Seahawks new OC saying all the wrong things

[IndyHawk]

The reason to remove text in a quote and using ... is because it is UNRELATED, NON IMPORTANT information. To take out VITAL language from the quote is in my opinion only twisting what was said / written.

The part you removed is below

Quick three-step passes, bubble screens and traditional screens to a back are far superior options and offer a much greater chance of producing an explosive play. If you have a quarterback who can execute these plays with ease — and Seattle does — then running the ball is of little importance.

What he is really saying is if you can move the ball in the backfield, with passes, and utilizing the RB in that position then you should still get your 1-3 yards but also a bigger chance of breaking one free.

It still takes time off the clock (high catch rate) the same way a running play does, you still use the RB to bruise players and move the lines. You are just opening up for the run as well.

If you look at the NBA game the 3 point shot has taken a long time to change the game but today it is a completely different game because of the value of the 3. Now you use it wrong it goes like Houston against GS and you miss 27 in a row because you are stupid........ if you have the right players, game plan and execution you take good open 3s and have a higher success rate and you score more. As long as you don't go quick 3 and out and use quick passes for short yardage then you are still moving the ball, still eating clock and maintain a high rate of ball security. Of course you will at times run the ball but it is not the primary focus of your game

I agree with this principal and wrote it in many posts last year when we talked about wanting to avoid turnovers, eating clock. It can be done with a passing game as well.

Please read the entirety of my post .

I did

But the part I quoted is the part where the author is saying that "the running game is inefficient" and "running the ball is of little importance" NO matter the context, is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
.

This is incorrect. This is not what the author stated. Please read my entire post to see why this is not what he stated. To save the trouble

[i]Quick three-step passes, bubble screens and traditional screens to a back are far superior options and offer a much greater chance of producing an explosive play. If you have a quarterback who can execute these plays with ease — and Seattle does — [then] running the ball is of little importance.[/i]

He says if you find other ways to involve the running back and get yards from him then the running the ball for the sake of running the ball is of little importance.

If you cannot execute those then stick to the running game. He is saying with RW at the helm we could negate the importance of the running game if you playcall right. THAT is why the part that was taken out intentionally or not skewed the statements of the author

He lost it right there, trhee step drops are not what Wilson does, why he runs from the shotgun, this is where his height if he does not have defined lanes does get the better of him, and then he said the B word.

I never have seen RW throw a quick slant and his short passes are really not that good either.
He is limited in a few ways but thats why you see him in shotgun that's just how it is with him.
RW needs a running game to open up his passing more than a Favre or Brady did.

 

[toffee]

Ok Our new OC wasn’t my choice and was disappointed at the announcement of his hiring.

BUT

I do believe his statement of “run successfully even when the defense would be prepared for run” was a direct if subtle reach to old timers on our team to address our Super Bowl debacle. He basically tell boys that we will run with ball on one yard line and power though.

Nation media missed that point, our new OC’s effort to win the hearts and minds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sutz]

:34853_doh:

I've been watching the Seahawks for a lot of years. Throughout the Pete Carroll era, we have NOT necessarily been "run first" team. I think people miss the point, and it goes right to what the OC meant. The Pete Carroll Seahawks have always thrown a lot in the first half, perhaps too much, because, yeah it's hard to develop the run game from scratch in the 2d half.

The idea is to score first, or at least get the lead and then in the 2d half, you run a lot more than in the 1st half, burn the clock and rely on your D to keep the other guy from out-scoring you. The thing is, everybody tries to do that, except for the pass happy teams who can't run when they need to. So everybody knows you're going to run in the 2d half if you get the lead. That's when you need to be able to pick up "3 yards and a cloud of dust."

I think Schotty will probably do fine here.

 

[adeltaY]

And, the author is not implying that "Running just for the sake of running is an unhealthy ideology."

He's specifically saying that teams don't need much of a running game, that passing is king in the NFL.

