Pete Carrols philosphy

[johnnyfever]

The other thing I thought was goofy is that in the press conference Cable said the line was 100% on pass pro. What? Didn't seem that way to me.

I thought they did ok, but 100% is a bit of a stretch, or your standards are set way too low.

 

[Natethegreat]

The other thing I thought was goofy is that in the press conference Cable said the line was 100% on pass pro. What? Didn't seem that way to me.

I thought they did ok, but 100% is a bit of a stretch, or your standards are set way too low.

I didn't hear the press conference but I would have to assume he meant assignment wise because Sowell definitely struggled at times.

 

[dogorama]

The other thing I thought was goofy is that in the press conference Cable said the line was 100% on pass pro. What? Didn't seem that way to me.

I thought they did ok, but 100% is a bit of a stretch, or your standards are set way too low.

Cable has been a head coach before which makes him a politician. Last year in his end of camp press conf he said the O-Line was the best group he's had to work with. This year he said the same. You will NOT get anything substantive out of his statements.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

The other thing I thought was goofy is that in the press conference Cable said the line was 100% on pass pro. What? Didn't seem that way to me.

I thought they did ok, but 100% is a bit of a stretch, or your standards are set way too low.

They edited out Sowell, Glowinski, Webb and Gilliam from the film before he watched it. Britt looked great, woo hoo!
:sarcasm_off:

 

[Seymour]

So basically Cable is saying it's Rawls and Wilsons fault then. Ranks right up there with Rex Ryan firing the wrong coordinator.

 

[iigakusei]

What Cable means is that we at least tried to block the right guys but failed miserably and that equals 100%?
Makes perfect sense.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

If Pete didn't approve of the empty backfield plays on short yardage don't you think he'd say something to Bevell about it?
One would hope ESPECIALLY considering Pete is a run first coach. Since that's the case, why would he approve of removing any threat of a run or ability to check to a run?
Perhaps he has said something about the calling of RO plays when there is a zero percent chance your QB keeps the ball due to injury.
This is Pete's decision as well as Bevell's. So if you're gonna fire one ya gotta fire the other. Or maybe we should fire Paul Allen too? After all he's the one who hired Pete who hired Bevell...no? :mrgreen:

And the whole 'he's faithful to his coaches' spiel just doesn't hold water. Was Bevell his first OC here? Was Cable the first line coach? Good point

 

[DavidSeven]

Cable only said that the OL was assignment-correct, meaning they were blocking the right guys. I sort of think that is a bigger indictment of his group. That means his guys were blocking the right players but losing the physical match-up.

 

[Natethegreat]

Cable only said that the OL was assignment-correct, meaning they were blocking the right guys. I sort of think that is a bigger indictment of his group. That means his guys were blocking the right players but losing the physical match-up.

I'll take that over the free running rushers we had last year. Plus a little perspective is in order as Quinn and Donald cause problems for EVERY offensive line.
Overall the pass pro was decent. In fact, had Lockett not been hurt, I think he would have had a huge game last week.

 

[Seymour]

Cable only said that the OL was assignment-correct, meaning they were blocking the right guys. I sort of think that is a bigger indictment of his group. That means his guys were blocking the right players but losing the physical match-up.

An indictment of not only his group, but also of his scheme being ineffective with HIS current personnel.

 

[TwistedHusky]

A few things:

You can have a philosophy and from that philosophy, you can have a strategy, but that strategy must jibe with your resources or assets.

However, there are different tactics you can use to accomplish the same strategy.

Right now, we cannot use the "out-athlete the other team" move forward we like to use. We do not have the horses.

Is that because the cut block option is less viable or because the RO is no longer a threat? No idea. What I do know is that what we are doing now is not what we were doing the latter part of the last year that was so successful. I also know that for some reason we chose to change our tactics as soon as we went into the playoffs, which led to almost losing vs the Vkings and allowing the Panthers to take a massive lead on us.

So both strategy and tactics are a problem right now, because we seem to only shift to what works when in dire need. Even though we know it works because it becomes the go-to in times of need. The question is why?

Is that not in alignment with the strategy? Just a comfort zone thing? Being stubborn? Or what I suspect, shooting for a KPI that ultimately is counter-productive to actually winning?

It feels like we are playing for specific #s that are not the score. It might be TOP, rushing yards or some other statistic, but to deviate from scoring there has to be a reason? We only seek to try to score when we feel threatened or falling behind.

I have seen this before, usually when a manager has a comp # that is tied to a KPI that is not really locked to the organization's real goal. And it feels like with the questions above the answer might just be that someone is shooting for #s that have nothing to do with the score - because we almost seem to prefer increasing certain #s instead of increasing the opportunities to score. Which sounds crazy.

You must score more than the other team to win. Now admittedly, you score too fast and you tire our your defense but I still remain perplexed here.

