on converting 4th downs.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

Ignore the score for a moment. If I told you that the opponent was held to 48 total passing yards, and for the first time in 35 years were forced to punt on every possession, wouldn't you - if you are completely honest with yourself - expect our offense, equipped with a 100-yard rusher, an $87-million QB, an elite tight end, an exciting rookie receiver, and the dependable Baldwin and Kearse, to score more than one touchdown?

I would, but I'd also expect the offense to play super conservative knowing it would only take a FG to win the game.

When was this known? The first quarter? Did someone go forward in time to see the final outcome?

Knowing Alshon Jeffery is out and Jimmy Clausen was starting, I think it's safe to say they knew the Bears offense wasn't putting up a lot of points. If the coaches believe in their defense (which they probably do) then they don't need to expect a fast start or a lot of points in the game to win which should affect the game plan.

it has nothing to do with not running up the score. Pete put up 56 points on the Cardinals a year ago. It's about ensuring the win.

Now, that's not to say they did not make mistakes, but compounding those mistakes with over aggressive play doesn't help either.

 

[Hawks46]

What I, myself am displeased with is the execution on the offensive side of the ball. I've said this in several other threads, I'm not looking for a world beater offense. I want an offense that can prolong drives, convert on third downs, and take advantage of mistakes by the defense. I also want a offense that can pick things up when the defense has its occasional struggles. I can guarantee you that this is what Carroll is looking for from his offense as well. This doesn't mean a team that hangs 50 burgers every week.

In the Bears game the Seahawks offense looked putrid for all but a few drives. They constantly had short fields to work with, and they had a lot of opportunities that were missed. Yes we won, but the performance of the offense against a bad Bears team is a bit disconcerting. There will be times this year that the Hawks offense must step up, I'm not sure at this point if they can.

This is a good point. If you look at the starting field position the defense and ST gave us many times, we honestly should've scored 35 points, with an average offense.

What I wanted to see out of Graham is a red zone threat, as we didn't have a problem moving the ball last year and getting into the red zone. I also wanted to see drives extended and for us to clean up third down and improve our conversion percentage. If Graham can help us do that, the numbers will be just fine.

I'm seeing Graham starting to help us on 3rd down better. If he's not converting, teams are starting to crash on him and are leaving at least one WR wide open at the sticks, and Wilson is seeing that better.

We'll see how Detroit goes.

 

[rideaducati]

I'll take 26-0 over 33 to 7.

A shut out is difficult against any team. If they were to score it casts our team in a much harsher light. Even with the same margin of victory.

I also think Graham makes that jump ball TD in the endzone 9 times out of 10.

He missed twice though.