Playcalling - Get it straight

There is a clear problem in the passing game.

It is not necessarily Wilson's fault. But there is a problem when you pass at such an inconsistent or worse, consistently low rate. It seems interesting that some want to rush immediately to the aid of their QB instead of discuss the issue. Hopefully that ends.

Not everything is an attack on Wilson. He is the QB, he has to produce, he isn't. Since there are a number of factors that affect his production - including the ability to audible. It makes sense to ask.

I don't see anything wrong with what the OP has stated. If you are going to evaluate the outcome of a play rationally then you need to look at all factors including QB play. You can't avoid it simply because an annoying group of posters twist all discourse into straw man "player is perfect/player sucks" debates.

One major caution about putting too much emphasis on audibles is that it obviously doesn't change our personnel group. So if we ran out there in jumbo 12 personnel with Davis-Vannett-Fant-Lockett-Baldwin we are well equipped to run the ball even if the opposing defense has brought some beef in to match our own formation. Conversely if we are in an empty set and they subbed in a dime defense to compensate that doesn't automatically mean we should audible to a run. Changing from a running play to a passing play is typically less interesting than being able to slightly adjust a passing play after using motion to figure out whether the opposing defense is in zone or man coverage.

TwistedHusky":2ush8hes said:

There is a clear problem in the passing game.

It is not necessarily Wilson's fault. But there is a problem when you pass at such an inconsistent or worse, consistently low rate. It seems interesting that some want to rush immediately to the aid of their QB instead of discuss the issue. Hopefully that ends.

Not everything is an attack on Wilson. He is the QB, he has to produce, he isn't. Since there are a number of factors that affect his production - including the ability to audible. It makes sense to ask.

Click to expand...

You're right and I think there are two natural inclinations at work here:

With so many variables in pay, select the variable with the most salary and touches per game as the most causal factor in outcomes because it's a fools errand to pick at the periphery.

With so many variables in play, try to isolate as much around that same variable and question how the periphery can be improved because that central variable isn't likely to change much over time.

Both make sense, both aren't inherently wrong and have their rationales.

I gravitate towards the latter only because I see more actionable things that could be done and want to explore those.

MontanaHawk05":2stzf6e9 said:

Scorpion05":2stzf6e9 said:

So again, how is OP’s point that Russ has little excuses and it’s not on the playcaller reasonable?

Click to expand...

That's not what he said.

just

Click to expand...

Go find that word in the OP, take a chill pill, and come back.

Click to expand...

LOL, Okay now I'm a little confused here......So Russ has a Designed play called in and he's out there with an Empty Backset...He still can decide to opt for a Run, but only if he decides to run it himself?

There are considerably more moving parts to a pass audible. A run audible has most of the team in the general vacinity and it's merely a matter of counting: We have 4 on 5 left of center and 4 on 4 right of center...run right.

Passing audibles are quite a bit more difficult. You use that language out loud more than once or twice and defenders remember and can jump it, not to mention that noise can be an issue in away gamesand you still need to know some semblance of a coverage that you're looking at to know where to attack it.

RW has never been given this much freedom or responsibility at any point in his career. Schotty was brought here specifically for RW's continued growth. RW is statistically doing well in terms of rating and TDs, no doubt. We could still use more consistency in getting the ball out on time, pocket presense, marking his own read progression based off what the defense shows, etc.

I think this improves over time. Thinking too much often manifests itself in terms of habits and that's probably what we're looking at here.

No wierdos need to take that as a defense either. Would be nice to go 5-1 or 6-0 and be the team no one wants to play.

An NO fan was telling me the other day that he doesn't want to see SEA make it.

Could it be that the point the OP was attempting to make is, Shotty sends out a certain player package. Then, the formation is established. Within that formation, with that certain player grouping, RW has 4 prime options on every play. It is up to RW to make the call as to which option he feels will work the best.

For fans, it becomes a chicken/egg argument. Either RW sucks because he either did or did not audible, or Shotty sucks because RW picked the wrong option, or there should have been several more options. And, all these options need to be processed and activated in 30 seconds or less.

seedhawk":2r2h5dk2 said:

Could it be that the point the OP was attempting to make is, Shotty sends out a certain player package. Then, the formation is established. Within that formation, with that certain player grouping, RW has 4 prime options on every play. It is up to RW to make the call as to which option he feels will work the best.