"The best offensive coordinators in the league understand that running the ball is inefficient.... If you have a quarterback who can execute these plays with ease — and Seattle does — then running the ball is of little importance

Because if you rarely run the ball and just throw it a lot, the defenses...what? Can't stop pass plays? Don't know what's coming? Aren't able to pin their ears back and rush the passer?

That was the most idiotic, and biased article I think I've ever read. The author was in a bad mood and wanted to trash somebody. Hey, Seattle is a soft target. Let's tear them down.

That's like the tweet from some former NFL executive named Banner badmouthing Schottenheimer. Which is rich, considering the"former" exec was fired from the Browns.

Ivo, keep in mind against the Texans we were using play action over and over again and they kept falling for it....we had five rushing yards that game. The key to play action is faking the run, not actually being able to run. There are stats that back this up.

Not saying anything about Schotty. Listened to his press conference and it sounded good to me. Pete wants the balanced attack, but I'm afraid the defense will not be good enough to play that style of ball. Jags were able to do it last year, but their pass defense was superb, one of the best in years. Even then they only made 10-6.

To your Gurley, Saquon points. With Gurley the pattern is already there. Their offense sucked in 2016 and Gurley sucked. Their offense was great in 2017 and Gurley was great. RBs can only do so much. OL, offensive system, and QB are more important. Similarly, Jags were only 7-6 when Fournette started, he had a limited impact. Their OL was more important in their run game success. I think Saquon was a reach due to position. It all depends on the team tbh. A pass rusher, stud OL, obviously QB, maybe WR are more valuable IMO.

 

[Smellyman]

I don't pay any attention to coach speak.

If a coach or coordinator ever said anything of substance in a press conference, it'd be the first time.

Yup

 

[Spin Doctor]

Usually I agree with your posts, but this one is way off and you're using only the negative aspects of Schottenheimer's past. He was so "rigid" about running the ball because that was his best chances at winning, and that's what Rex asked him to do.

Rex Ryan's favorite saying was "Ground and Pound! Ground and Pound!" He and Brian set up the game plan against Detroit because Ryan prefers to play a strong defense, run the ball, and throw as little as possible. Why? Because his QB had a 53.8% completion rating.

At one time in New York, they had the #9 ranked offense. People keep trashing him over his time with the Jets and the Rams! That is completely idiotic! You can't blame him for Rex Ryan and Jeff Fisher! Jeebus!

I've gone back and looked at his offensive successes and failures, and they all have one thing that mirrors the results, the QB he had, and the completion percentage.

When he had a healthy Chad Pennington or a healthy Brett Favre, Schottenheimer had very good offenses.

But when he had Mark Sanchez or Austin Davis, he had to rely on the running game. It was all he had. Yet people choose to ignore the facts, and blame the failures of Jeff Fisher and Austin Davis on Brian. Rex Ryan and Mark Sanchez are his fault too, as was the ButtFumble.

The only things he had going for him were Zac Stacy (who kicked our ass), Leon Washington and Thomas Jones.

Brian Schottenheimer's philosophy is the same one that got us to our first SuperB Owl win. Run the ball and use play action passes to control time of possession, thereby keeping your defense fresh and fired up to go!

It's a successful model that helped us have the number one defense 4 years in a row. Our offense wasn't ranked up there all the time, but that didn't matter. All that matterEd was T.O.P and wearing down the opposing defense.

People need to stop pigeon holing Schottenheimer based on rigged and incomplete statistics!

Where did that game plan get the New York Jets? They were playing right into the strength of the Lions. As soon as Rex Ryan told him to stop using the game plan they went on to win the game. I don't care if that was what Rex Ryan initially wanted, rarely do things go as you draw them up in practice. One of the things that defines offensive coordinators is their ability to adjust to what defenses are throwing at them. Schottenheimer has not demonstrated this ability in any of his stints. He does exactly what his HC asks of him, and this is his greatest weakness. He does not deviate from his game plans, he will continue down the path to hell unless he is specifically told to otherwise. I don't want that kind of guy on the Seahawks, especially with Pete Carroll as head coach. Carroll has proven time and time again that his judgement is questionable at best when it comes to the offensive side of the ball. I want a guy that is able to make his own decisions when the situation calls for it, I don't think Schottenheimer is capable of that.

