The stat that will hold us back: 1005 yards

[RiverDog]

Hmmmm 8 for 50 or 9 for 85...think I'll go with better this week.

This week vs. last week, yes, 8 is better than 9 and 85 is better than 50. But not when you compare it over the course of the season and certainly not when you compare it over the past 4 games. We had 7 against the Vikings, 8 vs. the Saints, 9 vs. the Niners, and 8 vs. the Giants. I don't call that getting better "lately", as the poster was suggesting.

 

[SonicHawk]

Hold us back?

I think it's an interesting stat to watch and certainly of worry, but hold us back? That's a little presumptuous.

 

[brettb3]

Sure, if you want something to be concerned about, I suppose you can cite the penalties. But studies have shown that there is zero correlation between penalty yardage and wins. It just isn't as big a deal as some make it out to be.

 

[HawkWow]

Hmmmm 8 for 50 or 9 for 85...think I'll go with better this week.

This week vs. last week, yes, 8 is better than 9 and 85 is better than 50. But not when you compare it over the course of the season and certainly not when you compare it over the past 4 games. We had 7 against the Vikings, 8 vs. the Saints, 9 vs. the Niners, and 8 vs. the Giants. I don't call that getting better "lately", as the poster was suggesting.

The poster (me) wasn't suggesting, I was asking. I said it seems like we are getting better...no? And while we ran up the same number of penalties, we were penalized much fewer yards and yards penalized is the subject of this thread.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

12-2

Drama much?

 

[Hawks46]

No drama, the penalties are driving me nuts as well. We punted twice because of false starts, one of which was on 3rd down.

We would have 4 less penalties if two guys actually watched the ball being snapped (like they teach you to do from peewee on up) and the other guys actually knew the snap count. These are dumb lack of concentration penalties. If you're not concentrating, it can hurt in other areas, obviously.

I didn't see Chancellor's hit but it sounds like it was yet another BS subjective call. I'm getting weary of seeing these on the defense, and it drives me nuts seeing the complete lack of consistency within each game from ref to ref, from each different ref crew and from game to game. Like some said, Miller might be concussed, the guy that blocked the Cincy punter was higher up than Tate was on Lee, etc. etc.

While we're on a thread about penalties: is Wilson head bobbing? That's twice in the last two games he's been called for false starts. You never see this on the QB in this league....so is what he's going egregious or ticky tacky by officials ?

 

[chrispy]

I think there are aspects to talk about:

1)Tate has been called for offensive PI a few times over the last few games. Is the aggressive nature of our DBs having an impact on our receivers? ... and might that show in offensive penalties?

2)With the understanding that the SuperBowl is the most watched program on TV, and watched by potential new fans, new advertisers, new sponsors to the League, how different will that game be called? Will the aggressive nature of the team need more adjustment because the game is being called tighter?

3)With depth at CB, can substitutions help to manage penalties depending on the situation? Might pulling Browner and subbing Thurmond/Lane save a penalty on a key down just because of reputation? (not because of actual contact/press, just reputation)

4)Is the OL jumping offsides as acceptable as a PI call on Sherman? How does that coaching staff manage that disparity: praising our DBs for being aggressive and scolding the OL for being undisciplined?

 

[AbsolutNET]

Penalties against a very good team? We lost.

Penalties against the Giants? Not a big deal.

We can't expect to win playoff games easily with 8 or 9 penalties, especially the kind that give the D free plays or kill big plays on our side. I don't think anyone here is complaining about calls against our secondary now and then, its the silly procedural flags and holds that hurt. Hawks had 2 false starts and 2 off sides yesterday (and one off side that was given to us with a horrible baiting call on Eli). Thurmond bailed us out on one with a pick after we gave them free downs, and one cost us 4 points. Those could be big deals against teams that are capable of staying close.

It's easy to say "12-2" but it would be nice to be able to examine things in a vacuum around here once in a while.

 

[Hawknballs]

The dumb 5 yard penalties need to be cleaned up - false starts, delay of game, offsides, etc. . . they seem like the more overlooked penalties but they are huge at times. if not for a few bad 5-yard penalties that game would have been over in the first quarter.

That being said there was a false start called yesterday that was complete fabrication.

I don't mind the PI and defensive holding as much, because we end up getting away with a lot and that style of play is what makes our D so good. It's the cost of doing business with having the most badass D in the league. As long as we're not getting bad personal fouls; the kind that are totally avoidable. There are some 'personal fouls' that will happen and aren't neccesarily acts of stupidity.

 

[Scottemojo]

I think there are aspects to talk about:

1)Tate has been called for offensive PI a few times over the last few games. Is the aggressive nature of our DBs having an impact on our receivers? ... and might that show in offensive penalties?

2)With the understanding that the SuperBowl is the most watched program on TV, and watched by potential new fans, new advertisers, new sponsors to the League, how different will that game be called? Will the aggressive nature of the team need more adjustment because the game is being called tighter?

3)With depth at CB, can substitutions help to manage penalties depending on the situation? Might pulling Browner and subbing Thurmond/Lane save a penalty on a key down just because of reputation? (not because of actual contact/press, just reputation)

4)Is the OL jumping offsides as acceptable as a PI call on Sherman? How does that coaching staff manage that disparity: praising our DBs for being aggressive and scolding the OL for being undisciplined?