For fans, it becomes a chicken/egg argument. Either RW sucks because he either did or did not audible, or Shotty sucks because RW picked the wrong option, or there should have been several more options. And, all these options need to be processed and activated in 30 seconds or less.

Click to expand...

Maddenitis!

Passing play Audibles out of a Run call are harder because you have to also take in consideration personnel on the field also, when you have Fant and Dickson and 2 WR's and also about field position and down and distance.


Going from a pass to a run is easier because you already have your line and just need to change blocking assignments and call the hole, unless your in a empty backfield on 3rd down and long .

You may have audibles but you’re still limited by formation and personnel. This isn’t madden where you can change everything and you’re limited to plays closely related to the original play. It’s probably too wordy for this space but just because Wilson has audibles he’s still very limited to what the OC called.

MontanaHawk05":38yqo1yv said:

Scorpion05":38yqo1yv said:

My reaction was actually quite appropriate given OP's post, which is negative, not constructive.

Click to expand...

Criticism is not always negativity. If we can't criticize players...

You also didn't address what I said - the implications of the word "just" in the OP.

So now I'm going to add reading glasses to the prescription of what is now three chill pills, because you're giving the distinct impression of some guy sitting at his desk grinding his teeth with a massive vein throbbing just above his temple. Over a post on the internet.

Click to expand...

Maybe I should make a thread like the OP saying that Russ cannot be the scapegoat, and the focus should be on Schotty. I'd be called a Russ fanatic, so in using that same logic I'm calling out this thread for what it is. Let's now discuss criticism vs negativity.

Criticism: "Russ missed that play. He missed that throw, should have read the defense differently there. Etc."

Negativity: Posts that imply Russ struggles to "think" like a good QB is supposed to, basically suggesting he's not smart enough (that has been implied on here). Or...overly criticizing him for things that are pretty standard among other players at his position.

Also "Negative" and not merely criticism:

You no longer can just point at the OC as your scapegoat. Not with any real valitity anyway.

Click to expand...

Translation, blame Russ, not the OC when things go bad. Also:

you no longer have easy copouts and the guy isn't your baby or even some greenhorn

Click to expand...

OP's subsequent posts have sounded more reasonable, but you can't set the tone like that for a thread and be surprised when someone reacts

The problem on this board is, you've accepted over the top Russ bashing as the norm. And yes I said bashing, not just criticism. There's a difference. Criticism is an open conversation about the offense, the limitations of the offense, and Russ, Pete, AND Schotty's role in it. The entire premise of the thread, as OP stated, is to focus on Russ while SIMULTANEOUSLY saying the OC should have less culpability. It's not holistic. If we're going to debate the offense, a good place to start might be to not suggest the OC has nothing to do with our offense's flaws. Just the short QB that is a constant punching bag on this forum. If I sit at my computer with a massive vein throbbing, as you claim...it's because I want to see people criticized fairly. And Russ, as I will continue to maintain is one of the most critiqued, and inexplicably polarizing QBs in the league despite his success.

Scorpion05":8qv39am1 said:

MontanaHawk05":8qv39am1 said:

Scorpion05":8qv39am1 said:

My reaction was actually quite appropriate given OP's post, which is negative, not constructive.

Click to expand...

Criticism is not always negativity. If we can't criticize players...

You also didn't address what I said - the implications of the word "just" in the OP.

So now I'm going to add reading glasses to the prescription of what is now three chill pills, because you're giving the distinct impression of some guy sitting at his desk grinding his teeth with a massive vein throbbing just above his temple. Over a post on the internet.

Click to expand...

Maybe I should make a thread like the OP saying that Russ cannot be the scapegoat, and the focus should be on Schotty. I'd be called a Russ fanatic, so in using that same logic I'm calling out this thread for what it is. Let's now discuss criticism vs negativity.

Criticism: "Russ missed that play. He missed that throw, should have read the defense differently there. Etc."