As far as his past stints never did he have a "very good offense", his highest rated offense was 11th, most of the time he was hanging in the late teens, and 20s. The only thing Schottenheimer has consistently in the NFL is trot out mediocre offenses. His track record is not very good no matter which way you look at it. I don't see how you can reconcile this fact. I understand that people want to be pumped up about the Seahawks, but his track record is pretty bad.

As far as the Super Bowl is concerned we had a few things going for us. The first thing is our defense. We had one of the best defenses that this NFL has ever seen. We are one of those defenses legendary defenses that even had a nickname that will forever be associated with it (legion of boom). We completely defined the way teams look at secondaries, and approached the game schematically. Now tall cornerbacks are in vogue, and many teams are aiming to copy the 2013 Seahawks defense, many with success. Pete Carroll is a bonafide defensive savant. What he did was unprecidented, and in the years 2013, and 2014 we boasted the number 1 defense. In 2015 and 2016 we were very close to being at that level as well.

With this style of defense you want to lean on them, and limit mistakes on offense. What we did in those years was absolutely the best coarse of action. The question I'm going to ask is can we replicate that kind of success with our current roster? My answer is no.

We have a host of wholesale changes, a few things need to happen in order for the Seahawks to reclaim their greatness on the defensive side of the ball. Griffin had a good rookie year, he needs to build upon that and become a true shutdown cornerback. We need to have a safety that is able to adequately fill in for Chancellor. He may never play another snap again, and if he does he has a less than stellar recent history with injuries. We need another pass rusher to develop next to Clark, and we need his pass rush to be more consistent. I think Maxwell will be fine with Thomas shading him. Realistically I don't think every single one of these things will happen.

I do not think we have the personnel on the offense to have a great running game on offense. I don't think Solari will magically fix that with one season of work, and a huge hold over of Cable guys. We really should be looking to structure this offense around Russell Wilson, and his unique talents. Again, I don't think Schottenheimer is capable of accomplishing this task or rather, I don't think Carroll is capable of making this a reality. Schottenheimer is just a rank and file guy. He is really going to be running Pete's offense. That doesn't mean abandoning the run. What I'm saying is we need to be playing to our strengths as a team. The team will be better at running this year, no doubt, but I don't think we have the personnel to run a full on ground and pound style of offense like we had in 2013, nor do I think we should run that style due to big question marks on our defense.

 

[Seafan]

I don't care what you take from all this. The threat of a running game will make any offense better. Statistically, RW was one of the best passers in the league last year but without a threat of a running game the team was not a contender. You ignore the running game at your own peril. Pete understands the need for balance. So does Schott.

 

[hawknation2018]

Steven Ruiz comes off looking like a CLOWN, sorry.

A strong run game increases the probability of pass success rate.

 

[chris98251]

Usually I agree with your posts, but this one is way off and you're using only the negative aspects of Schottenheimer's past. He was so "rigid" about running the ball because that was his best chances at winning, and that's what Rex asked him to do.

Rex Ryan's favorite saying was "Ground and Pound! Ground and Pound!" He and Brian set up the game plan against Detroit because Ryan prefers to play a strong defense, run the ball, and throw as little as possible. Why? Because his QB had a 53.8% completion rating.

At one time in New York, they had the #9 ranked offense. People keep trashing him over his time with the Jets and the Rams! That is completely idiotic! You can't blame him for Rex Ryan and Jeff Fisher! Jeebus!

I've gone back and looked at his offensive successes and failures, and they all have one thing that mirrors the results, the QB he had, and the completion percentage.

When he had a healthy Chad Pennington or a healthy Brett Favre, Schottenheimer had very good offenses.

But when he had Mark Sanchez or Austin Davis, he had to rely on the running game. It was all he had. Yet people choose to ignore the facts, and blame the failures of Jeff Fisher and Austin Davis on Brian. Rex Ryan and Mark Sanchez are his fault too, as was the ButtFumble.