Either way, I feel like someone making decisions is not making the right ones. And I do not agree that you cannot change tactics and still stay in alignment with the strategic goals or philosophy. Most mountains have more than one path to the top.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

Cable only said that the OL was assignment-correct, meaning they were blocking the right guys. I sort of think that is a bigger indictment of his group. That means his guys were blocking the right players but losing the physical match-up.

Yes, I took it that way too. But he also said (and I think he meant it more in an overall sense) that this line pass-blocked the Rams better than in either game from last year against that team.

 

[dogorama]

Its been said many times lately but this article once again reinforces that this is Petes team and follows his lead including the offense.
If we were to part ways with Bevell not much is going to change.It may be frustrating at times watching us struggle but in the end they have a plan and it has been successful.


http://www.seahawks.com/news/2016/09/21 ... nning-game

"There was a time in Pete Carroll’s career when, being a defensive-minded head coach, he was content to let his offensive coordinator run the offense however that particular coach saw fit.
But coming off of a 6-6 season in his first year as the head coach at USC, Carroll made a decision that would help change the direction of his career. Having already been fired from his previous two head coaching gigs, both in the NFL, Carroll decided between the 2001 and 2002 seasons that if he were going to go down, he’d go down doing things his way on both sides of the ball."

While I think PC would prefer a ball control run-first offense supported by a dominating defense I have never EVER heard him express that philosophy. I believe that if he was to comment on his offensive philosophy he would say that you have to tailor the offense to the personnel you have available. Isn't that what he did with Wilson/Lynch? IIRC, he wasn't using the RO at USC was he? You have to have the right QB to run the RO and he and Bevell recognized that right away with Wilson.

The RO will continue to be a big feature on offense because RW is so good at it, but I am not sure we can continue to run the same way we did w/Lynch. In fact, in the second half last year we didn't run the same way when we opened up the offense. I believe they are still trying to determine what identity this group will have, but one thing is sure and that is the RO is nothing more than a smokescreen until RW's ankle heals. That much is clear, and Ram's defensive players said as much in interviews after the game.

 

[Ozzy]

A few guys on Twitter have done a good job with the All-22 tape. Sowell and Webb played much worse than we think which is a scary thought. They were terrible.

 

[theincrediblesok]

I know Russell and Bevell gets the blame for slow starts, but that has always been the case even with Tarvaris and Hasselbeck at the helm, and I had posted stats on that years ago, and the year with Hasselbeck was with a different OC so that tells you that Pete has more control of the tempo of the game or at least have the responsibility of the slow start.

The year with Hasselbeck they went pass heavy and they went 7-9

The year with Tarvaris they went balanced for 3 quarters and passed more in the 4th and that might contribute to being behind, and Tarvaris wasn't known as a comeback king as we saw what usually happens in the 4th, they went 7-9. In Tarvaris' 2nd half of the season the identity of the team was Lynch and they decided to build around him.

Wilson's rookie year, they rushed for all 4 quarters more than they have passing, they went 11-5. Wilson's rushing help contribute to the running attack, taking the league by storm.

The Superbowl year, I've notice that we were a balance attack for 3 Quarters, and really hammered down teams in the 4th with running plays, it was almost double the amount of passing as we were more in the lead.

2014 and 2015 had the same style of play, 1st Quarter we rushed more, passed more in the 2nd, balance attack in the 3rd, and closed the game out with more rushing.

As you can see to get the game the way that Pete loves is that our running game has to contribute big to it, and Pete even said that they will still let Wilson use the read option even though they know he is a bit hobbled. He knows the run game has to be there and knows that Wilson is a big contributor to that. Is it wise to let Wilson run on plays? Who knows but it seems like Pete still wants that to be a threat.

Start with the run and end with the run

Pete is responsible for the Tight End Plays, I've checked his USC stat days (2001-2009) to see what the TE offered. They weren't heavily featured except for 2007, Fred Davis 881 yards and 8 TDs. This explains why we don't use our TE's more, his system doesn't utilize them in the passing plays like we would like. Bevell and Cable's past resumes have shown they have used TEs pretty well.

I think Bevell and Cable do get more of the blame because they are in the front of their respective position. In the end Pete has final say on what they can and can't do.

I think with the line and everyone having to gel again, it will take at least 8 games until they start peaking.

 

[johnnyfever]

Webb and Sowell need to be replaced though. Physically and mentally they just cant keep up. I'ts not like these guys are rookies, and they have been less than stellar in the NFL.

 

[Natethegreat]

I know Russell and Bevell gets the blame for slow starts, but that has always been the case even with Tarvaris and Hasselbeck at the helm, and I had posted stats on that years ago, and the year with Hasselbeck was with a different OC so that tells you that Pete has more control of the tempo of the game or at least have the responsibility of the slow start.