Negativity: Posts that imply Russ struggles to "think" like a good QB is supposed to, basically suggesting he's not smart enough (that has been implied on here). Or...overly criticizing him for things that are pretty standard among other players at his position.

Also "Negative" and not merely criticism:

You no longer can just point at the OC as your scapegoat. Not with any real valitity anyway.

Click to expand...

Translation, blame Russ, not the OC when things go bad. Also:

you no longer have easy copouts and the guy isn't your baby or even some greenhorn

Click to expand...

OP's subsequent posts have sounded more reasonable, but you can't set the tone like that for a thread and be surprised when someone reacts

The problem on this board is, you've accepted over the top Russ bashing as the norm. And yes I said bashing, not just criticism. There's a difference. Criticism is an open conversation about the offense, the limitations of the offense, and Russ, Pete, AND Schotty's role in it. The entire premise of the thread, as OP stated, is to focus on Russ while SIMULTANEOUSLY saying the OC should have less culpability. It's not holistic. If we're going to debate the offense, a good place to start might be to not suggest the OC has nothing to do with our offense's flaws. Just the short QB that is a constant punching bag on this forum. If I sit at my computer with a massive vein throbbing, as you claim...it's because I want to see people criticized fairly. And Russ, as I will continue to maintain is one of the most critiqued, and inexplicably polarizing QBs in the league despite his success.

Click to expand...

Agreed ^, I also have to ask....If Schottenheimer doesn't share in the responsibility of plays that sometimes DON'T WORK as drawn up, is that on Wilson too?.....In fact, if it's ALL ON WILSON, why did the Seahawks even bother to go out & hire Schottenheimer as the OC in the first place.
Even the best of execution by a Quarterback is no guarantee that some of the others involved will make their plays to perfection, & vice versa.
Whose our #1 Receiver, and is he playing at 100%?, are the # 2s & 3's getting any kind of separation?-----Variables-----And then there is the O-Line, with even more Variables on any given play.
Can't lay all the blame for miscues on ANY ONE PERSON.

I think the moral we can take away from this thread is that people don't like being fed definitives.

There is nothing wrong with saying Wilson deserves some of the blame for the play being called given that he has the latitude to change plays at the line. There is also validity to the fact that Wilson is the one executing the plays on the field and if they fail it's largely his responsibility. The problem is when you state that as a definitive you are ignoring the fact that both the original play call and the audibles Russell is given are all part of the offensive system installed by the offensive coordinator and neither Russell or the play caller, has control over the other players on the field. The same logic applies to the definitive that Bevell or Schotty is to blame for the offense struggling. Because neither of those guys is on the field, it's impossible to say they are more at fault than Wilson or any other player on the offense when the offense struggles.

In other words, no definitive in this case can adequately paint a clear picture unless you include all variables and treat them equally. If you simply focus in on Schotty or Wilson you will miss the big picture because you are no longer giving an answer to the problem "holistically" rather you are giving an opinion of what you think the problem is and giving a solution to a particular narrative you disagree with.

And look there is nothing wrong with sharing your opinion on a given subject, as long as you're not taking a hardline stance on one side of an argument that doesn't have concrete variables while assuming your position is anything other than an opinion.

That's not even a criticism of the OP, all of us are guilty of it from time to time.

Play calling get it straight: After reading your original post referring to a "Bevel cop out as the real issue". This sounds to me as a shot across Schotty's bow. On avg. a QB only calls a audible 3 or 4 times out of 10 plays called.

Its just unclear who you are referring to that needs to get it straight?

Now before the Pete and Schotty go over what they want to do, but once the game start Pete lets Schotty go with only suggestion on what changes mite work.

I'm still puzzled about who you are referring to, i think they doing a wonderful job calling the plays, and other one or two mistake by the players there keep the sticks moving.

It would really be interesting to have one of us call the plays, i bet we could even beat the Brown on there worst year.
LOL
Cheers

Some of you guys need to up your football IQ. Audibles are available to a QB based entirely in the presnap read of the defense. Russ can only audible off specific reads, not just based on what he wants to do. Some plays will have no pass option. Some will have no run option. Some will have both.

Schotty’s issue is that frequently his pass plays don’t have a bail out option. Most other spread offenses have a number of short routes available to the QB. They get fast players into space and go for YAC. That’s the modern game and we seem to ignore horizontality in our passing offense.

