Finger Prints...

mrt144 · Nov 12, 2018

So I got another 'I wonder' moment today while using the urinal - always the best place to be when thinking about the Schotty. So it came to me pretty easily - I wonder where the Seahawks rank in terms of YAC.

Why would I be curious about this? Well, I have a hunch that one of the more ailing aspects of our offense is passing (okay, I didn't really go out on a limb there, did I?) but I was curious where the smoke in the forest is coming from.

Some things to get out of the way:

RW Net Yards Per Attempt / Rank

2018: 6.39 (Schotty) / 17th
2017: 6.11 (Bevell on Down) / 17th
2016: 6.65 / 11th
2015: 7.73 / 4th
2014: 6.54 / 17th
2013: 6.84 / 7th
2012: 6.84 / 9th

STL QB Net Yards Per Attempt -

2014: 6.24 (Hill) / 20th
2014: 5.82 (Davis) / 30th
2013: 5.84 (Clemens) / 23rd
2013: 5.74 (Bradford) / 26th
2012: 5.92 (Bradford) / 23rd

NYJ QB Net Yards Per Attempt

2011: 5.55 (Sanchez) / 27th
2010: 5.84 (Sanchez) / 29th
2009: 5.77 (Sanchez) / 21st
2008: 5.90 (Favre) / 20th
2007: 4.83 (Pennington) / 24th
2007: 5.02 (Clemens) / 30th
2006: 6.17 (Pennington) / 13th

Alright, so we've covered QBs under Schotty, and whatever you think is the biggest cause of mediocre at best is over his career, just know that Schotty tied to any one QB is mediocre.

So let's look at this from another perspective, the WR corps specifically what may or may not be happening vis a vis YAC and YAC per reception. Why the YAC per reception as well? Believe it or not (believe it!) there are several teams with a low absolute YAC that have a high YAC per reception relative to other teams. Also I'll append the rank for the year for both and also include the league average for both.

YAC / YAC Per Reception / League Average YAC / League Average YAC Per Reception/ Rank YAC / Rank YAC per Reception

Hawks:

2018: 781 / 4.91 / 1165 / 5.51 / 31st / 23rd
2017: 1583 / 4.66 / 1776 / 5.23 / 25th / 25th
2016: 1833 / 4.98 / 1824 / 5.05 / 17th / 17th
2015: 1826 / 5.48 / 1892 / 5.25 / 20th / 11th
2014: 1850 / 6.45 / 1856 / 6.45 / 17th / 2nd
2013: 1529 / 5.73 / 1834 / 5.29 / 28th / 6th
2012: 1024 / 4.94 / 1706 / 5.04 / 29th / 18th

2011: 1498 / 5.01 1739 / 5.29 / 21st / 22nd
2010: 1538 / 4.75 / 1709 / 5.22 / 23rd / 21st
2009: 2054 / 5.52 / 1661.9 / 5.08 / 5th / 8th
2008: 987 / 3.77 / 987 / 3.77 / 32nd / 32nd
2007: 1786 / 4.81 / 1520 / 4.66 / 5th / 14th
2006: 1024 / 3.51 / 1473 / 4.8 / 30th / 32nd

Rams:

2014: 1727/ 5.28 / 1856 / 5.31 / 23rd / 17th
2013: 1620 / 5.38 / 1834 / 5.29 / 24th / 15th
2012: 1585 / 4.77 / 1706 / 5.04 / 22nd / 21st

Jets:

2011: 1622 / 5.23 / 1739 / 5.29 / 20th / 17th
2010: 1378 / 4.73 / 1709 / 5.22 / 29th / 29th
2009: 1042 / 4.96 / 1661.9 / 5.0875 / 31st / 18th
2008: 1590 / 4.58 / 1391 / 4.41 / 8th / 10th
2007: 1316 / 4.25 / 1520 / 4.66 / 25th / 27th
2006: 1391 / 4.4 / 1473 / 4.8 / 21st / 28th

So that's a lot of numbers and I'll try to add some context.

Schotty has only ever commanded an offense that was above average on Yards after Catch once - in 2008 with Favre at QB. Favre's NY/A was easily within 1 Standard Deviation of Mean Jets QB Performance but the YAC was nearly 1 Standard Deviation above Mean Jets YAC but only half a Standard Deviation above the combined Jets Rams Standard Deviation. So a relatively small blip on an ontherwise consistently below average passing game measured in two ways by the relative performance of the QBs and the YACs under his stead.

