Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

12-0 over 250 yards

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:43 am
  • Prior to Sundays game the Seahawks are 12-0 in games they rush for 250 or more yards. So that makes the first loss in team history when we rush for over 250. :(

    Defense and poor coaching decisions lost this game IMO. Sure you could bring up the strip sack as a factor, but we've also lost games where we were plus 3 in turnovers also, so that is not a given.

    With 108 yards on the ground, Seahawks rookie Rashad Penny spearheaded a Seattle rushing attack that steamrolled the Rams for 273 yards, and surprisingly, Seattle lost. ... the Seahawks lost a game where they rushed for more than 250 yards. Before Sunday, they had been 12-0 when hitting that mark.


    Cant link Seattle Times article....they want me to pay. :roll:
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:59 am
  • That goes to show you how important that one mistake can be, Pete always talks about mistakes and how we need to take care of our mistakes. Without that one fumble its a different outcome.
    Cheers
    SUPERBOWL CHAMPIONS XLVIII 43-8

    Better to have a bottle in front of me,then a frontly lobotmy.
    User avatar
    Chawker
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2099
    Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:18 am
    Location: corner of 40th & plum


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:00 am
  • Yep, they were in this game the entire time. Onside kick and choosing to let Russ sit in the pocket cost them another game in the 4th quarter. I for one am sick of them getting outcoached in the 4th quarter.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10806
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:18 am
  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Yep, they were in this game the entire time. Onside kick and choosing to let Russ sit in the pocket cost them another game in the 4th quarter. I for one am sick of them getting outcoached in the 4th quarter.


    Agree 100%. Nothing like making your QB a sitting duck during duck season with empty backfields and no outlets and no rollouts on must pass situations with a Dline like that. :pukeface:

    Pete still preaches that "It's not about them it's about us" BS. Not against that Dline!! :141847_bnono: It's about them, and if you don't game plan to keep your QB clean bad sh!t is going to happen.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:26 am
  • Seymour wrote:
    Cant link Seattle Times article....they want me to pay. :roll:



    Good business model. "Hey we know you can find this information on a dozen other sites, but give us $10 a month to read our crappy articles."

    It is frustrating to rush for so many yards and lose. I think what the Ram's game showed is that even if we're rushing well we have to find some passing balance so that Russell is in rhythm and rolling in the 4th quarter, and isn't expected to just flip a switch and lead two straight passing drives.

    How many passing yards did we have in the first half, like 39? Gotta find some balance.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13829
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:35 am
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    Cant link Seattle Times article....they want me to pay. :roll:



    Good business model. "Hey we know you can find this information on a dozen other sites, but give us $10 a month to read our crappy articles."

    It is frustrating to rush for so many yards and lose. I think what the Ram's game showed is that even if we're rushing well we have to find some passing balance so that Russell is in rhythm and rolling in the 4th quarter, and isn't expected to just flip a switch and lead two straight passing drives.

    How many passing yards did we have in the first half, like 39? Gotta find some balance.


    Agree on balance. He needs to get into the flow of the game, we've seen that with all the first half slow starts last years and early this year. Not just Wilson either, the WR's get tired running full speed routes then never getting a target.

    And I don't know what is up with Baldwin, but he is a NO SHOW! He averages 850 yards and 6 TD's per year. This season past halfway point he has 275 yards and ZERO TD's. Something is up with him when he announces "I'm only going to be 80% this season". Why even tell everyone that? :roll: :141847_bnono:

    Baldwin vs Rams. 6 reception 40 yards zero TD's in 2 games!
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:44 am
  • Seymour wrote:
    And I don't know what is up with Baldwin, but he is a NO SHOW! He averages 850 yards and 6 TD's per year. This season past halfway point he has 275 yards and ZERO TD's. Something is up with him when he announces "I'm only going to be 80% this season". Why even tell everyone that? :roll: :141847_bnono:

    Baldwin vs Rams. 6 reception 40 yards zero TD's in 2 games!


    He's hurt, and he's been hurt all year.

