Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Serious Question

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Serious Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:04 pm
  • Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Srrs Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:05 pm
  • poly1274 wrote:Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.


    Why not just line up in punt formation every play? Because it's dumb and won't work.
    2018 Adopt a Rookie: Rashaad Penny

    Image
    User avatar
    Sox-n-Hawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2223
    Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:26 am


Re: Srrs Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:33 pm
  • I thought this was a question about SARS
    User avatar
    King Dog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1680
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:13 pm
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


Re: Srrs Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:18 pm
  • Not interested in trying to become the Greatest Show on Turf, who actually had a pretty good defense but was on the field a majority of the game because their offense scored so fast. Defense also exerts more energy than the offense.

    Let's get some maulers on the line and be a balanced offense and make good calls when needed. Situational offense is what is important here and we need to be able to pass and run with a creative coach that knows when to do it.
    "It's Ground Hawks Day" Chris Berman
    User avatar
    seahawkfreak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4980
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:36 pm
    Location: Aiken , SC


Re: Srrs Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 10:49 pm
  • seahawkfreak wrote:Not interested in trying to become the Greatest Show on Turf, who actually had a pretty good defense but was on the field a majority of the game because their offense scored so fast. Defense also exerts more energy than the offense.

    Let's get some maulers on the line and be a balanced offense and make good calls when needed. Situational offense is what is important here and we need to be able to pass and run with a creative coach that knows when to do it.


    I’m with this 100%
    2018 Adopt a Rookie: Rashaad Penny

    Image
    User avatar
    Sox-n-Hawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2223
    Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:26 am


Re: Srrs Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 10:51 pm
  • Sox-n-Hawks wrote:
    seahawkfreak wrote:Not interested in trying to become the Greatest Show on Turf, who actually had a pretty good defense but was on the field a majority of the game because their offense scored so fast. Defense also exerts more energy than the offense.

    Let's get some maulers on the line and be a balanced offense and make good calls when needed. Situational offense is what is important here and we need to be able to pass and run with a creative coach that knows when to do it.


    I’m with this 100%


    Tree dat
    "It's Ground Hawks Day" Chris Berman
    User avatar
    seahawkfreak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4980
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:36 pm
    Location: Aiken , SC


Re: Srrs Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 11:32 pm
  • Absolutely.

    The key thing is calling the right plays at the right time. If fans can predict what plays are likely coming, imagine what the opposing team can work out who study formation, down and distance tendencies, personnel on the field etc etc.

    Mix it up, keep some plays for later in the season, be different, adapt.

    Of course, though, all those things are useless without execution.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Srrs Question
Tue Feb 06, 2018 11:39 pm
  • poly1274 wrote:Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.


    When a team is down 14+ points it's actually better for them not to run the ball most of the time. Passing doesn't waste as much time which leaves you more time to get back in the game and you can put up points rather quickly, assuming plays are executed. Generally speaking though you need some balance to have success and win games. Also, the QB and receivers would be tired to death if a pass play was called every time. It's actually remarkable what the Seahawks have been able to do with such crappy running game the past few years.
    ImageImageImageImageImage
    WhyDidntWeRun.jpg
    User avatar
    Crizilla
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2780
    Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 6:52 pm
    Location: Kirkland


Re: Srrs Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:56 am
  • Sox-n-Hawks wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.


    Why not just line up in punt formation every play? Because it's dumb and won't work.



    How do you know it's dumb and won't work? Have any OC tried it?

    Example 1: When Jags was up 24-10 4th Quarter, all RW did was pass the ball and we never ran in the 4th quarter. We almost had a chance to win the game also. ( That game where DB didn't attempt to get 1st down marker).

    Example 2: Seahawks v Panthers 31-0 lead 3rd Quarter. 1st drive 3rd quarter. (4/4 Passing TD) 2nd drive: 7 plays. No Running game. 2 RW scrambles TD in air. Basically only 1 time they rushed the ball in the 2nd half against the Panthers. and they came up just short 24-31.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Srrs Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:59 am
  • Crizilla wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.


    When a team is down 14+ points it's actually better for them not to run the ball most of the time. Passing doesn't waste as much time which leaves you more time to get back in the game and you can put up points rather quickly, assuming plays are executed. Generally speaking though you need some balance to have success and win games. Also, the QB and receivers would be tired to death if a pass play was called every time. It's actually remarkable what the Seahawks have been able to do with such crappy running game the past few years.