The only things he had going for him were Zac Stacy (who kicked our ass), Leon Washington and Thomas Jones.

Brian Schottenheimer's philosophy is the same one that got us to our first SuperB Owl win. Run the ball and use play action passes to control time of possession, thereby keeping your defense fresh and fired up to go!

It's a successful model that helped us have the number one defense 4 years in a row. Our offense wasn't ranked up there all the time, but that didn't matter. All that matterEd was T.O.P and wearing down the opposing defense.

People need to stop pigeon holing Schottenheimer based on rigged and incomplete statistics!

Where did that game plan get the New York Jets? They were playing right into the strength of the Lions. As soon as Rex Ryan told him to stop using the game plan they went on to win the game. I don't care if that was what Rex Ryan initially wanted, rarely do things go as you draw them up in practice. One of the things that defines offensive coordinators is their ability to adjust to what defenses are throwing at them. Schottenheimer has not demonstrated this ability in any of his stints. He does exactly what his HC asks of him, and this is his greatest weakness. He does not deviate from his game plans, he will continue down the path to hell unless he is specifically told to otherwise. I don't want that kind of guy on the Seahawks, especially with Pete Carroll as head coach. Carroll has proven time and time again that his judgement is questionable at best when it comes to the offensive side of the ball. I want a guy that is able to make his own decisions when the situation calls for it, I don't think Schottenheimer is capable of that.

As far as his past stints never did he have a "very good offense", his highest rated offense was 11th, most of the time he was hanging in the late teens, and 20s. The only thing Schottenheimer has consistently in the NFL is trot out mediocre offenses. His track record is not very good no matter which way you look at it. I don't see how you can reconcile this fact. I understand that people want to be pumped up about the Seahawks, but his track record is pretty bad.

As far as the Super Bowl is concerned we had a few things going for us. The first thing is our defense. We had one of the best defenses that this NFL has ever seen. We are one of those defenses legendary defenses that even had a nickname that will forever be associated with it (legion of boom). We completely defined the way teams look at secondaries, and approached the game schematically. Now tall cornerbacks are in vogue, and many teams are aiming to copy the 2013 Seahawks defense, many with success. Pete Carroll is a bonafide defensive savant. What he did was unprecidented, and in the years 2013, and 2014 we boasted the number 1 defense. In 2015 and 2016 we were very close to being at that level as well.

With this style of defense you want to lean on them, and limit mistakes on offense. What we did in those years was absolutely the best coarse of action. The question I'm going to ask is can we replicate that kind of success with our current roster? My answer is no.

We have a host of wholesale changes, a few things need to happen in order for the Seahawks to reclaim their greatness on the defensive side of the ball. Griffin had a good rookie year, he needs to build upon that and become a true shutdown cornerback. We need to have a safety that is able to adequately fill in for Chancellor. He may never play another snap again, and if he does he has a less than stellar recent history with injuries. We need another pass rusher to develop next to Clark, and we need his pass rush to be more consistent. I think Maxwell will be fine with Thomas shading him. Realistically I don't think every single one of these things will happen.

I do not think we have the personnel on the offense to have a great running game on offense. I don't think Solari will magically fix that with one season of work, and a huge hold over of Cable guys. We really should be looking to structure this offense around Russell Wilson, and his unique talents. Again, I don't think Schottenheimer is capable of accomplishing this task or rather, I don't think Carroll is capable of making this a reality. Schottenheimer is just a rank and file guy. He is really going to be running Pete's offense. That doesn't mean abandoning the run. What I'm saying is we need to be playing to our strengths as a team. The team will be better at running this year, no doubt, but I don't think we have the personnel to run a full on ground and pound style of offense like we had in 2013, nor do I think we should run that style due to big question marks on our defense.

Jeremy Bates was fired for not doing what Pete wanted, go against the Head Coach at your peril, he also had a incident I heard at a party but his pushing the deep ball instead of the run was a major factor as well.

 

[hawknation2018]

It's all conjecture. Bates wasn't getting stuff done. Bevell wasn't getting stuff done.