But let's go back up to the top. One thing you might notice right away is that RW has never dropped below 17th in NY/A and even peaked at 4th. 2015. I think we know that back half was huge there and we all have some ideas about why it worked then. Even so the YAC didnt vary that much as time wore on and passing volume went up. I included the Pre RW years just to get an eyeball comparison for YAC when Schotty was actively coaching in the NFL. The variance is mind boggling.

So I have a few questions:

1. How much of Schotty's mediocrity is attributable to him and how much to the seemingly abundantly average players he's been surrounded with?

2. How much of our YAC mediocrity is attributable to PC, Bevell and the player talent?

3. How could Pete possibly have hired anyone else for OC?

Other fun things!

Do you think it's a coincidence that the Rams under McVay were near the very top last season and currently top 5 or that the Chiefs since 2016 have always been top 5? Or the Saints?

Even if I'm off the mark in thinking that this hints that what we do on offense has Pete's fingerprints all over it, I think it was pretty bad to hire someone that seemingly will reinforce things that we lack in the passing game while being neutral to negative in other aspects like time management and pacing towards the end of games.

It seems to me that how you actually design a passing game matters to some extent and that's reflected not only over the relative stickiness of some teams (although again that varaince of the mid '00 Hawks is crazy) but how someone could consistently perform in a band with longish tenures.

I pulled most of this from Football Outsiders but the YAC data was a pain in the ass pulling from a few sources.

hawknation2018 · Nov 12, 2018

Uh, let me get this straight... you're saying the Seahawks have increased their net yards per attempt from 6.11 last year to 6.39 this year, while breaking in a new offensive coordinator, having lost two starting WRs in Graham and Richardson, and having our best WR (Baldwin) injured for much of the season.

Seahawks are #1 in the NFL in rushing yards per game. Russell Wilson has a 110.2 QB rating (a career high). He is on pace for over 37 TDs this season (which would also be a career high).

And this trend is a problem for some?

:snack:

chris98251 · Nov 12, 2018

hawknation2018":1md4zca0 said:
Uh, let me get this straight... you're saying the Seahawks have increased their net yards per attempt from 6.11 last year to 6.39 this year, while breaking in a new offensive coordinator, having lost two starting WRs in Graham and Richardson, and having our best WR (Baldwin) injured for much of the season.

Seahawks are #1 in the NFL in rushing yards per game. Russell Wilson has a 110.2 QB rating (a career high). He is on pace for over 37 TDs this season (which would also be a career high).

And this trend is a problem for some?

:snack:

Yes the Fantasy football world wants Wilson to throw for 400 yds and 4 touchdowns a game split between two of our recievers, they also want 130 yards and 2 touchdowns from Carson or Penny a game.

We suck didn't you know becasue we spread the ball all over, Wilson not having to be 86 percent of the offense is a problem.

TwistedHusky · Nov 12, 2018

I didn't want Schotty.

He improved the line but has now decimated our passing offense. Since our best weapon was the QB, our best players are on offense, and the point of football involves scoring more than the other team - I was perplexed.

And yesterday was frustrating. I don't like 1950s football. It keeps the games close. But in a game that gives every advantage to the passer - it gives you no chance to win.

I get the point. With everyone focusing on stopping the passer, defenses have gotten smaller and lighter. They play in more space. So bruising run games can exploit this weakness. But they are too prone to derailment by penalties, they take too long to complete a drive so you end up losing a drive each half. And you really cannot hope to compete offensively with the good offensive teams.

This would be OK if we had no offensive weapons and were doing the best with what we had. But we have weapons. We just won't use them.

Ok so the offense keeps us in games but gives us little chance to win. It actually makes winning harder.

I think you need to be realistic.

We lost our owner. We won't get the good coaches or assistants. We have what we have, frustrating as it is. It won't get better and I think greatness is something we will have to reminisce about. But there is no pathway to getting better. I get frustrated about it but I get we have to lower expectations. Now we are just doing our best with the choices our FO made.