    I have to disagree that the QB and receivers would be tired to death if a pass play was called every time. RW works best in the 2min drill, and WR's can get rest easily. I believe the only position that struggles when it's All passing plays, is the DL as they have to keep rushing for the QB, and they don't have a lot of time subbing them out.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Srrs Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:11 am
  • poly1274 wrote:
    Crizilla wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.


    When a team is down 14+ points it's actually better for them not to run the ball most of the time. Passing doesn't waste as much time which leaves you more time to get back in the game and you can put up points rather quickly, assuming plays are executed. Generally speaking though you need some balance to have success and win games. Also, the QB and receivers would be tired to death if a pass play was called every time. It's actually remarkable what the Seahawks have been able to do with such crappy running game the past few years.



    I have to disagree that the QB and receivers would be tired to death if a pass play was called every time. RW works best in the 2min drill, and WR's can get rest easily. I believe the only position that struggles when it's All passing plays, is the DL as they have to keep rushing for the QB, and they don't have a lot of time subbing them out.


    I highly doubt an NFL offense can run the 2 minute drill throughout the entire game sufficiently. This isn't a video game. If you think it's a good idea then become a head coach and call pass plays every time and see how it goes for ya.
    ImageImageImageImageImage
    WhyDidntWeRun.jpg
    User avatar
    Crizilla
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2780
    Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 6:52 pm
    Location: Kirkland


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:19 am
  • Yeah it didn't work too well for Chip Kelly did it.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:28 am
  • I thought we DID abandon the Run this year?
    User avatar
    Seahawkville
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 124
    Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:04 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:41 am
  • Seahawkville wrote:I thought we DID abandon the Run this year?


    314 attempts not including Wilson's rushes vs 555 passing attempts.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Srrs Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:47 am
  • poly1274 wrote:
    Sox-n-Hawks wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.


    Why not just line up in punt formation every play? Because it's dumb and won't work.



    How do you know it's dumb and won't work? Have any OC tried it?

    Example 1: When Jags was up 24-10 4th Quarter, all RW did was pass the ball and we never ran in the 4th quarter. We almost had a chance to win the game also. ( That game where DB didn't attempt to get 1st down marker).

    Example 2: Seahawks v Panthers 31-0 lead 3rd Quarter. 1st drive 3rd quarter. (4/4 Passing TD) 2nd drive: 7 plays. No Running game. 2 RW scrambles TD in air. Basically only 1 time they rushed the ball in the 2nd half against the Panthers. and they came up just short 24-31.


    Time to follow Bevell and become a Colts fan buddy. haha

    Let me elaborate. Becoming completely one dimensional allows for the defensive coaching staff to dial in on your offense. What keeps a team from blitzing every play? The potential of it being a running play of some type. Pass on every single play and watch the backfield get annihilated. The West Coast offense is about as close as you'll ever see to a pure passing offense.

    The reason it works in a two minute drill is the QB finds the holes in the defense and picks at them without allowing the defensive coaching staff to rotate players or change defensive looks.

    Yes, intentionally becoming one dimensional is dumb.
    2018 Adopt a Rookie: Rashaad Penny

    Image
    User avatar
    Sox-n-Hawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2223
    Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:26 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:00 am
  • Ask the saints. The only reason they are in the national conversation is that they found the run. Drew Brees is a better pure passer than RW and had better tools. Went 7-9 3 years.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    User avatar
    NOLAHawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 216
    Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 8:55 pm


Re: Srrs Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:19 am
  • seahawkfreak wrote:Not interested in trying to become the Greatest Show on Turf, who actually had a pretty good defense but was on the field a majority of the game because their offense scored so fast. Defense also exerts more energy than the offense.

    Let's get some maulers on the line and be a balanced offense and make good calls when needed. Situational offense is what is important here and we need to be able to pass and run with a creative coach that knows when to do it.