Just listening to Brian Schottenheimer, he speaks with a level of intelligence and authenticity that is a stark departure from previous Carroll offensive coordinators. His understanding of the run game is another departure.

 

[adeltaY]

I don't care what you take from all this. The threat of a running game will make any offense better. Statistically, RW was one of the best passers in the league last year but without a threat of a running game the team was not a contender. You ignore the running game at your own peril. Pete understands the need for balance. So does Schott.

The only "wow" stat RW had last year was TD/INT ratio. Completion percentage, passer rating, passing yards, and yards per attempt weren't good enough to sustain the offense at a contender-level.

If our run game is going to be as bad as it was last year (nobody wants or expects this), he's going to have to throw for at least 40 TDs, 4500 (passing) yards, 8.0 ypa, 67% completion, 105 rating for us to be SB contenders. He's done the latter two in 2015 (high efficiency), but not at the volume required to sustain an offense with a bottom-five running game. With Pete's philosophy and our OL, I don't see Russ putting up those numbers.

Thus, I agree with you and many other posters here. If the run game can contribute, say, 1500 non-RW rushing yards and he can run for around 300 additional yards, all we need is a high efficiency passing game that contributes 4000 yards and we should be a top-tier offense, at least in terms of moving the ball. 5800 total yards was right in the 6-11 range for offensive rankings last year. I think we can all be happy with that kind of offensive improvement for this coming season.

 

[RolandDeschain]

It's all conjecture. Bates wasn't getting stuff done. Bevell wasn't getting stuff done.

Bevell wasn't getting stuff done. I don't know where you gather that the same issue plagued Bates.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Usually I agree with your posts, but this one is way off and you're using only the negative aspects of Schottenheimer's past. He was so "rigid" about running the ball because that was his best chances at winning, and that's what Rex asked him to do.

Rex Ryan's favorite saying was "Ground and Pound! Ground and Pound!" He and Brian set up the game plan against Detroit because Ryan prefers to play a strong defense, run the ball, and throw as little as possible. Why? Because his QB had a 53.8% completion rating.

At one time in New York, they had the #9 ranked offense. People keep trashing him over his time with the Jets and the Rams! That is completely idiotic! You can't blame him for Rex Ryan and Jeff Fisher! Jeebus!

I've gone back and looked at his offensive successes and failures, and they all have one thing that mirrors the results, the QB he had, and the completion percentage.

When he had a healthy Chad Pennington or a healthy Brett Favre, Schottenheimer had very good offenses.

But when he had Mark Sanchez or Austin Davis, he had to rely on the running game. It was all he had. Yet people choose to ignore the facts, and blame the failures of Jeff Fisher and Austin Davis on Brian. Rex Ryan and Mark Sanchez are his fault too, as was the ButtFumble.

The only things he had going for him were Zac Stacy (who kicked our ass), Leon Washington and Thomas Jones.

Brian Schottenheimer's philosophy is the same one that got us to our first SuperB Owl win. Run the ball and use play action passes to control time of possession, thereby keeping your defense fresh and fired up to go!

It's a successful model that helped us have the number one defense 4 years in a row. Our offense wasn't ranked up there all the time, but that didn't matter. All that matterEd was T.O.P and wearing down the opposing defense.

People need to stop pigeon holing Schottenheimer based on rigged and incomplete statistics!

Where did that game plan get the New York Jets? They were playing right into the strength of the Lions. As soon as Rex Ryan told him to stop using the game plan they went on to win the game. I don't care if that was what Rex Ryan initially wanted, rarely do things go as you draw them up in practice. One of the things that defines offensive coordinators is their ability to adjust to what defenses are throwing at them. Schottenheimer has not demonstrated this ability in any of his stints. He does exactly what his HC asks of him, and this is his greatest weakness. He does not deviate from his game plans, he will continue down the path to hell unless he is specifically told to otherwise. I don't want that kind of guy on the Seahawks, especially with Pete Carroll as head coach. Carroll has proven time and time again that his judgement is questionable at best when it comes to the offensive side of the ball. I want a guy that is able to make his own decisions when the situation calls for it, I don't think Schottenheimer is capable of that.