We are going to get better #s overall (but for passing yards) but WL is going to be 7-9 to 9-7. We are literally Jeff Fischer's Rams, even down to the cheap shots after the whistle or hitting guys out of bounds. That is just where we are going to be. There isn't a pathway out of this so we just have to wait for beating up on weaker teams. We won't be terrible - just not great anymore.

chris98251 · Nov 12, 2018

TwistedHusky":r0yyojhw said:
I didn't want Schotty.

He improved the line but has now decimated our passing offense. Since our best weapon was the QB, our best players are on offense, and the point of football involves scoring more than the other team - I was perplexed.

And yesterday was frustrating. I don't like 1950s football. It keeps the games close. But in a game that gives every advantage to the passer - it gives you no chance to win.

I get the point. With everyone focusing on stopping the passer, defenses have gotten smaller and lighter. They play in more space. So bruising run games can exploit this weakness. But they are too prone to derailment by penalties, they take too long to complete a drive so you end up losing a drive each half. And you really cannot hope to compete offensively with the good offensive teams.

This would be OK if we had no offensive weapons and were doing the best with what we had. But we have weapons. We just won't use them.

Ok so the offense keeps us in games but gives us little chance to win. It actually makes winning harder.

I think you need to be realistic.

We lost our owner. We won't get the good coaches or assistants. We have what we have, frustrating as it is. It won't get better and I think greatness is something we will have to reminisce about. But there is no pathway to getting better. I get frustrated about it but I get we have to lower expectations. Now we are just doing our best with the choices our FO made.

We are going to get better #s overall (but for passing yards) but WL is going to be 7-9 to 9-7. We are literally Jeff Fischer's Rams, even down to the cheap shots after the whistle or hitting guys out of bounds. That is just where we are going to be. There isn't a pathway out of this so we just have to wait for beating up on weaker teams. We won't be terrible - just not great anymore.

Well guess your a Cowboys fan next year then, Jerry has Money.

Nobody has bought us yet, teams have won Super Bowls without Paul Allen owning them, things change, sometimes for worse and sometimes for better. We don't know what we will have so dooming us to failure is a bit over the top.

One other aspect unless he is fired Pete has a contract making him the controller of this franchise from the on Field point up to personnel and staff still. Three more years I think is left on it.

hawknation2018 · Nov 12, 2018

TwistedHusky":268sis55 said:
And yesterday was frustrating. I don't like 1950s football. It keeps the games close. But in a game that gives every advantage to the passer - it gives you no chance to win.

Yesterday, the Seahawks offense scored 31 points on the road, without assistance from a single big return or defensive turnover. That is tied for the most points that Rams have allowed at home this year. The only team to score more points against the Rams was the Saints.

Uncle Si · Nov 12, 2018

Twisted's posts are becoming inane redundancies, now pinning the 4-5 record on the offense and claim its getting worse. Some peoples desire to pound a point into the ground will defy, actually ignore, facts.

And data. Dont even bother with statistics.

Jville · Nov 12, 2018

Kind of like having a crying infant in the back ground going off with reoccurring regularity.

MD5eahawks · Nov 12, 2018

Here's an article I found back in the first week of October. This article is reflective of the Hawks being 2-2 right before playing the Rams in Week 5. but I think it still fits the bill here.

https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/...o-teams-keep-hiring-brian-schottenheimer/amp/

One thing that stands out is this -

Through his career as an NFL offensive coordinator, his teams have never finished in the top 10 in total yards, and only once—with the 2008 Jets—in the top 10 in total points. More often, his offenses will finish in the bottom third of the NFL in both categories, and the passing offenses have lagged severely behind.

That little paragraph is spot on with how the Hawks' offense is playing. The only thing it doesn't really point out is that he has not been blessed with being able to work with decent QBs as an OC. Favre in 2008 and now Wilson. But that's it.

Sox-n-Hawks · Nov 12, 2018

hawknation2018":3tbp7oy5 said:
Uh, let me get this straight... you're saying the Seahawks have increased their net yards per attempt from 6.11 last year to 6.39 this year, while breaking in a new offensive coordinator, having lost two starting WRs in Graham and Richardson, and having our best WR (Baldwin) injured for much of the season.

Seahawks are #1 in the NFL in rushing yards per game. Russell Wilson has a 110.2 QB rating (a career high). He is on pace for over 37 TDs this season (which would also be a career high).

And this trend is a problem for some?