    The greatest show on turf also had Marshall Faulk who is a hall of fame RB that averaged right around 5 YPC and over 1000 per year and also was a dual threat during his time there.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5609
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:35 am
  • Having an effective run game is vital to success in the NFL.
    It helps you control the clock, establish a good TOP, keeps their defense off balance with the threat of play action, and keeps your defense fresh.
    The Seahawks have only been successful in franchise history with an elite running back. Warner, Alexander and Lynch have all been key to a winning season. We need to establish a solid, successful running attack.
    semiahmoo wrote:I'll say it again - this is Pete's last season in Seattle if the teams doesn't make a legit hard run deep into the playoffs.
    User avatar
    Jerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2544
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:39 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 12:34 pm
  • I think you need to run but IMO the new NFL and part of the Pats sucess is the RB position being a very good receiving outlet. You need a dynamic back in todays NFL
    Image

    "Jed York does not own the 49ers; Russell Wilson does"
    User avatar
    WilsonMVP
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2771
    Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 1:03 pm
  • What this team did in the past is use the running game to establish the passing game. What other teams do is use the passing game to establish the run. I think (I hope) the west coast offense was mostly passing with a sprinkle of run just to keep them off balance.

    If we can get back to being that dominant running force with both a half back, fullback, and Read option, then the passing game will be easier to establish and will move quicker. I hope we can get a stable of decent backs with a fullback to make that happen this year. That is in my opinion what we were lacking and I believe that is what someone else posted above.


    Good luck hawks.
    R.I.P. Queen.
    User avatar
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8137
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:20 pm
    Location: A little ways from Boise.


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:15 pm
  • WilsonMVP wrote:I think you need to run but IMO the new NFL and part of the Pats sucess is the RB position being a very good receiving outlet. You need a dynamic back in todays NFL



    I don't agree with the run, but I agree what you wrote about Pats sucess is the RB position being a very good receiving outlet.

    Like Clemente Eagles RB 4 Catches 100 Yards 1 TD.
    Danny Woodhead.
    I still like Mike Davis, Rawls, CJ Prosise, JD MCkissic as RB catching the ball.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:18 pm
  • Easy answer. RW is not capable of this plain and simple. What has this team done since Lynch left? Jack shit.
    RCATES
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 457
    Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 9:09 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:25 pm
  • RCATES wrote:Easy answer. RW is not capable of this plain and simple. What has this team done since Lynch left? Jack shit.


    Just so we're clear, capable of what, exactly? What is 'this' that you refer to?
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:27 pm
  • Hi! Welcome to Football.

    Let me answer your question for you:

    1.) The Clock


    That's all, have a great day and you're welcome!
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3503
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:32 pm
  • IMO I want to use a few examples why Pass 100% might work.

    The first example I want to say is that if you want to beat Seattle at home, you have to abandon the run. Just pass the ball, and you can win that. Seattle is very good at defending the run. The only game I remember when Seattle gave up so much yards @ Home was against that Rams team this year when they killed us.

    Look at 2017 Schedule @ Home.

    Cards, Rams, Falcons, Washington, They all won by throwing the ball and not really running it.


    Example 2: If Aaron Rodgers or Brady was throwing the ball all the time, they would still win. It doesn't matter if you're one dimensional. Any Elite QB's can just win the game by passing. Many at Seahawks.Net fans believe that RW is a top tier QB. RW and Rodgers have better scrambling for yards than Brady or (Peyton at his prime) and I think that benefits them, as they can sometimes run and get 4-5 yards.

    Example 3: The last reasoning why I believe that you don't need to pay for RB's and just sign up rookie's or give them minimum veteran salary. ( Just like Marcel Reece). Instead of paying for a good RB why not sign an decent DL like Sheldon.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:38 pm
  • Hawknballs wrote:Hi! Welcome to Football.

    Let me answer your question for you:

    1.) The Clock


    That's all, have a great day and you're welcome!



    You still can kill the clock by getting 1st down. Most teams try to run the ball and after failing it 3x running the ball they Punt the ball and lose. I never seen an aggressive teams try to march the field or try to Pass the ball 3x. to get a 1st down.

    That Texans v Patriots when Texans tried to kill the clock running it 3x, and they gave Brady enough time just to score a TD.

    1st and 10 at NE 27
    (3:23 - 4th) (Shotgun) L.Miller left tackle to NE 20 for 7 yards (K.Van Noy).