But for the most part, execution and stupidity have derailed us more than play calling has.

That's a "hot read" and is the single most basic of all pass audibles.

knownone":ep7h98a4 said:

I think the moral we can take away from this thread is that people don't like being fed definitives.

There is nothing wrong with saying Wilson deserves some of the blame for the play being called given that he has the latitude to change plays at the line. There is also validity to the fact that Wilson is the one executing the plays on the field and if they fail it's largely his responsibility. The problem is when you state that as a definitive you are ignoring the fact that both the original play call and the audibles Russell is given are all part of the offensive system installed by the offensive coordinator and neither Russell or the play caller, has control over the other players on the field. The same logic applies to the definitive that Bevell or Schotty is to blame for the offense struggling. Because neither of those guys is on the field, it's impossible to say they are more at fault than Wilson or any other player on the offense when the offense struggles.

In other words, no definitive in this case can adequately paint a clear picture unless you include all variables and treat them equally. If you simply focus in on Schotty or Wilson you will miss the big picture because you are no longer giving an answer to the problem "holistically" rather you are giving an opinion of what you think the problem is and giving a solution to a particular narrative you disagree with.

And look there is nothing wrong with sharing your opinion on a given subject, as long as you're not taking a hardline stance on one side of an argument that doesn't have concrete variables while assuming your position is anything other than an opinion.

That's not even a criticism of the OP, all of us are guilty of it from time to time.

Click to expand...

If I could stand and applaud this in text, I would.

austinslater25":2kq4a47b said:

You may have audibles but you’re still limited by formation and personnel. This isn’t madden where you can change everything and you’re limited to plays closely related to the original play. It’s probably too wordy for this space but just because Wilson has audibles he’s still very limited to what the OC called.

Click to expand...

:2thumbs:
Bingo!
You are also limited by any dominant player / mismatch that blows up the play. Miller, Mack, Donaldson, Suh, and Daniels tonight.

We don't look like we even add hots to the options we give Wilson.

It seems weird to just run into stacked boxes and not even give the QB a call for plays where the defense is clearly committed to stopping the run. It seems even weirder that Wilson himself is not pushing for them.

At issue is not whether Wilson is good or not. Most of his 'detractors' consider him a top 10 QB.

At issue is why our potentially 30M QB is being used like a 3M backup. That might be Wilson's fault, it might be the OC, it might be the coach - but someone is making decisions that don't seem to leverage what a 30M QB should be contributing in terms of production.

And while you can say it is a complex system, there are lots of parts, etc - there are still the realities that there is responsibility and accountability for the key players (QB, OC, Coach). The objective of the game is to score more points than the other side. We are not doing that, and we are putting up near league low passing #s at the same time.

Since teams scoring the most points are also putting up the higher passing #s (with the exception of Tampa Bay, who is leading everyone in passing but not points) - it certainly seems within the bounds to ask if we might score more if we had a better passing game or at least used our potentially 30M QB more effectively.

For those that claim the problem is the defense, our defense is going to be average. And teams above .500 are scoring close to 27pts per game against us. In fact, if you look at how many scores our defense allowed in each game - then contrasted it with the avg score per game for that team - they are pretty close (Cowboys is an exception and I don't count the Raiders game at all). So defense might be the problem, but the solution, if you want to beat better than .500 teams, better be scoring enough to overcome that defense.

Or we can just run the ball for lots of yards, lose games to teams better than .500, and just say we didn't have the horses this year. But we are keeping our best thoroughbred in the stable for some reason.

Great Topic!!!

This conversation is way overdue!

More Xs and Os guys keep it coming. Less bickering and pissing contests, please.

Props to Twisted--get out of my head! you're saying a lot of the things that I think many Seahawk fans are frustrated by every Sunday and the past few seasons. Our eyes are telling us one thing but what we're seeing on the field is leaving us with so many what the?????!!!!!! moments!

It feels like they are more than content to just punt and put the defense back out on the field. It seems everyone but the staff knows we no longer have an elite defense. So why not up the offensive game? So frustrating to watch week in and week out.