:snack:

Too Short
Too Fat
Doesn’t have enough autonomy
[emoji849]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hawks85 · Nov 12, 2018

mrt144":2uqx2lql said:
So I got another 'I wonder' moment today while using the urinal - always the best place to be when thinking about the Schotty. So it came to me pretty easily - I wonder where the Seahawks rank in terms of YAC.

Why would I be curious about this? Well, I have a hunch that one of the more ailing aspects of our offense is passing (okay, I didn't really go out on a limb there, did I?) but I was curious where the smoke in the forest is coming from.

Some things to get out of the way:

RW Net Yards Per Attempt / Rank

2018: 6.39 (Schotty) / 17th
2017: 6.11 (Bevell on Down) / 17th
2016: 6.65 / 11th
2015: 7.73 / 4th
2014: 6.54 / 17th
2013: 6.84 / 7th
2012: 6.84 / 9th

STL QB Net Yards Per Attempt -

2014: 6.24 (Hill) / 20th
2014: 5.82 (Davis) / 30th
2013: 5.84 (Clemens) / 23rd
2013: 5.74 (Bradford) / 26th
2012: 5.92 (Bradford) / 23rd

NYJ QB Net Yards Per Attempt

2011: 5.55 (Sanchez) / 27th
2010: 5.84 (Sanchez) / 29th
2009: 5.77 (Sanchez) / 21st
2008: 5.90 (Favre) / 20th
2007: 4.83 (Pennington) / 24th
2007: 5.02 (Clemens) / 30th
2006: 6.17 (Pennington) / 13th

Alright, so we've covered QBs under Schotty, and whatever you think is the biggest cause of mediocre at best is over his career, just know that Schotty tied to any one QB is mediocre.

So let's look at this from another perspective, the WR corps specifically what may or may not be happening vis a vis YAC and YAC per reception. Why the YAC per reception as well? Believe it or not (believe it!) there are several teams with a low absolute YAC that have a high YAC per reception relative to other teams. Also I'll append the rank for the year for both and also include the league average for both.

YAC / YAC Per Reception / League Average YAC / League Average YAC Per Reception/ Rank YAC / Rank YAC per Reception

Hawks:

2018: 781 / 4.91 / 1165 / 5.51 / 31st / 23rd
2017: 1583 / 4.66 / 1776 / 5.23 / 25th / 25th
2016: 1833 / 4.98 / 1824 / 5.05 / 17th / 17th
2015: 1826 / 5.48 / 1892 / 5.25 / 20th / 11th
2014: 1850 / 6.45 / 1856 / 6.45 / 17th / 2nd
2013: 1529 / 5.73 / 1834 / 5.29 / 28th / 6th
2012: 1024 / 4.94 / 1706 / 5.04 / 29th / 18th

2011: 1498 / 5.01 1739 / 5.29 / 21st / 22nd
2010: 1538 / 4.75 / 1709 / 5.22 / 23rd / 21st
2009: 2054 / 5.52 / 1661.9 / 5.08 / 5th / 8th
2008: 987 / 3.77 / 987 / 3.77 / 32nd / 32nd
2007: 1786 / 4.81 / 1520 / 4.66 / 5th / 14th
2006: 1024 / 3.51 / 1473 / 4.8 / 30th / 32nd

Rams:

2014: 1727/ 5.28 / 1856 / 5.31 / 23rd / 17th
2013: 1620 / 5.38 / 1834 / 5.29 / 24th / 15th
2012: 1585 / 4.77 / 1706 / 5.04 / 22nd / 21st

Jets:

2011: 1622 / 5.23 / 1739 / 5.29 / 20th / 17th
2010: 1378 / 4.73 / 1709 / 5.22 / 29th / 29th
2009: 1042 / 4.96 / 1661.9 / 5.0875 / 31st / 18th
2008: 1590 / 4.58 / 1391 / 4.41 / 8th / 10th
2007: 1316 / 4.25 / 1520 / 4.66 / 25th / 27th
2006: 1391 / 4.4 / 1473 / 4.8 / 21st / 28th

So that's a lot of numbers and I'll try to add some context.

Schotty has only ever commanded an offense that was above average on Yards after Catch once - in 2008 with Favre at QB. Favre's NY/A was easily within 1 Standard Deviation of Mean Jets QB Performance but the YAC was nearly 1 Standard Deviation above Mean Jets YAC but only half a Standard Deviation above the combined Jets Rams Standard Deviation. So a relatively small blip on an ontherwise consistently below average passing game measured in two ways by the relative performance of the QBs and the YACs under his stead.