    2nd and 3 at NE 20
    (2:41 - 4th) L.Miller right guard to NE 18 for 2 yards (K.Van Noy).

    (2:34 - 4th) Timeout #1 by NE at 02:34.

    3rd and 1 at NE 18
    (2:34 - 4th) (Shotgun) L.Miller up the middle to NE 18 for no gain (M.Brown, L.Guy). measurement

    (2:28 - 4th) Timeout #1 by NE at 02:28.

    4th and 1 at NE 18
    (2:24 - 4th) K.Fairbairn 36 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-J.Weeks, Holder-S.Lechler.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:33 pm
  • If totally abandoning the run was a good idea and passing 100% of the time is the solution to failing teams problems, why don’t they do it?

    With just how deep teams go into analysis and research, do you not think they’d have figured it out by now?
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:54 pm
  • original poster wrote:If totally abandoning the run was a good idea and passing 100% of the time is the solution to failing teams problems, why don’t they do it?

    With just how deep teams go into analysis and research, do you not think they’d have figured it out by now?


    No team has the balls to do things at the min or max limits nor are there enough games in a season to robustly test ideas out.

    As much as we like to imagine coaches are imbued with an almost predatory instinct towards solving the game of football, nothing could be further from the truth. Football coaches absolutely don't play the percentages as a whole, don't recursively evaluate their decisions and in fact let their emotions get the best of them at integral inflection points.

    The myth that football coaches as a whole are extraordinary game players needs to die - they aren't and the constant gap between optimal play by statistical observation and NFL coaching decisions is profound. You might find individual cases where the coach beats alpha (that being league average results over tenure) but most of the people coaching in the NFL got there by connection, putting up with bullshit that most of us wouldn't, investing in a career that has narrow and specific opportunities, honing their craft with technique as position coaches before getting coordinator opportunities, managing the logistics of team coordination and congruency and many things that have nothing to do with simply being better at making better choices at the right moment.

    I have more faith in chess players figuring out football than football coaches figuring out chess, if that makes sense. The 2nd line of yours makes it seem like the NFL is currently operating at perfect football coaching efficiency rather than operating at an acceptable entertaining equilibrium. If football has been figured out so thoroughly by the myriad coaches in the NFL, or if team outcomes are trivially impacted by coaching aptitude when it comes to strategic and tactical choices, then what explains the various levels of team outcomes from coach to coach - team talent alone?

    That invokes a weird possibility - Bevell was actually infallible.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3238
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:09 pm
  • 100% pass might work on the following basis:

    Opposing team is terrible against the pass.
    Your QB can hit a variety of ranges and designs at roughly a 67% completion rate and at 70 Attempts per game (this isn't insignificant). This might depend on having 2 QBs in fact.
    Your RBs are both good at blocking and pass catching which could allow for TEs to sub in that role
    You have RBs that clown on LBs covering them in Man
    You utilize passes that function like runs i.e. 3-4 yard gains that are very high percentage on completion

    FWIW, I think the biggest problem with 100% pass is that there are diminishing returns at some point - if you could get the same output from 80% pass as with 100% pass, why wouldn't you opt to a slightly more flexible option? Or 70%. Also getting buy in from players on this might be hard and monotonous.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3238
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:56 pm
  • At some point, it depends on what you are good at and what the other team is good at.

    Running the ball works better right now because most of the rules of the game are structured to assist the passer. The average QB is passing for close to 100 yards a game more now than a comparable QB in the 1980s. Because the ability to defend the passer is curtailed and penalties extend drives.

    So how is that helpful to running the ball? Because everything is about stopping the passer. So defenses are lighter and faster, but that means a physical run game can tire them or simply bull through them.

    But....

    A team that specifically focused on passing the ball, would barely need to run it. In fact, the WCO was very close to that. Passes worked like runs in that offense and it worked. I actually imagine the Run and Shoot will make a comeback with some wrinkles soon too.

    You don't need to run the ball if you have a way of making sure the defense cannot victimize you when they know you are going to pass.