    Baldwin needs that burst off the line to get that separation from the DB..........and he just hasn't had it with his knee.

    He did look quicker and sharper on Sunday, so maybe that's a good sign he's feeling better.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13829
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:49 am
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    And I don't know what is up with Baldwin, but he is a NO SHOW! He averages 850 yards and 6 TD's per year. This season past halfway point he has 275 yards and ZERO TD's. Something is up with him when he announces "I'm only going to be 80% this season". Why even tell everyone that? :roll: :141847_bnono:

    Baldwin vs Rams. 6 reception 40 yards zero TD's in 2 games!


    He's hurt, and he's been hurt all year.

    Baldwin needs that burst off the line to get that separation from the DB..........and he just hasn't had it with his knee.

    He did look quicker and sharper on Sunday, so maybe that's a good sign he's feeling better.


    Well, he was better than the first game where he had 1 reception for 1 yard....so there is that.

    I know he is hurt, my question is why he says he'll only be 80% all year and tip all the other teams to possibly switch coverage and put their #1 on Lockett.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:55 am
  • Seymour wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    And I don't know what is up with Baldwin, but he is a NO SHOW! He averages 850 yards and 6 TD's per year. This season past halfway point he has 275 yards and ZERO TD's. Something is up with him when he announces "I'm only going to be 80% this season". Why even tell everyone that? :roll: :141847_bnono:

    Baldwin vs Rams. 6 reception 40 yards zero TD's in 2 games!


    He's hurt, and he's been hurt all year.

    Baldwin needs that burst off the line to get that separation from the DB..........and he just hasn't had it with his knee.

    He did look quicker and sharper on Sunday, so maybe that's a good sign he's feeling better.


    Well, he was better than the first game where he had 1 reception for 1 yard....so there is that.

    I know he is hurt, my question is why he says he'll only be 80% all year and tip all the other teams to possibly switch coverage and put their #1 on Lockett.


    Film doesn't lie, he could say he's 100% but teams would know he's not. Him saying it doesn't change anything.

    Lockett's had his best year as a WR, so it's not like it's affected coverage.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13829
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:39 pm
  • We put up over 30 points. This loss is on the defense. It isn’t even debatable.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2018 Adopt a Rookie: Rashaad Penny

    Image
    User avatar
    Sox-n-Hawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2687
    Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:26 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:30 pm
  • Got to give some credit to the opponent. Rams are a Top 2 team in the NFL right now. We’ve run over their defense pretty well. Our own defense just hasn’t stopped them enough.
    User avatar
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2842
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 10:25 pm
  • The Rams defense is really bad at times but when they needed to get a stop they did.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2205
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:32 pm
  • Sox-n-Hawks wrote:We put up over 30 points. This loss is on the defense. It isn’t even debatable.

    What's the motivation to assign blame to either the defense or the offense? We had bad and good plays on both sides of the ball. One more good play on either side and we could have gotten a win against a more talented team on the road.

    The Rams are currently #1 in offensive efficiency and #25 in defensive efficiency (yards per play). Nobody has shut down that offense yet but they can be run on and beaten in a shoot out. The upcoming Chiefs game will be very similar as they are #24 in defensive efficiency, so a game in which we win is more likely to be a 38-33 game then a 14-10 affair.
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3560
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:24 am
  • AgentDib wrote:
    Sox-n-Hawks wrote:We put up over 30 points. This loss is on the defense. It isn’t even debatable.

    What's the motivation to assign blame to either the defense or the offense? We had bad and good plays on both sides of the ball. One more good play on either side and we could have gotten a win against a more talented team on the road.

    The Rams are currently #1 in offensive efficiency and #25 in defensive efficiency (yards per play). Nobody has shut down that offense yet but they can be run on and beaten in a shoot out. The upcoming Chiefs game will be very similar as they are #24 in defensive efficiency, so a game in which we win is more likely to be a 38-33 game then a 14-10 affair.


    How many games have we won under PC where the opponent scored over 27 points? Not many. Bottom line. If the offense puts up 30+ points the LOSS isn’t on their shoulders. They did their job. The defense has some work to do. How’d we beat the donkeys in the Super Bowl? Shut down the most prolific offense.