But let's go back up to the top. One thing you might notice right away is that RW has never dropped below 17th in NY/A and even peaked at 4th. 2015. I think we know that back half was huge there and we all have some ideas about why it worked then. Even so the YAC didnt vary that much as time wore on and passing volume went up. I included the Pre RW years just to get an eyeball comparison for YAC when Schotty was actively coaching in the NFL. The variance is mind boggling.

So I have a few questions:

1. How much of Schotty's mediocrity is attributable to him and how much to the seemingly abundantly average players he's been surrounded with?

2. How much of our YAC mediocrity is attributable to PC, Bevell and the player talent?

3. How could Pete possibly have hired anyone else for OC?

Other fun things!

Do you think it's a coincidence that the Rams under McVay were near the very top last season and currently top 5 or that the Chiefs since 2016 have always been top 5? Or the Saints?

Even if I'm off the mark in thinking that this hints that what we do on offense has Pete's fingerprints all over it, I think it was pretty bad to hire someone that seemingly will reinforce things that we lack in the passing game while being neutral to negative in other aspects like time management and pacing towards the end of games.

It seems to me that how you actually design a passing game matters to some extent and that's reflected not only over the relative stickiness of some teams (although again that varaince of the mid '00 Hawks is crazy) but how someone could consistently perform in a band with longish tenures.

I pulled most of this from Football Outsiders but the YAC data was a pain in the ass pulling from a few sources.

wow thats one long pee bro with all those numbers.

mrt144 · Nov 12, 2018

hawknation2018":22gi9v9u said:
TwistedHusky":22gi9v9u said:

And yesterday was frustrating. I don't like 1950s football. It keeps the games close. But in a game that gives every advantage to the passer - it gives you no chance to win.

Click to expand...

Yesterday, the Seahawks offense scored 31 points on the road, without assistance from a single big return or defensive turnover. That is tied for the most points that Rams have allowed at home this year. The only team to score more points against the Rams was the Saints.

There are heartening things with our offense but none of them relevant to the passing game or situational football.

Close calls on game winning drives might make things feel closer than they are but they leave the unspoken question of why the games are close calls and why the need to play perfect football for a drive that they spend nearly a game avoid doing. Of course theyll come up short more often than not fighting uphill against their own talents and an insipid passing game.

You might reason its a good thing to draw a game down to one possession where you can go ahead...and id agree with you if the Hawks displayed that ability this season. They dont. I think part of that might just be an inherent limitation of Schotty holistically. From situational playcalling, to play design, to clock management it just seems like he adds anything over Bevell as an OC. And I dont feel like the data provided supports that he does nor did it seemingly hint at the possibility vis a vis passing.

Maybe Solari isnt a grifter like Cable and deserves share of the credit for the running game.

Im not really bent out of shape about it, its just feels like exactly what is expected and exactly what Pete wanted. Which is disappointing in a way because fixing the most glaring issue on offense from 2017 and doing even marginally better in pass pro still isnt yielding outcomes even if it certainly is more entertaining.

And you can blame RW for some or most of the woes if you want but again, nothing about Schotty has ever indicated he could get the better out of RW.
NOTHING.

So Im kind of resigned to thinking that until our defense can be dominant we will consistently lose more than we win when faced with time constraints and expected pass heavy drives. Not for lack of trying, not for lack of execution all the time, but because our OC doesnt have the chops to coordinate an offense that does that consistently.

So bring on the dominant D.

mrt144 · Nov 12, 2018

chris98251":zlca8jry said:
hawknation2018":zlca8jry said:

Uh, let me get this straight... you're saying the Seahawks have increased their net yards per attempt from 6.11 last year to 6.39 this year, while breaking in a new offensive coordinator, having lost two starting WRs in Graham and Richardson, and having our best WR (Baldwin) injured for much of the season.

Seahawks are #1 in the NFL in rushing yards per game. Russell Wilson has a 110.2 QB rating (a career high). He is on pace for over 37 TDs this season (which would also be a career high).

And this trend is a problem for some?

:snack:

Click to expand...