    And I think eventually, with more rule changes that inevitably result, there will be teams that find that they are more effective with some crazy CFL type of offense than running the ball. We already have offenses that 'only' pass, you see them all the time - the 2 minute offense. So we know it works. The other team knows it is coming, and they still often cannot stop the progress. Mike Leach could probably build an offense that works like that for a full game. Chip Kelly came close.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3348
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 7:01 pm
  • Because being 1 dimensional is always a great idea.
    AF_BASS_MAN
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 114
    Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:11 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:06 pm
  • So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 25089
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:14 pm
  • mrt144 wrote:
    original poster wrote:If totally abandoning the run was a good idea and passing 100% of the time is the solution to failing teams problems, why don’t they do it?

    With just how deep teams go into analysis and research, do you not think they’d have figured it out by now?


    No team has the balls to do things at the min or max limits nor are there enough games in a season to robustly test ideas out.

    As much as we like to imagine coaches are imbued with an almost predatory instinct towards solving the game of football, nothing could be further from the truth. Football coaches absolutely don't play the percentages as a whole, don't recursively evaluate their decisions and in fact let their emotions get the best of them at integral inflection points.

    The myth that football coaches as a whole are extraordinary game players needs to die - they aren't and the constant gap between optimal play by statistical observation and NFL coaching decisions is profound. You might find individual cases where the coach beats alpha (that being league average results over tenure) but most of the people coaching in the NFL got there by connection, putting up with bullshit that most of us wouldn't, investing in a career that has narrow and specific opportunities, honing their craft with technique as position coaches before getting coordinator opportunities, managing the logistics of team coordination and congruency and many things that have nothing to do with simply being better at making better choices at the right moment.

    I have more faith in chess players figuring out football than football coaches figuring out chess, if that makes sense. The 2nd line of yours makes it seem like the NFL is currently operating at perfect football coaching efficiency rather than operating at an acceptable entertaining equilibrium. If football has been figured out so thoroughly by the myriad coaches in the NFL, or if team outcomes are trivially impacted by coaching aptitude when it comes to strategic and tactical choices, then what explains the various levels of team outcomes from coach to coach - team talent alone?

    That invokes a weird possibility - Bevell was actually infallible.


    I'm an 1850 IN USCF raiting for Chess
    and I'm 2100+ Rating strength for bughouse.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:18 pm
  • chris98251 wrote:So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.



    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:21 pm
  • poly1274 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.



    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.


    No rushing. Passing only.
    2018 Adopt a Rookie: Rashaad Penny

    Image
    User avatar
    Sox-n-Hawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2223
    Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:26 am


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:31 pm
  • poly1274 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.



    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.


    One problem, Russell isn't going to out run CB's and Safeties faster then he is especially coming at him and slide, that will work sometimes but knowing that's what he will do they will close and all it takes is one combo hit or needing to get a first down and take a full hit and he will be in IR by the third game.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 25089
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:41 pm
  • Sox-n-Hawks wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.



    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.


    No rushing. Passing only.


    Making this a constraint thought exercise is entertaining.

    Like, if any rushing, including scrambles are off the table... how would you design plays, read hierarchy, personnel, etc etc to make it function. Like even the most pass happy teams don't cross a 70% threshold, but what if they did.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3238
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:43 pm
  • chris98251 wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.



    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.


    One problem, Russell isn't going to out run CB's and Safeties faster then he is especially coming at him and slide, that will work sometimes but knowing that's what he will do they will close and all it takes is one combo hit or needing to get a first down and take a full hit and he will be in IR by the third game.


    So what you're saying is potentially having multiple QBs involved. Holy crap, we're making full contact basketball.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3238
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 9:28 pm
  • Sox-n-Hawks wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.



    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.


    No rushing. Passing only.



    QB scrambling =/ running the ball. IMO They scramble when all WR's are covered.
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Serious Question
Wed Feb 07, 2018 10:53 pm
  • All it will take to flush your brilliant idea down the toilet is injuries and turnovers.
    Once you cannot pass like planned then the losses will pile up.
    The defense can't save you as you really don't seem to care about that end.
    No matter the cap hits probaly took care of that anyway.
    25-35 million @QB..That is before you pay for the good OL/WR you need.
    Will Dissly
    2018 Adopt a rookie
    User avatar
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4027
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:42 pm


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 1:49 am
  • IndyHawk wrote:All it will take to flush your brilliant idea down the toilet is injuries and turnovers.
    Once you cannot pass like planned then the losses will pile up.
    The defense can't save you as you really don't seem to care about that end.
    No matter the cap hits probaly took care of that anyway.
    25-35 million @QB..That is before you pay for the good OL/WR you need.