The year with Hasselbeck they went pass heavy and they went 7-9

The year with Tarvaris they went balanced for 3 quarters and passed more in the 4th and that might contribute to being behind, and Tarvaris wasn't known as a comeback king as we saw what usually happens in the 4th, they went 7-9. In Tarvaris' 2nd half of the season the identity of the team was Lynch and they decided to build around him.

Wilson's rookie year, they rushed for all 4 quarters more than they have passing, they went 11-5. Wilson's rushing help contribute to the running attack, taking the league by storm.

The Superbowl year, I've notice that we were a balance attack for 3 Quarters, and really hammered down teams in the 4th with running plays, it was almost double the amount of passing as we were more in the lead.

2014 and 2015 had the same style of play, 1st Quarter we rushed more, passed more in the 2nd, balance attack in the 3rd, and closed the game out with more rushing.

As you can see to get the game the way that Pete loves is that our running game has to contribute big to it, and Pete even said that they will still let Wilson use the read option even though they know he is a bit hobbled. He knows the run game has to be there and knows that Wilson is a big contributor to that. Is it wise to let Wilson run on plays? Who knows but it seems like Pete still wants that to be a threat.

Start with the run and end with the run

Pete is responsible for the Tight End Plays, I've checked his USC stat days (2001-2009) to see what the TE offered. They weren't heavily featured except for 2007, Fred Davis 881 yards and 8 TDs. This explains why we don't use our TE's more, his system doesn't utilize them in the passing plays like we would like. Bevell and Cable's past resumes have shown they have used TEs pretty well.

I think Bevell and Cable do get more of the blame because they are in the front of their respective position. In the end Pete has final say on what they can and can't do.

I think with the line and everyone having to gel again, it will take at least 8 games until they start peaking.

Good post thanks for sharing.

 

[kf3339]

Two things about this article:

1. It only discusses his basic philosophy of a run first offense. It states nowhere how play calls are to be decided and at what point in a offensive series or the game itself adjustments should be made by the OC.

2. Nowhere does it discuss how PC himself when faced with inadequate personnel to run his philosophy makes him adjust to this reality to give his offense the tools to score enough points to win the game.

I seriously doubt that PC himself will be so stubborn as to stick with a plan that has no chance of success to just prove a point about "his philosophy". He adjusted out of this philosophy the second half of last year with great success. It should have been completely obvious to PC, DB, TC and every other member of the offensive brain trust that they don't have the horses to run "his philosophy" right now.

So you adjust or you lose. We are 1-1 with only 15 points scored and one TD in 8 quarters. That is the reality.

You have to prove yourself again each new year. Past results are in the past. Great coaches, CEO's, business founders, ect. don't rest on their past accomplishments. They also adapt when environments in business, society and yes even football may be changing. The really great ones see the change before it happens and set the tone. PC in many ways did that with his defense. The issue is the offense.

 

[dogorama]

A few guys on Twitter have done a good job with the All-22 tape. Sowell and Webb played much worse than we think which is a scary thought. They were terrible.

It is scary because in both games the quick pass has been taken away. At the end of last year we dealt w/a poor pass-blocking O-Line by utilizing the quick pass, but Miami's DC, Vance Joseph, devised a scheme to take away Seattle's short & intermediate routes and only allow bubble screens and quick outs on short passes. The DB's covered up those pass plays w/quick tackles so they were largely ineffective and then the Rams merely copied his scheme. That is why RW is holding onto the ball too long, they are taking away his first option.

This is why Doug Baldwin is so important to this offense, he has the ability to find a spot in the zone and catch a bullet. As we saw in the first game, Lockett is not good at that, downfield routes are more his forte. A healthy Jimmy Graham would help immensely also because of his body shielding style of catching passes in tight coverage, we need to start utilizing that more.

 

[Seymour]

Two things about this article:

1. It only discusses his basic philosophy of a run first offense. It states nowhere how play calls are to be decided and at what point in a offensive series or the game itself adjustments should be made by the OC.

2. Nowhere does it discuss how PC himself when faced with inadequate personnel to run his philosophy makes him adjust to this reality to give his offense the tools to score enough points to win the game.

I seriously doubt that PC himself will be so stubborn as to stick with a plan that has no chance of success to just prove a point about "his philosophy". He adjusted out of this philosophy the second half of last year with great success. It should have been completely obvious to PC, DB, TC and every other member of the offensive brain trust that they don't have the horses to run "his philosophy" right now.

So you adjust or you lose. We are 0-2 with only 15 points scored and one TD in 8 quarters. That is the reality.

You have to prove yourself again each new year. Past results are in the past. Great coaches, CEO's, business founders, ect. don't rest on their past accomplishments. They also adapt when environments in business, society and yes even football may be changing. The really great ones see the change before it happens and set the tone. PC in many ways did that with his defense. The issue is the offense.

Reality? Last I checked we are 1-1????