    It’s not about blame, it’s a simple equation. Make them score less than you do. When the offense puts up 30+, it’s awfully hard to put the loss on their shoulders.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2018 Adopt a Rookie: Rashaad Penny

    Image
    User avatar
    Sox-n-Hawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2687
    Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:26 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:20 am
  • Losing these games in many ways. But ignoring problems with the D has been very common the last few years on here. As if they are above criticism. They are getting shredded in the run game and over the middle.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10806
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:56 am
  • Seymour wrote:Prior to Sundays game the Seahawks are 12-0 in games they rush for 250 or more yards. So that makes the first loss in team history when we rush for over 250. :(

    Defense and poor coaching decisions lost this game IMO. Sure you could bring up the strip sack as a factor, but we've also lost games where we were plus 3 in turnovers also, so that is not a given.

    With 108 yards on the ground, Seahawks rookie Rashad Penny spearheaded a Seattle rushing attack that steamrolled the Rams for 273 yards, and surprisingly, Seattle lost. ... the Seahawks lost a game where they rushed for more than 250 yards. Before Sunday, they had been 12-0 when hitting that mark.


    Cant link Seattle Times article....they want me to pay. :roll:


    I think the 250 yards means less than it used to because the amount of offense is so much more these days with all the QB protection and passing game emphasis. As a result, you can put up 300 - 400 yards passing so much easier than even 10 years ago -- and that means 250 yards rushing doesn't mean as much UNLESS you have a defense that is dominant. If you defense is dominant and you rack up 250 yards rushing then it means you are running the ball all game long, the other team knows you are running the ball and they still cannot stop you. In last week's game, the Rams didn't care at points in the game if the Seahawks ran the ball because with the Rams' passing attack the Rams knew they could score a TD with a minute or 2 on the clock. The problem with 250 yards rushing in a shoot out game is that it took them 6 minutes to go down the field in their 2 minute offense.

    We all knew before the game even started that the defense weren't good enough to "WIN" this game for them. If they were to have a chance It was always going to come down to the Seahawks playing a near flawless game on offense and RW making the clutch plays down the stretch. Wilson did NOT do that so I don't see how he doesn't shoulder the blame for the loss if you are going to make someone responsible. I think the coaches knew that they don't pass protect that well when the other team knows they are passing so they had to stick with the run to give them a shot. If you are going to criticize some of the strange pass play calling (I think warranted) then they need just as much credit for calling the running plays they did and getting the yardage they did. There were quite a few on this board that believed Fluker was the main reason they could run the ball and without him that it would fall apart.

    As an aside, I cant help but roll my eyes when I hear statistics these days about "1st QB in History to throw for 3000+ yards in 5 straight seasons" or "fastest WR to reach 10000 career yards or 500 receptions etc". Al the passing stats are so inflated now that reaching 3000 yards in a season for a QB is almost a bare minimum Right now, Josh Rosen (who has looked terrible) at his current pace would hit 3000 yards by the end of this year if he had played 16 games. If that doesn't show that we 3000 yards means nothing these days and that it is pointless to compare current passing stats to seasons prior to 2008.

    Z.
    zetes
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 177
    Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 9:25 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:14 am
  • Just curious what the stats are for games where we pass for less than 50 yards at the half?

    I imagine not great.

    So running for tons of yards while at the same time being almost unable to pass the ball and having a horrible 3rd down efficiency? They probably offset each other.

    We did score 31 but we didn't do ourselves any favors running our own clock down when down by 2 scores.

    It is a stat that makes sense but if you compare total offensive efficiency and effectiveness #s you get a bit of a different story.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3355
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:27 am
  • I do not understand all the focus on offense here? This record being broken this year is FAR more on an indictment of the defense, not the offense.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:35 am
  • Your defense won't get better.

    The offense can.

    Our best players are on offense.


    And the offense wasn't even close to NFL standards as a whole.