    Yep, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 3:41 am
  • poly1274 wrote:Why not abandon the Run? for all games and just focus on passing. Even when teams are down 14+ Points they don't run the ball.


    There needs to be a run-pass ratio, period.

    HCs and OCs ask for the stats on pass : run ratios occasionally during a game to make sure the O is not getting too predictable.
    User avatar
    Vesuve
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 261
    Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 7:02 pm


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 4:25 am
  • original poster wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:All it will take to flush your brilliant idea down the toilet is injuries and turnovers.
    Once you cannot pass like planned then the losses will pile up.
    The defense can't save you as you really don't seem to care about that end.
    No matter the cap hits probaly took care of that anyway.
    25-35 million @QB..That is before you pay for the good OL/WR you need.


    Yep, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.


    No battle plan survives contact with the enemy.
    2018 Adopt a Rookie: Rashaad Penny

    Image
    User avatar
    Sox-n-Hawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2223
    Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:26 am


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 5:37 am
  • original poster wrote:
    Seahawkville wrote:I thought we DID abandon the Run this year?


    314 attempts not including Wilson's rushes vs 555 passing attempts.


    Which would be last place I believe. The Miami Dolphins had the lowest number of rushing attempts as a team at 360. 334 for non QB attempts.
    JGreen79
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 599
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:26 pm
    Location: Newberg, Oregon


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 7:11 am
  • JGreen79 wrote:
    original poster wrote:
    Seahawkville wrote:I thought we DID abandon the Run this year?


    314 attempts not including Wilson's rushes vs 555 passing attempts.


    Which would be last place I believe. The Miami Dolphins had the lowest number of rushing attempts as a team at 360. 334 for non QB attempts.


    Short of looking at each individual team and removing QB rushes I'm struggling to confirm this but certainly sounds like it's the case.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 7:47 am
  • mrt144 wrote:
    original poster wrote:If totally abandoning the run was a good idea and passing 100% of the time is the solution to failing teams problems, why don’t they do it?

    With just how deep teams go into analysis and research, do you not think they’d have figured it out by now?


    No team has the balls to do things at the min or max limits nor are there enough games in a season to robustly test ideas out.

    As much as we like to imagine coaches are imbued with an almost predatory instinct towards solving the game of football, nothing could be further from the truth. Football coaches absolutely don't play the percentages as a whole, don't recursively evaluate their decisions and in fact let their emotions get the best of them at integral inflection points.

    The myth that football coaches as a whole are extraordinary game players needs to die - they aren't and the constant gap between optimal play by statistical observation and NFL coaching decisions is profound. You might find individual cases where the coach beats alpha (that being league average results over tenure) but most of the people coaching in the NFL got there by connection, putting up with bullshit that most of us wouldn't, investing in a career that has narrow and specific opportunities, honing their craft with technique as position coaches before getting coordinator opportunities, managing the logistics of team coordination and congruency and many things that have nothing to do with simply being better at making better choices at the right moment.

    I have more faith in chess players figuring out football than football coaches figuring out chess, if that makes sense. The 2nd line of yours makes it seem like the NFL is currently operating at perfect football coaching efficiency rather than operating at an acceptable entertaining equilibrium. If football has been figured out so thoroughly by the myriad coaches in the NFL, or if team outcomes are trivially impacted by coaching aptitude when it comes to strategic and tactical choices, then what explains the various levels of team outcomes from coach to coach - team talent alone?

    That invokes a weird possibility - Bevell was actually infallible.


    This is relevant

    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 3166
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 8:29 am
  • original poster wrote:
    mrt144 wrote:
    original poster wrote:If totally abandoning the run was a good idea and passing 100% of the time is the solution to failing teams problems, why don’t they do it?

    With just how deep teams go into analysis and research, do you not think they’d have figured it out by now?


    No team has the balls to do things at the min or max limits nor are there enough games in a season to robustly test ideas out.