As far as his past stints never did he have a "very good offense", his highest rated offense was 11th, most of the time he was hanging in the late teens, and 20s. The only thing Schottenheimer has consistently in the NFL is trot out mediocre offenses. His track record is not very good no matter which way you look at it. I don't see how you can reconcile this fact. I understand that people want to be pumped up about the Seahawks, but his track record is pretty bad.

As far as the Super Bowl is concerned we had a few things going for us. The first thing is our defense. We had one of the best defenses that this NFL has ever seen. We are one of those defenses legendary defenses that even had a nickname that will forever be associated with it (legion of boom). We completely defined the way teams look at secondaries, and approached the game schematically. Now tall cornerbacks are in vogue, and many teams are aiming to copy the 2013 Seahawks defense, many with success. Pete Carroll is a bonafide defensive savant. What he did was unprecidented, and in the years 2013, and 2014 we boasted the number 1 defense. In 2015 and 2016 we were very close to being at that level as well.

With this style of defense you want to lean on them, and limit mistakes on offense. What we did in those years was absolutely the best coarse of action. The question I'm going to ask is can we replicate that kind of success with our current roster? My answer is no.

We have a host of wholesale changes, a few things need to happen in order for the Seahawks to reclaim their greatness on the defensive side of the ball. Griffin had a good rookie year, he needs to build upon that and become a true shutdown cornerback. We need to have a safety that is able to adequately fill in for Chancellor. He may never play another snap again, and if he does he has a less than stellar recent history with injuries. We need another pass rusher to develop next to Clark, and we need his pass rush to be more consistent. I think Maxwell will be fine with Thomas shading him. Realistically I don't think every single one of these things will happen.

I do not think we have the personnel on the offense to have a great running game on offense. I don't think Solari will magically fix that with one season of work, and a huge hold over of Cable guys. We really should be looking to structure this offense around Russell Wilson, and his unique talents. Again, I don't think Schottenheimer is capable of accomplishing this task or rather, I don't think Carroll is capable of making this a reality. Schottenheimer is just a rank and file guy. He is really going to be running Pete's offense. That doesn't mean abandoning the run. What I'm saying is we need to be playing to our strengths as a team. The team will be better at running this year, no doubt, but I don't think we have the personnel to run a full on ground and pound style of offense like we had in 2013, nor do I think we should run that style due to big question marks on our defense.

Jeremy Bates was fired for not doing what Pete wanted, go against the Head Coach at your peril, he also had a incident I heard at a party but his pushing the deep ball instead of the run was a major factor as well.

Bates was fired because he showed up drunk at an important function that Paul Allen was hosting, and he made a fool of himself and Paul Allen. Bates was running the style of offense that Carroll wanted, something akin to the Shannahan style of WCO. The Seahawks were not able to run the ball well during 2010, even with Marshawn Lynch due to poor O-Line play. Bates's philosophy was to open the running lanes by forcing defenses to play back, and it worked in many cases. Bates also butted heads with Gibbs.

What I'm saying here is that OC's are granted a fair bit of autonomy to adjust the playcalls if the original plan isn't working. Just look at some of Bevell balls to the wall passing games, even with Lynch around. Those weren't what Pete originally had in his mind, no doubt. The reason why the Jets example is talked about a lot is because it is quite rare to see somebody not deviate. Rex Ryan had to go over and say "We're down 20, do you want to win, or do you want to run the ball 40 times?". Schottenheimer then said "we gotta get those 40 carries coach". Rex Ryan tells him to "forget it, we can pass on them now".

That is the kind of thing that has derailed Schotty's carrier wherever he has been. It's unfortunate because his play designs aren't half bad, and he seems like an intelligent guy. He is a great QB coach as well. He just does not adjust or waver from the initial game plan even if it is not working. This has been a reoccurring theme since his first stint as an OC. I really hope that this time he gets it, and Pete doesn't have an iron grip over the offense.