    So we can complain about a defense that is weak because we cut most of the best players or let them go. (Specifically running a defense that is predicated on great play by the safeties where we pretty much have average safeties (McD and TT somewhat cancel each other out))

    Or we can look at what can be fixed, which would more likely be the offense. We knew this defense was going to give up 20-30 points a game (or should have known). But as pointed out by another poster, when we play top offenses that have relatively weak defenses - the onus is on the offense to win those games. An average defense against a great offense is not a good matchup.

    Our passing game is horrific. Either we have no WRs (and where is Brown?) or we just are not even trying. I honestly don't know that answer but I know we face bleak prospects against better than .500 teams if we cannot figure it out.

    The defense won't win games for us. It has to be our offense.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3355
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:47 am
  • TwistedHusky wrote:Just curious what the stats are for games where we pass for less than 50 yards at the half?

    I imagine not great.

    So running for tons of yards while at the same time being almost unable to pass the ball and having a horrible 3rd down efficiency? They probably offset each other.

    We did score 31 but we didn't do ourselves any favors running our own clock down when down by 2 scores.

    It is a stat that makes sense but if you compare total offensive efficiency and effectiveness #s you get a bit of a different story.


    I'm trying to find this via Pro Football Reference but there doesn't seem to be a way to get passing yards at half out of it.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3310
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:11 am
  • TwistedHusky wrote:Your defense won't get better.

    The offense can.

    Our best players are on offense.

    And the offense wasn't even close to NFL standards as a whole.............


    Is this some kind of joke? How can anyone say with a straight face only one side of the ball is capable of improvement??

    Was the defense not better in the 2nd half the last 2 games?? :roll:

    Image
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:28 am
  • That is true.

    You CAN leverage your worst players and try to get better.

    Or you can leverage your best.

    We have a top 7 QB in the league and he had thrown for 38 yd before the 2 min warning in the first half. 6 total passes.

    Ask yourself how that is leveraging your best players to win.

    Would you rather win games with Wilson or Tedric Thompson? Which one is more likely?

    or you can rail against the defense but we don't have the horses, we have average players and we stole the DC from the Raiders (who they probably want back because he was terrible there and they are trying to lose). He hasn't been terrible here but it isn't a prescription for any kind of regular success against better than .500 teams.

    In the NFL, you win with your best players. Our best players are on offense.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3355
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:43 am
  • TwistedHusky wrote:Just curious what the stats are for games where we pass for less than 50 yards at the half?

    I imagine not great.

    So running for tons of yards while at the same time being almost unable to pass the ball and having a horrible 3rd down efficiency? They probably offset each other.

    We did score 31 but we didn't do ourselves any favors running our own clock down when down by 2 scores.

    It is a stat that makes sense but if you compare total offensive efficiency and effectiveness #s you get a bit of a different story.


    I'm trying to find this via Pro Football Reference but there doesn't seem to be a way to get passing yards at half out of it.

    Edit: I did the 2018 Season using a few filters that show me only completed passes by RW in the 1st and 2nd quarter, then sum the total yards passing by looking at the game log and then find out if it it was a win or not.

    in 2018 they dipped below 100 passing yards in the 1st half and the record is 1-2. Against the Bears they had 68 yards passing in the first half and lost (24-17), 85 against the Cardinals and won (20-17), 39 against the Rams and lost (36-31).

    2017 Since I'm doing this reverse chronological order I've already got two hits:

    2nd Cardinals game - 36 passing yards at half - Loss
    Cowboys - 35 Passing yards at half - Win

    Interesting to note that the final was 26-24 Cards and 21-12 Hawks respectively.

    Rams - 88 at half - Loss - (42-7 Rams)
    Jags - 36 at half - Loss ( 30-24 Jags)
    Eagles - 85 at half - Win (24-10)
    Niners - 80 at Half - Win (24-13)
    Skins - 98 at Half - Loss (17-14)
    Packers 59 at Half - Loss (17-9)

    I might do 2012-2016 later.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3310
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:44 am
  • TwistedHusky wrote:That is true.

    You CAN leverage your worst players and try to get better.

    Or you can leverage your best.

    We have a top 7 QB in the league and he had thrown for 38 yd before the 2 min warning in the first half. 6 total passes.

    Ask yourself how that is leveraging your best players to win.

    Would you rather win games with Wilson or Tedric Thompson? Which one is more likely?

    or you can rail against the defense but we don't have the horses, we have average players and we stole the DC from the Raiders (who they probably want back because he was terrible there and they are trying to lose). He hasn't been terrible here but it isn't a prescription for any kind of regular success against better than .500 teams.

    In the NFL, you win with your best players. Our best players are on offense.


    Your entire premise that the offense is our clear strength is not even factual! Forget what you think you know and look at the numbers. Just going with points allowed / scored offense is #18 in the league and defense is #9. Scrap your entire plan IMO. From there look at how the team is designed to win. It's designed to win with a top 3-5 D and ball control. Get the D where it belongs and other things will fall into place. You want to change that and focus on offense? You'll need another head coach then!

    Lastly. we have more youth on defense and vets on offense. By default that means that there is actually more room to improve and grow on defense. Again, exact opposite of what you stated.
    Last edited by Seymour on Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:52 am
  • Seymour wrote:
    TwistedHusky wrote:That is true.

    You CAN leverage your worst players and try to get better.

    Or you can leverage your best.

    We have a top 7 QB in the league and he had thrown for 38 yd before the 2 min warning in the first half. 6 total passes.

    Ask yourself how that is leveraging your best players to win.

    Would you rather win games with Wilson or Tedric Thompson? Which one is more likely?

    or you can rail against the defense but we don't have the horses, we have average players and we stole the DC from the Raiders (who they probably want back because he was terrible there and they are trying to lose). He hasn't been terrible here but it isn't a prescription for any kind of regular success against better than .500 teams.

    In the NFL, you win with your best players. Our best players are on offense.


    Your entire premise that the offense is our clear strength is not even factual! Forget what you think you know and look at the numbers. Just going with points allowed / scored offense is #18 in the league and defense is #9. Scrap your entire plan IMO. From there look at how the team is designed to win. It's designed to win with a top 3-5 D and ball control. Get the D where it belongs and other things will fall into place. You want to change that and focus on offense? You'll need another head coach then!


    I think in terms of known quantities the offense is clearer than defense. But in terms of what the team needs to do to win within the parameters of their strategy, the D has to be even better than they are. And totally agree with the coaching aspect - there is nothing out there that shows that our tendencies and foibles will change because of Pete at the helm. But that doesn't make me less jealous of what Nagy and Mark Helfrich are doing with Trubisky as an example. Or hold back questioning why it is so important for Pete to pursue his dogmatic quest towards one 'true' football when it seems to require so many more ducks in a row to pull off.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3310
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:59 am
  • Not saying I like it either! I really don't like the lack of flexibility to do what is needed every week for every team. But we have what we have, and this is the fastest way to get the most of what we have with the given parameters of Pete ball.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:04 am
  • Seymour,

    The defense has nothing but average players on it. Our difference makers are primarily on offense.

    We do have:
    Clark
    Wagner
    KJ (?)

    But for the most part, all those young players are young with average athletic ability. They are not something we can pin improvement on. They are high floor, low ceiling types. Maybe Griffin and Flowers have some run untapped stuff since they occasionally flash their potential but that is it.

    I guess people are high on Naz and Green too but I have not really seen it in games.

    Contrast to the offense:

    Wilson
    Baldwin
    Lockett
    Carson

    (You could even put Penny, who still is flashing more potential than most of the young players on defense. Then again he was a higher pick).

    Who can make more difference in a game,
    Clark or Wilson?
    Wagner or Baldwin?
    Lockett or KJ

    I get you are used to us being able to lean on the defense to keep us in games or win them. Those days are over. We either win with offense, play to a standstill or 'lose because of the defense'. We were rated #9 but if you look at who we played it would be apparent that #9 was inflated. The only game I saw against a decent team that the defense really looked above average was against the Cowboys.

    Everyone looks good against the Raiders, they are trying to lose.
    The Cards are not as bad as the Raiders, but they were still starting a rookie QB.
    The Lions are, shockingly, the Lions. (Not sure why everyone thought they were good but that is another topic)

    We aren't ending this year with our defense in the top 10, and that is with our run game protecting the defense massively. The upside is offense. The defense is actually playing better than the roster indicates they should.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3355
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:23 am
  • You are far too hung up on name familiarity and your vision of what you believe is "average". The numbers don't lie. All those lost all pro's were also average before they got their shot. Many on D were boosted because of the system. Maxwell, Browner, Thurmond, Marsh, Irvin, Smith come to mind for starters. Most of them flamed out after they left.

    All those teams you point out as weaknesses, play both offense and defense too. So the stats go both ways so both sides get inflated not just "your side of the ball".
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5848
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:38 am
  • Really just comes down to sh*tting the bed. In every close loss this season it just seems like we get close then freeze up. This team is the definition of passive aggressive.
    Bandwagon76
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 29
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2018 1:27 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:00 am
  • Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.
    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: 25425
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:36 am
  • chris98251 wrote:Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.


    Interestingly enough I did a quick query of teams that have over 250 rushing yards in a game and gave up 30+ points along the way.

    From 2012 to 2018 only 7 games qualify across the NFL.

    2018:

    SEA / 36-31 Loss

    2016:

    BUF / 34-31 Loss in OT

    MIA/ 34-31 Win in OT (yes it was the same game)

    2014:

    SF / 35-38 Loss in OT

    2013:

    DEN / 34-31 Loss in OT
    TB / 44-32 Win

    2012:
    CAR / 44-38 Win


    I also looked at games where a team gave up 30+ points and had less than 250 yards passing - over 400 games qualified and strictly looking at W/L percentages, a team that gave up 30+ points and got less than 250 yards passing won around 5% of their games in that situation.

    I further restricted to look at teams that got over 200 yards rushing in a game, gave up 30+ points and had less than 250 yards passing.

    16 games qualified and Losers outweighed the Winners 11-5.

    I opened the Passing Yards a bit to <300 and that increased the data size to 25. Losers still outweighed winners 15-10.

    Finally I went all the way back to >250 yards rushing and giving up =< 30 points. 36 games qualified and Winners outweighed Loser 33-3! (And if you look at games where a team got 450 yards passing and gave up 30 points it's 10-3 Winners over Losers)

    Obviously we are dealing with smaller than small sample sizes here but some of it at least makes some sort of sense - giving up 30+ points seems bad no matter how good your rushing offense is. And it seems worse if your passing game sucks on the same day. In fact, that Overtime Buffalo game Vs. Miami is the only game that qualified under the conditions of >250 yards rushing, >300 yards passing and giving up 30+ points across 2012-2018 season. And only Buffalo did. And they lost.

    I will reiterate again that sample sizes are small in some situations so drawing a conclusion is murky but across the board it seems like giving up 30 points is bad.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3310
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:07 pm
  • mrt144 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.


    Interestingly enough I did a quick query of teams that have over 250 rushing yards in a game and gave up 30+ points along the way.

    From 2012 to 2018 only 7 games qualify across the NFL.

    2018:

    SEA / 36-31 Loss

    2016:

    BUF / 34-31 Loss in OT

    MIA/ 34-31 Win in OT (yes it was the same game)

    2014:

    SF / 35-38 Loss in OT

    2013:

    DEN / 34-31 Loss in OT
    TB / 44-32 Win

    2012:
    CAR / 44-38 Win


    I also looked at games where a team gave up 30+ points and had less than 250 yards passing - over 400 games qualified and strictly looking at W/L percentages, a team that gave up 30+ points and got less than 250 yards passing won around 5% of their games in that situation.

    I further restricted to look at teams that got over 200 yards rushing in a game, gave up 30+ points and had less than 250 yards passing.

    16 games qualified and Losers outweighed the Winners 11-5.