Yes the Fantasy football world wants Wilson to throw for 400 yds and 4 touchdowns a game split between two of our recievers, they also want 130 yards and 2 touchdowns from Carson or Penny a game.

We suck didn't you know becasue we spread the ball all over, Wilson not having to be 86 percent of the offense is a problem.

The thing that sticks with me is that Wilson not being 86% of the offense matters much either in terms of what they trying to do out there. Wilson, with Bevell and an atrocious running game isnt enough, running roughshod on everyone and still letting games slip through our fingers isnt much better. Its a different ailment in the same region. And again, what would have lead anyone to believe this wouldnt be a "careful what you wish for" hire.

hawknation2018 · Nov 12, 2018

mrt144":1zobwg5a said:
hawknation2018":1zobwg5a said:

Yesterday, the Seahawks offense scored 31 points on the road, without assistance from a single big return or defensive turnover. That is tied for the most points that Rams have allowed at home this year. The only team to score more points against the Rams was the Saints.

Click to expand...

There are heartening things with our offense but none of them relevant to the passing game or situational football.

“Russell Wilson has a 110.2 QB rating (a career high). He is on pace for over 37 TDs this season (which would also be a career high). “

He is #1 in QB rating against the blitz. They are also one of the most efficient play action passing teams in the league. They are 9th in passing yards per attempt and 5th in passing TDs.

mrt144":1zobwg5a said:
Close calls on game winning drives might make things feel closer than they are but they leave the unspoken question of why the games are close calls and why the need to play perfect football for a drive that they spend nearly a game avoid doing. Of course theyll come up short more often than not fighting uphill against their own talents and an insipid passing game.

Sorry, this makes no sense to me, whatsoever. You’re saying that the failure of the defense to get a stop or force a turnover should be blamed on the passing offense? The offense scored 31 points. Three of those TDs came from the passing game. Those are great offensive outputs that are good enough to win when the defense plays as it should.

You are conflating these issues, and I’m not sure why. It’s true that a failure to run the ball and to control the clock can have a negative impact on your own defense. That is not true of the passing game, generally. The Seahawks are doing those things now. They have the #1 rushing offense in the NFL. They are #8 in time of possession, and that number continues to improve.

chris98251 · Nov 12, 2018

The losses are a product of a defense that needs help up front and ailing LB's a learning secondary and turnovers at bad times, throw in some WTF decisions by the coaches, on side kick and a time out to let the Rams re think punting the ball and you have our season so far.

Were what you could call a few bad bounces away from being 6 and 3.

Those bounces could go our way the second half, I like to think we can make our own breaks but were not quite there yet.

Attyla the Hawk · Nov 13, 2018

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
I didn't want Schotty.

I didn't either. I was extremely disappointed that Pete succeeded his yes man with the ultimate yes man. I felt strongly that Seattle needed it's offense to free itself from Pete and join this millenium.

I'm not terribly thinking that anymore though.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
He improved the line but has now decimated our passing offense. Since our best weapon was the QB, our best players are on offense, and the point of football involves scoring more than the other team - I was perplexed.

Seattle lost it's top two receivers and 3 of out top 4 (Baldwin, Richardson and Graham). Further, we lost Graham's replacement very early.

There is no shame in the passing performance. You don't lose that much production and not feel it. Take away Kupp/Woods from LA and you have a very different Rams team.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
And yesterday was frustrating. I don't like 1950s football. It keeps the games close. But in a game that gives every advantage to the passer - it gives you no chance to win.

This is complete BS. There are multiple ways to win in this league. This offense is producing a lot of points and is physically dominating teams. Like any offense, it has it's Achilles Heel. But this game is more frequently about hitting. It's a physical game and especially in the playoffs, it comes down to who can beat up the other team.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
I get the point. With everyone focusing on stopping the passer, defenses have gotten smaller and lighter. They play in more space. So bruising run games can exploit this weakness. But they are too prone to derailment by penalties, they take too long to complete a drive so you end up losing a drive each half. And you really cannot hope to compete offensively with the good offensive teams.

History -- even recent history -- shows that physical teams can compete quite well with good offensive teams.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
This would be OK if we had no offensive weapons and were doing the best with what we had. But we have weapons. We just won't use them.

Outside of Lockett, we're pretty short on passing weapons right now. And his production this year has been fantastic.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
Ok so the offense keeps us in games but gives us little chance to win. It actually makes winning harder.

