Pete Carrols philosphy

[kf3339]

....Pete is seemingly ever trying to recapture the 2013 team. That team executed his entire philosophy on offense and defense to his idea of perfection and substantiated his modern theory on the game. The problem now is that he keeps trying to fit these square 2016 pegs and duds into that 2013 round hole of success.

Notoriously stubborn Pete will seemingly not alter the offense or defense much at all. It is indeed his offensive theory that we're seeing and it's very frustrating that he just doesn't appear to want to adapt to the changing scene. More frustrating is that he did adjust some last year by adding spread features and now, it's gone again.

And while it's Pete's overall offensive design we see, what is maddening regarding Bevell though is different, i.e. the situational playcalling fiascos (Collins back to back, Graham not sent out for a redzone route, hurt Wilson RO, strange personnel split wide, continuous empty set on short yardage, no play action unless it's 3rd and long, no standard RB screens or other basic plays to defeat a blitz etc. etc.) So while everyone agrees the line is a disaster and injuries are compounding problems, there's still the feeling that with the talent we do have, we should simply be a little better on offense right now.

What is concerning to me and others regarding the big picture is that despite all our success the last several years, there's still this underlying feeling that this window won't last forever and we don't want to sink back into Seahawk mediocrity. Wilson may not be able to scramble like he used to and create improv magic for years and years. The defense may only have a couple more years in their prime, if that-no guarantee that we'll be able to reload. The real fear is that lifetime fans like myself who grew up in the Patera and Knox eras, who suffered through decades of always disappointing subpar football, won't have a true championship contender again for awhile. Make no mistake, I'm certainly hopeful Pete and Co. can get things turned around and our season is far from over, but it's just disturbing what we've seen thus far this year.

What an awesome post West TX Hawk! You have summed up my feelings, both as it concerns the present offensive difficulties and sourceS thereof as well as my fear of the chances at more championships slipping away fabulously. Thank you.

I second this as well. :irishdrinkers:

 

[morgulon1]

Personally, Im not as concerned with Rawls and C-Mike as much as I am with our line opening up lanes for the run game. But Cable has taught them up before, so I need to have faith.

Cable's presser yesterday (the video is posted at Seahawks.com) was interesting in that he, surprisingly to me, expressed good confidence in the way the OL played in pass-pro. He also said that in the running game, they missed only on about 4 or 5 plays. And Cable said, like Bevell who followed him said too, that while CM hit some Rawls was too anxious, too quick to the line, not patient enough to wait for the hole to open up. Both expressed plenty of confidence that it will turn around, soon.

Ok, if we only missed on 4-5 plays , why didn't we drive and score more than 3 points in the entire game ? Besides the bullshit offensive pass interference penalties and false starts etc ..

It appeared to me watching it on television that we were man-handled at the LOS. I noticed on run plays that the Rams were 2 feet in our backfield when the RB took the handoff.

 

[chris98251]

Here's a thought...............

When we are playing our best the defense is attacking, Quinn and the young and Hungry Seahawks of 2013, The defense got turnovers, short fields and the offense went for points fast. Pete was throttling back, I remember when Beast asked can we score again>

If your going to win you have to attack somewhere, offense or defense, you can play protective soft zone if your offense attacks and scores, you can't play safe on offense and play passive and safe of defense and just hope something breaks your way. Attacking of defense sets up short fields and field position with turnovers and also takes confidence away from teams and makes them push and create more mistakes.

Either way, you have to attack somewhere.

 

[kf3339]

Here's a thought...............

When we are playing our best the defense is attacking, Quinn and the young and Hungry Seahawks of 2013, The defense got turnovers, short fields and the offense went for points fast. Pete was throttling back, I remember when Beast asked can we score again>

If your going to win you have to attack somewhere, offense or defense, you can play protective soft zone if your offense attacks and scores, you can't play safe on offense and play passive and safe of defense and just hope something breaks your way. Attacking of defense sets up short fields and field position with turnovers and also takes confidence away from teams and makes them push and create more mistakes.

Either way, you have to attack somewhere.

Exactly. We are passive on both sides of the ball. No aggressive game planning at all. Also, the Beastmode comments to PC you mention were telling then, and still are to this day. Personally I don't get why "ANY" coach wouldn't want to score more points at "every" opportunity.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Here's a thought...............

When we are playing our best the defense is attacking, Quinn and the young and Hungry Seahawks of 2013, The defense got turnovers, short fields and the offense went for points fast. Pete was throttling back, I remember when Beast asked can we score again>

If your going to win you have to attack somewhere, offense or defense, you can play protective soft zone if your offense attacks and scores, you can't play safe on offense and play passive and safe of defense and just hope something breaks your way. Attacking of defense sets up short fields and field position with turnovers and also takes confidence away from teams and makes them push and create more mistakes.

Either way, you have to attack somewhere.

Agree 100%

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Here's a thought...............

When we are playing our best the defense is attacking, Quinn and the young and Hungry Seahawks of 2013, The defense got turnovers, short fields and the offense went for points fast. Pete was throttling back, I remember when Beast asked can we score again>

If your going to win you have to attack somewhere, offense or defense, you can play protective soft zone if your offense attacks and scores, you can't play safe on offense and play passive and safe of defense and just hope something breaks your way. Attacking of defense sets up short fields and field position with turnovers and also takes confidence away from teams and makes them push and create more mistakes.

Either way, you have to attack somewhere.

Brock talked about this today.

The Hawks have one of the lowest blitz percentages in the league, it averages around 20% blitz to base defense.

This has allowed bad teams to hang around games because they know if they don't turn the ball over and just basically do nothing on offense the entire game they can do what the Rams did last weekend.........put 2-3 drives together into FG range because of our bend but don't break defense and score 9-10 pts.

It's also contributed to our terrible field position. Sure our D hasn't given up many points, but they have allowed too many 3-5 minute possessions allowing teams to move the ball 30-40 yards and THEN punt.......resulting in terrible field position spots for our pathetic offense.

Moral of the story, Pete and Richard need to get more creative and start attacking offenses with blitzes and aggressiveness. Sure that might result in some big plays given up. But it's also going to result in knocking QB's out and turnovers.

 

[Natethegreat]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

 

[kf3339]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

Oh Please. Just because a few posters think being more aggressive on defense to force more turnovers you think they should follow another team? Going from 15-20% blitzing to perhaps 30-35% and everything is going to fall apart? Changing the defensive calls so we aren't so predictable to opposing offensives is a recipe for disaster?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

I don't think anyone's asking for a complete philosophical overhaul, at least not on defense.

But defensively I certainly think we can tweak how we're attacking teams. IMO we sit too much in our cover 3 zone, which is fine.......but it's not resulting anymore in the necessary turnovers and defensive opposing of will that this team needs to win.

ESPECIALLY now when our offense is struggling so badly. Bump the blitz percentage up to 30% and do a little more press man. Start suffocating these terrible QB's.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

I don't think anyone's asking for a complete philosophical overhaul, at least not on defense.

But defensively I certainly think we can tweak how we're attacking teams. IMO we sit too much in our cover 3 zone, which is fine.......but it's not resulting anymore in the necessary turnovers and defensive opposing of will that this team needs to win.

ESPECIALLY now when our offense is struggling so badly. Bump the blitz percentage up to 30% and do a little more press man. Start suffocating these terrible QB's.

Terrible QBs? Ryan Tannehill and Case Keenum? Terrible? :sarcasm_off:

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

Agreed. And even looking at the past two games we have 8 sacks, numerous hits and hurries, several batted battles, and ... The NFL's #1 rated Defense!

The turovers are sure to come, I'd bet money they do it at least once this weekend once they've completely shut down SF's Carlos Hyde.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

I don't think anyone's asking for a complete philosophical overhaul, at least not on defense.

But defensively I certainly think we can tweak how we're attacking teams. IMO we sit too much in our cover 3 zone, which is fine.......but it's not resulting anymore in the necessary turnovers and defensive opposing of will that this team needs to win.

ESPECIALLY now when our offense is struggling so badly. Bump the blitz percentage up to 30% and do a little more press man. Start suffocating these terrible QB's.

Terrible QBs? Ryan Tannehill and Case Keenum? Terrible? :sarcasm_off:

You think Keenum is good? I think you meant to turn your sarcasm on.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

I don't think anyone's asking for a complete philosophical overhaul, at least not on defense.

But defensively I certainly think we can tweak how we're attacking teams. IMO we sit too much in our cover 3 zone, which is fine.......but it's not resulting anymore in the necessary turnovers and defensive opposing of will that this team needs to win.

ESPECIALLY now when our offense is struggling so badly. Bump the blitz percentage up to 30% and do a little more press man. Start suffocating these terrible QB's.

Terrible QBs? Ryan Tannehill and Case Keenum? Terrible? :sarcasm_off:

You think Keenum is good? I think you meant to turn your sarcasm on.

It was meant as a totally sarcastic post man. I was actually agreeing with you in that we've played 2 very poor QBs and came away with 0 turnovers.

 

[hawk45]

It's legitimate to question coaching strategies, even Pete's, even with his track record with this defense.

I just have an awful hard time justifying even the slightest change in defensive approach when they have been snuffing out all opponent scoring. If the D were allowing 20 pts a game then I'd say fine, let's gamble more and the give the O some short fields and more whacks at the Pinata. But the offense is getting plenty of whacks as it is, and only needs to come up with one or two scores.

I certainly don't think the sky would fall if we bumped up the blitz percentage. I just can't justify making even a small change. Any offense other than a historically inept offense would find it nearly impossible to avoid outscoring opponents. If they did increase the blitzes, and it led to even one or two big plays worth 3 pts, that would be catastrophic given our offensive "prowess."

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

It's legitimate to question coaching strategies, even Pete's, even with his track record with this defense.

I just have an awful hard time justifying even the slightest change in defensive approach when they have been snuffing out all opponent scoring. If the D were allowing 20 pts a game then I'd say fine, let's gamble more and the give the O some short fields and more whacks at the Pinata. But the offense is getting plenty of whacks as it is, and only needs to come up with one or two scores.

I certainly don't think the sky would fall if we bumped up the blitz percentage. I just can't justify making even a small change. Any offense other than a historically inept offense would find it nearly impossible to avoid outscoring opponents. If they did increase the blitzes, and it led to even one or two big plays worth 3 pts, that would be catastrophic given our offensive "prowess."

Agreed.

Once the offense develops a punishing run game which given the commitment the team has to it they will, then the rest of the offense will open up nicely. Yes, including the 'explosive' plays that everyone is salivating for, and that Bevell's scheme also excels at once things are clicking nicely.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

At http://www.seahawks.com/news/2016/09/23 ... s-seahawks’-week-3-game-vs-san-francisco

“It sets the tone offensively,” said center Justin Britt. “We want to be physical, we want to do what we do, and that’s run the ball, beat on our opponents… It just opens up the whole offense.”

 

[Natethegreat]

There is a team that I think would make some people a lot more happy to follow and that would be the Cardinals.
They blitz constantly, have a wide open offense, and they are an exciting team to watch. Very successful during the season but have yet to replicate that success in the playoffs.
Expecting or wanting the Seahawks to be that team will only lead to further frustration. Blitzing frequently is not the plan Pete has for defense and it won't be changing. And are we really complaining right now about one of the most successful defenses of all time put together by Pete? I mean honestly, we are incredibly spoiled if we are whining about our defense.

Oh Please. Just because a few posters think being more aggressive on defense to force more turnovers you think they should follow another team? Going from 15-20% blitzing to perhaps 30-35% and everything is going to fall apart? Changing the defensive calls so we aren't so predictable to opposing offensives is a recipe for disaster?

I never said anything was a recipe for disaster. In fact I didn't make a comment on the effectiveness or risk of blitzing at all. I'm merely stating that expecting or desiring these things from the Seahawks is only going to lead to more frustration on your part.
I'm also being honest in saying the Cards are a fun team to watch and if these are things you want to see its not a terrible idea to follow them.

If you want to ENJOY watching the best defense in the history of the game WITHOUT FRUSTRATION you are going to have to let go of the idea of blitzing more though. Its never been a big part of our defense under ANY defensive coach here and it never will be.

I do believe our offense needs to start putting pressure on the opposing team before we start seeing opposing QB's holding the ball too long or forcing throws into tight windows though.

 

[Seymour]

I never said anything was a recipe for disaster. In fact I didn't make a comment on the effectiveness or risk of blitzing at all. I'm merely stating that expecting or desiring these things from the Seahawks is only going to lead to more frustration on your part.
I'm also being honest in saying the Cards are a fun team to watch and if these are things you want to see its not a terrible idea to follow them.

If you want to ENJOY watching the best defense in the history of the game WITHOUT FRUSTRATION you are going to have to let go of the idea of blitzing more though. Its never been a big part of our defense under ANY defensive coach here and it never will be.

I do believe our offense needs to start putting pressure on the opposing team before we start seeing opposing QB's holding the ball too long or forcing throws into tight windows though.

Is this a bad joke?? People like to see success with the team they love and follow. You do not get that same experience watching "the enemy" succeed. Exact opposite!! :141847_bnono:

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

I never said anything was a recipe for disaster. In fact I didn't make a comment on the effectiveness or risk of blitzing at all. I'm merely stating that expecting or desiring these things from the Seahawks is only going to lead to more frustration on your part.
I'm also being honest in saying the Cards are a fun team to watch and if these are things you want to see its not a terrible idea to follow them.

If you want to ENJOY watching the best defense in the history of the game WITHOUT FRUSTRATION you are going to have to let go of the idea of blitzing more though. Its never been a big part of our defense under ANY defensive coach here and it never will be.

I do believe our offense needs to start putting pressure on the opposing team before we start seeing opposing QB's holding the ball too long or forcing throws into tight windows though.

Is this a bad joke?? People like to see success with the team they love and follow. You do not get that same experience watching "the enemy" succeed. Exact opposite!! :141847_bnono:

His point was that since you will not see that style here, it's a good team to watch if you do like watching that style. As to which style succeeds the best, well let's just watch both and see

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

--
@GrahamBarfield Small sample (25 att.), but Christine Michael has gained 5+ yards on 44% of carries in Wk 1-2. Better than Rawls' nuclear 2015 rate (40.8%).
--