TheLegendOfBoom
Well-known member
Fade":3mrvtnyd said:Popeyejones":3mrvtnyd said:Fade":3mrvtnyd said:King Dog":3mrvtnyd said:What do you think is happening?
I want your opinion.
Well, nobody wants my opinion, but I'll jump in and give it. :lol:
There's nothing special going on in the Seahawks' two minute offense, what changes is the defense.
So, let's not talk about two minute offense, let's talk about the Bears and two minute defense.
BEFORE HALFTIME:
If you're up by 10 and going into 2 minute defense, holding the offense to a 56 yard field goal attempt is essentially a stalemate. A TD or a 30-40 yard field goal would be a win for the offense, and no FG attempt would be a win for the defense. In a two minute defense your trading yards for the clock draining down.
END OF GAME:
If you're up by 14 with 3 minutes left, and can grind the clock so that you're up by 1 touchdown with 15 seconds left, that's a win for the defense. At the end of the game you're trading yards and even points for the clock draining down.
Basically, a team running their two minute defense is an invitation to an offense to pad their stats in exchange for the clock running out. It's why defenses leave the 5-7 yard pass to the RB over the middle entirely open -- if the RB doesn't break a tackle and gain more than 10 yards that is a win for the defense. It's a weird thing in which a RB dropping that pass is actually less favorable for the defense (it stops the clock) than the RB catching the pass and getting tackled under 10 yards.
Put another way, the Seahawks, like every other team, are more successful moving the ball in a two minute offense not because of them, but because the situation causes defenses to INVITE THEM to move the ball in exchange for clock time.
Good theory, but if you watched last season, they only consistently saw prevent against Tennessee, Jax, at home against the Rams (which he ended up doing nothing in.) They were in every game save for those 3 which he padded his stats in 2 of them verses prevent. Please account for the other 13 games, bearing in mind the Rams game actually hurt his stats.
Now account for the sacks. Why is he getting sacked far more in the 1st qtr than the 4th qtr?
4th qtr sacked only 3 times ? When everyone knows you're throwing it? In 13 games he wasn't consistently seeing prevent, they either had the lead, or were right there within a score, or two.
Just look at the Bears game.
17 points scored during "Russ Ball", sacked 1 time. Yes a garbage time TD at the end. still makes it.
10 points, 1 sack
vs.
0 points during "Pete Ball" sacked 5 times.
Read the article I linked. Wilson is being square pegged, round holed by a dated scheme.
My final thought is this. If you were any other team in the NFL. The Chiefs, The Patriots, The Browns, The Bills, it doesn't matter. Would you want to run Pete Carroll's Offensive Scheme? Put yourself in their shoes. The answer will quickly be HELL NO!
I've discussed Carroll's preferred offense with my coworker day in and day out! Analyzed why the "West Coast Offense" would help and keep coming back to is it Carroll's fault or is Wilson himself unable to run a more traditional WCO. The shorter quick pass game seems it would definitely alleviate some stalls and benefit the run game but I also think Carroll's pedigree would make using this offense almost automatic so what gives? Who's offense it really? Is it Carroll's or have they thought about using this offense but Wilson is unable to run it (for whatever reason) proficiently?
I wanna say it's the former but this would mean, the only way the Seahawks make any "real changes" to their offense is letting Carroll go.
Eventually Carroll's time will be up as HC but I'm not sure if Paul Allen believes it to be this year.
And then the billion dollar question would be who is the successor to Carroll?!?!?