    I opened the Passing Yards a bit to <300 and that increased the data size to 25. Losers still outweighed winners 15-10.

    Finally I went all the way back to >250 yards rushing and giving up =< 30 points. 36 games qualified and Winners outweighed Loser 33-3! (And if you look at games where a team got 450 yards passing and gave up 30 points it's 10-3 Winners over Losers)

    Obviously we are dealing with smaller than small sample sizes here but some of it at least makes some sort of sense - giving up 30+ points seems bad no matter how good your rushing offense is. And it seems worse if your passing game sucks on the same day. In fact, that Overtime Buffalo game Vs. Miami is the only game that qualified under the conditions of >250 yards rushing, >300 yards passing and giving up 30+ points across 2012-2018 season. And only Buffalo did. And they lost.

    I will reiterate again that sample sizes are small in some situations so drawing a conclusion is murky but across the board it seems like giving up 30 points is bad.


    I was talking strictly from the rushing perspective, the fumble gave them more points, the onside kick set them up for more points. Most game you give up 30 plus points is bad also, they may not have hit the 30 mark if not for the two big mistakes. The defense was actually playing better in the second half.
    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: 25425
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:51 pm
  • Just about any team that ran for 250 yds will win, it's not a relevant stat because it's a rare occurrence in today's game.
    Bow Down to Washington
    User avatar
    DomeHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 923
    Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:20 am
    Location: Meadowdale


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:35 pm
  • Earlier today I read a stat (don't remember where) that since 2012 the Seahawks are 50-0 in games when they were up by 4 or more points at halftime. Assuming that is correct, it says a lot. More first half scoring may be needed this season to maintain that stat.

    :smilingalien:
    ------------------Rashaad Penny, the next great Seahawks RB.------------------
    User avatar
    CamanoIslandJQ
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1403
    Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:11 am
    Location: Camano Island, WA


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:59 pm
  • Seymour wrote:
    I know he is hurt, my question is why he says he'll only be 80% all year and tip all the other teams to possibly switch coverage and put their #1 on Lockett.


    On the final, and arguably most important, play of the Rams game. How did the coverage on Baldwin compare to the coverage on every other receiver on the field? He was double, smother covered like chili on a hot dog. Lockett, Moore, and Brown were all given huge zone cushions, and only stellar play by Donald, combined with bone headed play by Brown, prevented Wilson from making an easy toss, to a wide open receiver, for a first down.
    Fire Tom Cable

    Still can't believe we let Alex Collins go
    User avatar
    bigskydoc
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2398
    Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:27 am
    Location: Kalispell, MT


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Thu Nov 15, 2018 2:09 pm
  • chris98251 wrote:Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.


    I think this is an antiquated stat that maybe proved out before the league turned into flag football with high powered offenses that are capable of moving the ball and scoring quickly.

    Not that running the ball, controlling the clock and keeping the other team's offense on the bench isn't a good thing. But when you play teams like the Rams, Packers, Chargers and soon the Chiefs who score 30+ a game and score quickly, it's not going to be as successful........as we've found out the last two weeks.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13829
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:45 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.


    I think this is an antiquated stat that maybe proved out before the league turned into flag football with high powered offenses that are capable of moving the ball and scoring quickly.

    Not that running the ball, controlling the clock and keeping the other team's offense on the bench isn't a good thing. But when you play teams like the Rams, Packers, Chargers and soon the Chiefs who score 30+ a game and score quickly, it's not going to be as successful........as we've found out the last two weeks.



    I understand why people feel the strategy has not been a success but it has been IMO. It might not have shown up in the win column but I doubt very few teams have played a schedule as tough as we have . Every loss we have had I would say we had the weaker talent. Sometimes by a large margin. Yet we have stood toe to toe with some of the best teams in the league with chances to win at the end.


    The roster needs upgrades throughout the D and until then it makes perfect sense to me to hide them behind our strengths and shorten the game.

    Besides I love watching them ram the ball down teams throats,
    justafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1230
    Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:37 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:53 pm
  • justafan wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.


    I think this is an antiquated stat that maybe proved out before the league turned into flag football with high powered offenses that are capable of moving the ball and scoring quickly.

    Not that running the ball, controlling the clock and keeping the other team's offense on the bench isn't a good thing. But when you play teams like the Rams, Packers, Chargers and soon the Chiefs who score 30+ a game and score quickly, it's not going to be as successful........as we've found out the last two weeks.



    I understand why people feel the strategy has not been a success but it has been IMO. It might not have shown up in the win column but I doubt very few teams have played a schedule as tough as we have . Every loss we have had I would say we had the weaker talent. Sometimes by a large margin. Yet we have stood toe to toe with some of the best teams in the league with chances to win at the end.


    The roster needs upgrades throughout the D and until then it makes perfect sense to me to hide them behind our strengths and shorten the game.

    Besides I love watching them ram the ball down teams throats,


    FWIW, looking at the Football Outsiders DVOA SoS our past games are ranked 9th hardest and 13th hardest schedule going forward as it stands now.

    The only team with a better record and harder past schedule are the Bengals and the closest team to us with a better record are the Pats at 10th position and Rams at 11th position. So the schedule hasn't exactly been kind to us and there are certainly other teams doing worse within spitting distance of us but I don't think a drastically easier schedule tips maybe more than 2 wins our way - that's actually kind of huge but this feels like a slightly above average team with a slightly above average schedule toughness and a 4-5 record kinda reflects that at this point.

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3310
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:19 pm
  • mrt144 wrote:
    justafan wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.


    I think this is an antiquated stat that maybe proved out before the league turned into flag football with high powered offenses that are capable of moving the ball and scoring quickly.

    Not that running the ball, controlling the clock and keeping the other team's offense on the bench isn't a good thing. But when you play teams like the Rams, Packers, Chargers and soon the Chiefs who score 30+ a game and score quickly, it's not going to be as successful........as we've found out the last two weeks.



    I understand why people feel the strategy has not been a success but it has been IMO. It might not have shown up in the win column but I doubt very few teams have played a schedule as tough as we have . Every loss we have had I would say we had the weaker talent. Sometimes by a large margin. Yet we have stood toe to toe with some of the best teams in the league with chances to win at the end.


    The roster needs upgrades throughout the D and until then it makes perfect sense to me to hide them behind our strengths and shorten the game.

    Besides I love watching them ram the ball down teams throats,


    FWIW, looking at the Football Outsiders DVOA SoS our past games are ranked 9th hardest and 13th hardest schedule going forward as it stands now.

    The only team with a better record and harder past schedule are the Bengals and the closest team to us with a better record are the Pats at 10th position and Rams at 11th position. So the schedule hasn't exactly been kind to us and there are certainly other teams doing worse within spitting distance of us but I don't think a drastically easier schedule tips maybe more than 2 wins our way - that's actually kind of huge but this feels like a slightly above average team with a slightly above average schedule toughness and a 4-5 record kinda reflects that at this point.

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff



    I would trade schedules with several of those teams ranked above us.
    justafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1230
    Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:37 am


Re: 12-0 over 250 yards
Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:45 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Losing to the Rams and controlling the ball and getting the yards on the ground was an anomaly, 99 percent of the time you win with that formula, the turnover and on side attempt skewed things.


    I think this is an antiquated stat that maybe proved out before the league turned into flag football with high powered offenses that are capable of moving the ball and scoring quickly.

    Not that running the ball, controlling the clock and keeping the other team's offense on the bench isn't a good thing. But when you play teams like the Rams, Packers, Chargers and soon the Chiefs who score 30+ a game and score quickly, it's not going to be as successful........as we've found out the last two weeks.



    Yeah nobody has ever thrown the ball before, Chargers didn't do shit with Fouts there, Marino never gained any yards either, neither did the Bills with the K Gun and Jim Kelly. Yep until the 2000's nobody ever moved the ball in the air. This controlling the ball is so old it has never been successful before since nobody ever threw the ball.
    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: 25425
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.




It is currently Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:33 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information