 

[hawknation2018]

It's all conjecture. Bates wasn't getting stuff done. Bevell wasn't getting stuff done.

Bevell wasn't getting stuff done. I don't know where you gather that the same issue plagued Bates.

The horrible offensive results for Bates in college and the NFL?

 

[vin.couve12]

It's rare that I ever agree with Ben Baldwin or most of the writers on FG, the new lead writer maybe most of all. They only believe in passing the ball because they are impatient fools who never played and most importantly, never felt the game. Their "analytics" are specifically skewed towards their agenda of a high octane passing attack. FG went downhill extremely badly when Danny Kelly left. Arthur and Baldwin take the football out of the NFL, and most importantly, they are almost always wrong. They are the NW weathermen of "football" writing, i.e. wrong so often that they might as well not be there and wonder how they have jobs.

 

[adeltaY]

It's rare that I ever agree with Ben Baldwin or most of the writers on FG, the new lead writer maybe most of all. They only believe in passing the ball because they are impatient fools who never played and most importantly, never felt the game. Their "analytics" are specifically skewed towards their agenda of a high octane passing attack. FG went downhill extremely badly when Danny Kelly left. Arthur and Baldwin take the football out of the NFL, and most importantly, they are almost always wrong. They are the NW weathermen of "football" writing, i.e. wrong so often that they might as well not be there and wonder how they have jobs.

Couldn't you say that about anything statistics apply to though? Basketball, baseball, etc. The point of stats is to take the feeling out of whatever you're analysing. I'm not saying I disagree with you, I think there's something to be said for the human element of the game and stats can't capture that.

 

[vin.couve12]

It's rare that I ever agree with Ben Baldwin or most of the writers on FG, the new lead writer maybe most of all. They only believe in passing the ball because they are impatient fools who never played and most importantly, never felt the game. Their "analytics" are specifically skewed towards their agenda of a high octane passing attack. FG went downhill extremely badly when Danny Kelly left. Arthur and Baldwin take the football out of the NFL, and most importantly, they are almost always wrong. They are the NW weathermen of "football" writing, i.e. wrong so often that they might as well not be there and wonder how they have jobs.

Couldn't you say that about anything statistics apply to though? Basketball, baseball, etc. The point of stats is to take the feeling out of whatever you're analysing. I'm not saying I disagree with you, I think there's something to be said for the human element of the game and stats can't capture that.

Okay.

There is a balance to all things. We see this throughout human history in actions and reactions. It is evident in religion, sociology, politics, and basically every part of human life. A majority will have its way for a period of time, but it's very existence gives cause and reason for the opposite reaction. Belief tries to deny these things, but inevitably fall to opposition that its very existence inevitably creates.

I think for a time, it was a passing league, as teams adapted to rules to literally try to make it so.

But then teams can still be willfully dominated. The Seahawks showed the NFL as much quite literally. The last two years of playoff teams and the more dominant teams in years prior support that.

The reason why I bring up opinions of those who have never played the game is because the lack of experience of getting the ish knocked out of you and having the will and determination of getting back up and inviting the opportunity to do better next time, regardless of how good you are or lack there of. Analytics, in its current state, leave a lot to be desired. It is vague enough that you can continue to tell a bit of a white lie, but football is usually about matchups. There are 22 variables and you have to maximize or minimize those values.

So let's talk about trends. The ILB/MLB position is getting extremely light as of late. There are quite a few guys who are merely 220 pounds or so. Teams don't have the luxury of a Wagner at 245 with 33 inch arms and a 4.4 40, but these players can be singled out like a weakness in the herd in the running game. Teams have gone this direction because of the pass game and zone blocking/beating angles, but they are mere targets to a power running scheme, with little effectiveness.

State of the league is one thing. You have to counter that, but you also have to value and recognize the allowance of what the 22 variables give you. Or not.

Either way, you have to be balanced. One dimensional of any aspect of existence is short lived.