1. Provide specifics. I recall Tate being called for OPI twice this year. Not a few times over the last few games. Please correct me if I am wrong.
2. The crew last year was handpicked specifically because they would let players play. It really benefitted the Ravens. And the Niners. Both heavily penalized teams last year.
3. That seems kind of silly. And Browner or Maxwell, either one is going to be grabby. Reputation aside, play the best players. End of story.
4. Offensive linemen false starting is is a procedural issue, and it is the only real consistent penalty problem we have had. False starts, bad hand placement that results in holds, clock issues, those are the ones that have hamstrung the offense. Your complaints about aggressive coverage resulting in a PI call are kind of hollow when that very aggression is what leads to turnovers. THere is some take the good with the bad in that area.

 

[RiverDog]

I can handle the PI calls against our defense. I don't want us to change the style in which our CB's play. Same goes for offensive holding on passing plays. If an OL of ours senses that he's getting beat, I'd rather them risk getting called for holding rather than take a chance on a blind side sack and a turnover, or worse yet, an injury to our quarterback. The ones that really get me upset are the pre-snap penalties, both on offense and on defense. With a proper emphasis, those types of penalties can be mitigated.

The top 10 most penalized teams, in order, are Sea, TB, StL, Den, Hou, Oak, Buf, Cle, NYJ, and Bal. Half of those teams are in last place in their division. Granted, it's hard to argue with a 12-2 record, but it's not as if they're no big deal, either. It's a problem, and something our coaching staff should be taking steps to correct.

 

[jblaze]

It's not just the fact of the penalties themselves, it's when we get them. They always seem to reverse a very good play of ours on offense or to give the opposing offense a first down on third for example.

When you're hyper aggressive like we are, we're going to get penalties and I'm good with that. But the timing of them has been really untimely.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

It's not just the fact of the penalties themselves, it's when we get them. They always seem to reverse a very good play of ours on offense or to give the opposing offense a first down on third for example.

When you're hyper aggressive like we are, we're going to get penalties and I'm good with that. But the timing of them has been really untimely.

I think most people are talking about the stupid procedural penalties, false starts, delay of game by the goal line, etc.

I blame Pete for the delay of game penalty by the goal line, not Russell. He took too damn long deciding on whether he was going for it or not. That kind of indecision might not come back to haunt you in a game against a terrible Giants team.........but it sure as hell might in a tight playoff game or god forbid SB.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Fair enough. They won, and continue to win. To assume or even worry about it, that's for other people. I choose to believe that NOBODY can beat the Hawks at home, regardless.

 

[jblaze]

True, I firmly believe no one can beat us except ourselves. Penalties or dumb turnovers could hamper us but I actually think we're good enough to even overcome those if necessary.

I actually like how Pete and John have put this team together. We have a point guard for a QB who just distributes the ball to 7-8 receivers a game and a RB who can carry the load. Makes it really difficult to game plan against because it's someone new every game that steps up and comes through. RW doesn't try to do too much and just takes what the defense gives him which is usually a lot given they're spread so thin with so many weapons to cover.

I hate to bring it up but I still really want to see Harvin in this offense. He would add another dimension and would require a lot of attention from defenses that it would get crazy explosive in my opinion. Whenever it is we get him back, I can't wait.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

But I get the point about the penalties, it does get maddening. It was nice to see a game where they seemed to let the teams play, for the most part.

 

[pmedic920]

The really stupid penalties piss me off, but some of them I see as a "worth it" trade off.
What I mean by that is, some of those just come with the style of play. Aggressive, physical, fast, "we the man". It's the Seahawks attitude, especially on defense. When they play with that chip on the shoulder style, they are going to draw a few flags. IMHO if PC forced a real hard line on removing all penalties, it would change the overall dynamic of their playing style.
Yes avoid the STUPID ones, but some off them are "worth it". Least in my book they are.
GoHawks.

PS I know stupid is a relative term, I hope you know what I mean.

 

[253hawk]

Watching the game again, Eli is definitely moving his hands forward a lot in time with his hard counts (which he and his brother are pretty good at) and he did it on that first one that drew Irvin offsides. The only other jump was Bennett, but that was only a quick hop into the neutral zone and he got back, but the OL moved as a result. Someone definitely noticed it and pointed it out to the refs because Eli was doing it a lot before he was caught.

Tough hits and DPI can actually be quite beneficial for our defense though because it infuriates the WR's (especially the divas) and can force them to alter their routes slightly if they don't want to be jammed and hand-checked every single play. That might give the front 4 just a little bit more time to pressure the QB or flush the pocket and turn an easy set throw into a wild scramble. Pretty soon the QB gets tired of it and just starts forcing it and throwing the ball up for grabs.

 

[plyka]

Yeah, I mean is this *really* necessary on a punter? Dude better get a fat fine for that.

I think there is some confusion regarding this penalty. It only (should only, but refs are stupid sometimes) takes place on a "defenseless receiver" or a QB in the pocket. If the QB is running with the ball, you can have a helmet to helmet hit. If a WR is running with the ball, you can have a helmet to helmet hit. If you are blocking someone, you can have a helmet to helmet hit. This is why Sherman was so pissed off that they gave him a penalty for hitting that WRs deep in the endzone a few weeks back. He thought Brees was running, and thus it was ok to hit the WRs as the WRs would be "blocking him."

The punter in the Cincinnati game was fair play. The Steeler player was blocking him, so it's not possible to have a helmet to helmet penalty.

 

[253hawk]

Where did I say it should have been flagged as H2H? It wasn't even flagged as a penalty. Dude got a fractured jaw and a broken vertebrae...you can see the crown of the helmet going right into his chin. If that 'block' isn't a penalty in some way, then the NFL are complete hypocrites about this whole player safety thing.

Tate did the exact same thing to Sean Lee last year (actually quite a bit cleaner and their sizes were reversed) and got fined $21K.