    As much as we like to imagine coaches are imbued with an almost predatory instinct towards solving the game of football, nothing could be further from the truth. Football coaches absolutely don't play the percentages as a whole, don't recursively evaluate their decisions and in fact let their emotions get the best of them at integral inflection points.

    The myth that football coaches as a whole are extraordinary game players needs to die - they aren't and the constant gap between optimal play by statistical observation and NFL coaching decisions is profound. You might find individual cases where the coach beats alpha (that being league average results over tenure) but most of the people coaching in the NFL got there by connection, putting up with bullshit that most of us wouldn't, investing in a career that has narrow and specific opportunities, honing their craft with technique as position coaches before getting coordinator opportunities, managing the logistics of team coordination and congruency and many things that have nothing to do with simply being better at making better choices at the right moment.

    I have more faith in chess players figuring out football than football coaches figuring out chess, if that makes sense. The 2nd line of yours makes it seem like the NFL is currently operating at perfect football coaching efficiency rather than operating at an acceptable entertaining equilibrium. If football has been figured out so thoroughly by the myriad coaches in the NFL, or if team outcomes are trivially impacted by coaching aptitude when it comes to strategic and tactical choices, then what explains the various levels of team outcomes from coach to coach - team talent alone?

    That invokes a weird possibility - Bevell was actually infallible.


    This is relevant



    Have to give it a listen for sure. Football Outsiders is very happy with the Eagles since one of their alumni got scooped up by the Eagles to do analytics under Pederson.

    And this just a minute ago https://twitter.com/FO_ScottKacsmar/sta ... 0049483776
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3238
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:54 pm
  • mrt144 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:So you go Bandit plus and flood the passing lanes and rush three from different spots all the time, there goes your passing game and it becomes a interception fest.



    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.


    One problem, Russell isn't going to out run CB's and Safeties faster then he is especially coming at him and slide, that will work sometimes but knowing that's what he will do they will close and all it takes is one combo hit or needing to get a first down and take a full hit and he will be in IR by the third game.


    So what you're saying is potentially having multiple QBs involved. Holy crap, we're making full contact basketball.



    Who said anything of having multiple QB's involved?

    I only said this if they rush with 3 DL men and try to cover all WR's passes, RW can just easily scramble and gain 5-7 yards per carry without being touched. I'm not saying he is gonna out run CB and safeties but like sometimes Brady runs up the middle for a 10-12 yard gain.


    Also when we play empty backfield formation, does that mean it's easy for the opposing team to cover this?
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 251
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:56 pm
  • poly1274 wrote:
    mrt144 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:

    If they try to stop the passing game by rushing 3, I would have RW scramble to get 7-8 yards per carry. by running straight to the middle and slide.


    One problem, Russell isn't going to out run CB's and Safeties faster then he is especially coming at him and slide, that will work sometimes but knowing that's what he will do they will close and all it takes is one combo hit or needing to get a first down and take a full hit and he will be in IR by the third game.


    So what you're saying is potentially having multiple QBs involved. Holy crap, we're making full contact basketball.



    Who said anything of having multiple QB's involved?

    I only said this if they rush with 3 DL men and try to cover all WR's passes, RW can just easily scramble and gain 5-7 yards per carry without being touched. I'm not saying he is gonna out run CB and safeties but like sometimes Brady runs up the middle for a 10-12 yard gain.


    Also when we play empty backfield formation, does that mean it's easy for the opposing team to cover this?


    Check the quote tree.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3238
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: Serious Question
Thu Feb 08, 2018 3:37 pm
  • Passing is by far more efficient than running. You also don't need a good run game to execute play action passes, this has been shown to be statistically false. You just need an RB lined up in the backfield. The Texans game was a good example of that. We had 5 RB rushing yards and were destroying them with PA passes.

    That being said, I agree with the point about diminishing returns. Maybe Brady could run this kind of system with no dropoff, maybe Rodgers, but the former's arm would be shot come playoffs given his age and even the latter struggled from mid-2015 to mid-2016 trying to carry that offense. I don't think Russ can do it, especially behind a craptastic OL with poor play design. I think we definitely need a good running game to help drain the clock. Throw to get the lead and run to keep it, but only if you can run effectively.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Next


It is currently Tue Nov 20, 2018 4:32 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information