 

[chris98251]

To Echo vin.couve12 's post, prior to the late 70's and 80's there were hardly any 300 pounders in the league, then a team got a couple and the run game began to dominate, you also seen changes in the passing game with rules and a blowout of passing stats began, Defenses began to counter with big MLB's big DT's and really fast edge guys and 4.4 guys at CB and heavy hitting Safety's like Lott, Easley, and some others. Guys on the O line got bigger to enforce the run game, now it's 325 or so across the board, the ZBS came into play to take down the big Dline and edge rushers as well as gap shooting MLB's support in the run game. We seen WR's get really tall now and look like TE's with speed, offenses adapted with the WCO and YAC and Quicker routes to suck a defense up with run and short passing, 50 percent completion rates began to be looked at as low, now you looked at 65 percent being good.

We're part of the adaptive aspect again, Pete's defense dominated on a level unexpected with speed and size in the secondary, speed at LB across the board, the Leo and the D line rotation he had, more rules implemented to try to reduce any contact with Receivers since our DB's were playing to what the rules would allow.


Again now there is an adapt period, the league has almost caught up with Pete's philosophy that worked, other teams now have a reflection of our defense, drafting the same type of players. Our staff has been hired across the league and brings the teachings we had initially, which means.... we have to do it better then they do and create new twists to what we do.

Yes I have skipped a few things but a history would take more time to write then a Bible, it was more just a over view of trends and how things change and get countered and then adapted to.


On offense the way to counter smaller and faster is to go with power and run to bring up a defense to take advantage of the different layers left vacant when a team cheats to shut down an aspect of your offense. That's where Bevell failed, he had no intermediate passing game and or tree that functioned and there had to be tip offs to what we were running besides the sheer predictability a lot of fans knew what was coming as well.


Not having a functional running game the last two years or any pass blocking just magnified the disaster that was supposedly our offense.

 

[jammerhawk]

Chris that was a good post!

In the end the need for balance is the key to regular success. The team needs to run to set up play action and that intermediate passing game the Patriots use so effectively allows the longer ball to be easier to complete. However, if one part is broken like it became under Cable/Bevell then the whole O starts to look ugly.

I truly believe as you observe that there were tells with Bevell’s O that allowed opponents ease in defending or it was so predictable and simple that it was easy to read. Cable’s run coordination wasn’t coordinated and his OLine couldn’t pass protect then there were constant necessary AD LIBs by RW who was under the highest pressure of any QB in the league. How this wasn’t clear to the FO is a mystery to me, but Cable was given latitude for far longer than he should have been. It was pretty clear to anyone watching with a critical eye that the OLine despite considerable investment of draft resources was not performing as expected. When Lynch finally broke down b/c of Cable/Bevell the whole unit looked out of sinc. In fact even with Lynch the O was not always in sinc and the team frequently couldn’t run when it needed to run, or convert by pass those must make 3rd downs. Besides that the clueless OC couldn’t make use of special players or take advantage of significant mismatches with any reliability.

The O was unferperforming the the D by an unfair differential. In any competitive circumstance that is a basis for quiet discord between units that becomes louder when there is a manifest failure. That happened to the team in XLIX and that epic fail that was “that play” causing a hurtful loss which honestly fell in terms of responsibility on both O and D, but was seen to be on the O which couldn’t carry it’s weight. Why it took so darn long to recognize this situation escapes me but the changes have finally been made by a FO that has at last awakened to the reality the O was not playing in balance or well.

The recent comment by Scotty that the team has to be able to run even when their opponent knows it’s coming is simply reflective of the Holmgren style thinking that effective execution allows the O to impose it’s will on an opponent’s D. The talk of “run first” is just talk; but the ability to run with some effectiveness to avoid being one dimensional or wear on an opponent is really what the new OC is talking about. This comment doesn’t really mean much more than just that. Besides that it might be nice to see what Wilson could do with some time to make a few reads.

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]

Everyone told us Pete Carroll Couldn't win at the NFL level. Nobody would buy into his college message... His NFL record spoke for itself...

Philly won the title.. 3rd in rushing. GROUND GAMES MATTER


Fake news. Go Hawks.