True. Offense is keeping us in games. In fact it's carrying this defense entirely. Seattle can't lose Chancellor/Thomas/Avril/Bennett/Sherman in a single offseason and not expect a significant drop on that side of the ball.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
I think you need to be realistic.

I believe I am. I always believed Seattle was in a rebuild year. I figured 6-10 to 8-8 would be our record. I felt we'd lose two of the three games in this last stretch (Chargers/Rams/Packers). Other than not splitting the first two games virtually every game has fallen as I figured it would in August.

I did not expect us to not only fix our run game, but to result in quite possibly the best run game we've seen in the Carroll era. What we're seeing right now reminds me of the late 90s and 00s Broncos. We have the best run blocking line we've assembled and it really doesn't seem to matter who we have running the ball -- they are all doing it at a fantastic clip.

That I attribute to the new offensive coaching changes. Not only the personnel (Schotty/Solari), but the end of the galactically stupid OC/Run game coordinator setup we had before. Our offense is no longer this constipated stew of misfit schemes and personnel ill equipped to do both. It's a whole unit now.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
We lost our owner. We won't get the good coaches or assistants. We have what we have, frustrating as it is. It won't get better

I disagree strongly. Our OL is literally blossoming in front of our eyes. Not only is it not the botttom two units in the NFL, but it's ascending firmly into the top 10 of the league. Our passing game consists of our #3 WR and a guy who was on the practice squad last year. We have guys on the shelf or hobbling out each week that immediately make us better.

We have young running backs. Guys that are actually getting better.

I'm not of the opinion that we need to get better coaches right now. Considering where we were in July and preseason even to where we are now. I feel like we have the exact right people in place now.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
But there is no pathway to getting better. I get frustrated about it but I get we have to lower expectations. Now we are just doing our best with the choices our FO made.

There is definitely a pathway to get better. This overall scheme is like a tripod. You need efficient passing. You need exceptional running of the ball. And you need a punishing defense.

This team doesn't have that third leg. This defense is .... poor right now. Outperforming even where it should be. There are probably no more than 5 players on this team right now that shouldn't be immediately replaced (Wagner, Griffin, Clark, Reed). Flowers is still progressing at an acceptable rate but he's not there yet. Mingo looks like he should be resigned. But otherwise the defense needs significant improvement.

That's actually the one aspect that is most readily improved quickly with added players and one in which this coaching staff is most able to turn around quickly.

TwistedHusky":1vgnvp6f said:
There isn't a pathway out of this so we just have to wait for beating up on weaker teams. We won't be terrible - just not great anymore.

Yes there is. Fix the defense. We're on the wrong side of one possession games. Get even so much as two additional stops on defense over the course of a game and we're on the right side. We haven't addressed the loss of our safeties and our pass rushers at all. We have a great draft upcoming to do just that. And we have a massive amount of free cap space to add a couple starter quality pieces.

We actually totally fixed the hardest part for this team to fix. Its offensive line and it's running attack. The defense is the easiest part for us to fix. And it's the kind of problem that can seemingly be fixed overnight.

ImTheScientist · Nov 13, 2018

The offense isn’t the problem.

SoulfishHawk · Nov 13, 2018

The play calling on offense is pathetic at times. Especially when they try to get cute, all while racking up OVER 270 yards of rushing. But yeah, let's do an onside kick and then put Russ back there to get clobbered. I feel like they have been outcoached in all 5 losses this year in the 4th quarter.

Also, the D is getting absolutely shredded against the run. And passes over the middle, guys wide open over and over again.

MD5eahawks · Nov 13, 2018

SoulfishHawk":1pwlv585 said:
The play calling on offense is pathetic at times. Especially when they try to get cute, all while racking up OVER 270 yards of rushing. But yeah, let's do an onside kick and then put Russ back there to get clobbered. I feel like they have been outcoached in all 5 losses this year in the 4th quarter.

Also, the D is getting absolutely shredded against the run. And passes over the middle, guys wide open over and over again.

Frustrating to watch sometimes. But I believe it'll get right. It just takes time and the right personnel.

SoulfishHawk · Nov 13, 2018

It just feels like they are real close, maybe just my ridiculous positive side, but I have a good feeling about this team.

Finger Prints...

New member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads