Some notes counter to the narrative

From Mike Sando’s Twitter: “Now here is a @seahawks note counter to what the eyes told me tonight, but I verified it. They were 50% pass on first down in first 28 minutes of game (excludes 2-minute). That was their 2nd-highest rate of season, and they went 0-4 when rate was above 38.5%. Crazy!”

They also threw three more times than they rushed (27 vs. 24).
http://www.espn.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=401038953

Now I don't know what to complain about...

Fire everyone! Fire Pete Carroll's masseuse!

sc85sis":1s8pweyw said:

From Mike Sando’s Twitter: “Now here is a @seahawks note counter to what the eyes told me tonight, but I verified it. They were 50% pass on first down in first 28 minutes of game (excludes 2-minute). That was their 2nd-highest rate of season, and they went 0-4 when rate was above 38.5%. Crazy!”

They also threw three more times than they rushed (27 vs. 24).
http://www.espn.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=401038953

Click to expand...

That may be correct after starting run, run pass, and doing nothing, they went to a few passes first and moved the ball, only to go back to run, run pass. example our first field goal, we started with 2 passes got down to the 12, then went run, run, pass on 3rd and long then a FG, The question is how many times on 1st and 2nd down did they go run, run and leave 3rd and long in the first half? Answer 5 out of 8. Also yes we did through more than run. however, 17 came in the 2nd half and 12 in the 4th qtr proving my point they were to run heavy in the first 3 qtrs and did not adjust

Wilson threw 2 passes in the 1st quarter....

Did we have some big plays near the end of the half? Sure, but this post is the definition of being a contrarian. We stubbornly stuck to what didn’t work and it cost us

Lets see what should we have done run the ball most of the first half to the tune of 3 ypc or pass the ball as we did in the 2nd 4th qtr to the tune of 12 ypa


For the game running 3 ypc passing 8.6 ypa. 233 passing 73 running and that includes Wilson 14 and 4.7

We should have adjusted earlier and stuck with it

Read this thread the stats make it open and shut

https://twitter.com/SharpFootball/s...//www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=153214

"Just incase the stats are

In the first half Wilson was 7/11 with 8.8 YPA.

Your RB-run game gained 19 yards on 9 carries, 2.1 YPC. Your longest run was 5 yards."

"1st down play calls on your first 4 drives of the 2nd half:

6 RB-runs: 3.9 YPC, 14% success rate
1 pass: 9 yards, 100% success rate"


"Seahawks fans, we're going to have a long talk about Brian Schottenheimer.
Seattle doesn't have Blake Bortles or Case Keenum at QB.
This is Russell Wilson.
16 Wilson passes @ 8.3 YPA vs
21 non-Wilson runs @ 2.8 YPC
One of the worst called games w a good QB I can remember."

Enough said

Scorpion05":12jd98nf said:

Wilson threw 2 passes in the 1st quarter....

Did we have some big plays near the end of the half? Sure, but this post is the definition of being a contrarian. We stubbornly stuck to what didn’t work and it cost us

Click to expand...

Facts that thwart your narrative aren't "contrarian". They're an opportunity to help you grow in your evaluation.

First viewings often give the wrong impression. Sando was a good teacher of that fact in his tweet.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JaredStanger/status/1081772435337240576[/tweet]

Here's another one...and god help me I'm having to retweet Stanger...

MontanaHawk05":24lveqb7 said:

Scorpion05":24lveqb7 said:

Wilson threw 2 passes in the 1st quarter....

Did we have some big plays near the end of the half? Sure, but this post is the definition of being a contrarian. We stubbornly stuck to what didn’t work and it cost us

Click to expand...

Facts that thwart your narrative aren't "contrarian". They're an opportunity to help you grow in your evaluation.

First viewings often give the wrong impression. Sando was a good teacher of that fact in his tweet.

Click to expand...

Facts that are intent on somehow providing a counter argument while conveniently ignoring every counter fact is, indeed, being contrarian

I don’t rant simply just to rant. Whether you agree with my points or not, I approach every opinion with the intention of being fair. Your response had nothing to do with mine, which is that Russell only threw 2 passes in the first quarter. Others have pointed out the sequence of drives as well, which included minimum pass attempts save for one or two successful drives early where we did pass

Context matters. Throwing out a 50% number without ANY context to drive and play calling sequencing is silly and doesn’t disprove people’s accurate frustrations

MontanaHawk05":2npipy3q said:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JaredStanger/status/1081772435337240576[/tweet]

Here's another one...and god help me I'm having to retweet Stanger...

Click to expand...

24 rush attempts on less than 3 yards a carry. Especially when you minus Wilson’s yards

Of course we didn’t have more attempts. We COULDNT sustain drives because we continuously kept running into brick walls even after our first drive out of halftime. Had we leveraged the running threat more with play action we likely are able to call more run plays and get over that 24 mark. Not complicated. Our offense was anemic most of the evening and simply combing over the play sequence of each drive would reveal that

Scorpion05":14j7y85h said:

Your response had nothing to do with mine, which is that Russell only threw 2 passes in the first quarter.

Context matters. Throwing out a 50% number without ANY context to drive and play calling sequencing is silly and doesn’t disprove people’s accurate frustrations

Click to expand...

Context? Here's some context:

* There were two passes by Wilson in the first quarter, but there were four pass PLAYS called. One became a sack, one a scramble. So that's 5 runs, 4 passes actually called in the first quarter. Since our concern is what was actually called by the coaching staff, it's missing part of the picture to cite only the two passes that actually left Wilson's hand.

* When your defense can't get Dallas' offense off the field, that's going to play a role in reducing the number of Wilson throws. Dallas did have the edge in TOP during that first quarter.

* Sando was referencing the first 28 minutes. You cited only the first quarter. Since Sando's 50% figure is not incorrect, that means the 13 minutes of the second quarter had to be pass-heavy for the overall average to hit 50%. And it was - 5 passes to 3 runs.

So once you throw in that context, the narrow fact of "he only threw two passes in the first quarter" really doesn't mean a whole lot anymore.

Here's some additional information: Some of Wilson's passes were successful *because* of the play-action. Some were successful *because* they went counter to tendency.

Regardless of how successful the rushing game is, we have to keep doing it because we do not have the offensive line to protect Wilson by itself. Misdirection and doubt are protecting our QB just as much as an additional offensive lineman or two.

Scorpion05":2cgsmh0y said:

MontanaHawk05":2cgsmh0y said:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JaredStanger/status/1081772435337240576[/tweet]

Here's another one...and god help me I'm having to retweet Stanger...

Click to expand...

24 rush attempts on less than 3 yards a carry. Especially when you minus Wilson’s yards

Of course we didn’t have more attempts. We COULDNT sustain drives because we continuously kept running into brick walls even after our first drive out of halftime. Had we leveraged the running threat more with play action we likely are able to call more run plays and get over that 24 mark. Not complicated. Our offense was anemic most of the evening and simply combing over the play sequence of each drive would reveal that

Click to expand...

We only ran 50 something plays due to Dallas holding the ball so long

KiwiHawk":1gghvc66 said:

Here's some additional information: Some of Wilson's passes were successful *because* of the play-action. Some were successful *because* they went counter to tendency.

Regardless of how successful the rushing game is, we have to keep doing it because we do not have the offensive line to protect Wilson by itself. Misdirection and doubt are protecting our QB just as much as an additional offensive lineman or two.

Click to expand...

To a point true, but when you first 3 series are run, run, 3rd and long, it is time to change. You can still commit to the run throwing on 1st down instead of 3rd, OR 2nd down. The issue here is, the run was not working at all so why not try mixing in more passes and then see if that opens things up for the run. PC in his postgame said they should have opened it up sooner, so this is not just me or most of the experts. They had the same issue in the Carolina game, they opened it up 2nd qtr and by 3rd and 4th they could run more. Sometimes the pass needs to set up the run. Most of the pressure they got on Wilson was on the 3rd and longs when they knew we had no choice. But when we threw on 1st and 2nd they got almost nothing. When a defense makes you one dimensional and you refuse to change you will lose. We were not winning by keeping running it so what did we have to lose.

MontanaHawk05":1sg7wo5k said:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JaredStanger/status/1081772435337240576[/tweet]

Here's another one...and god help me I'm having to retweet Stanger...

Click to expand...

How many 3 and outs and how many punts. That will keep down those attempts.

I'm not sure what the point of this statistic is.
The first down passes were overwhelmingly successful.
Early down runs and 3rd down passing was overwhelmingly unsuccessful.

Even if you argue that more passes on 1st down were called there were still too many. This stat also ignores the fact that on 2nd and medium we called runs basically every time (I honestly can't remember a time we went run pass pass except for when that 7 yard loss by penny put us in 2nd and a Mike.

We had 12 drives total. 2 were end of half drives. 5 ended with run run pass punt/FG. 2 more were hampered by negative run plays on first down.

To be honest there were 3 plays on particular that stood out as just awful to me, and they were all pass plays...

1st drive of the game, 3rd and 2 after running with Carson twice - why do we go empty backfield? This gave me flashbacks to Superbowl 49. The run game had worked to get a manageable 3rd down, at least have a RB in the backfield to keep Dallas honest. Of course we miss and go 3 and out.

3rd and 17 (I forget quite where in the game. 2nd or 3rd quarter) - a TE screen to Vannett on the outside? Are you kidding me? No blockers out in front, he's tackled immediately. That play had no chance and felt like we'd just given up making the 1st down.

2nd and 25 (something like that - 4th quarter, after KJ interception) - WR screen to Lockett. No blockers in front. Somehow gets 5yds. Sets up a 3rd and 20 (which we then screen AGAIN) and we go 3 and out.

All of those plays felt absolutely awful and, in the case of the first two examples in particular, I can't even understand what the thinking was. I realise I know nothing about football compared to these chaps but...what were they thinking!

LOL cherrypicking stats to fit your narrative

Take away the last desperation drive, there were far more rushing attempts than passing attempts. That adjustment should have come no later than halftime, not when they needed a miracle.

And there were so few rushing attempts because the offense could not sustain a drive because those rushing attempts were lucky to gain 2 yards.