John Clayton sets the Record Straight

ivotuk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
23,060
Reaction score
1,763
Location
North Pole, Alaska
In the Seattle - Dallas game, the Seahawks threw 27 times, and ran 24 times. More passes than throws.

John Clayton: "The score late in the 3rd Quarter was Seattle 14, Dallas 10, correct?" [Brock & Salk] "Correct"

John Clayton: "How many running plays did they have after that?! One! They passed the ball!"


http://sports.mynorthwest.com/category/ ... k+and+Salk
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
ivotuk":2g9lec87 said:
In the Seattle - Dallas game, the Seahawks threw 27 times, and ran 24 times. More passes than throws.

John Clayton: "The score late in the 3rd Quarter was Seattle 14, Dallas 10, correct?" [Brock & Salk] "Correct"

John Clayton: "How many running plays did they have after that?! One! They passed the ball!"


http://sports.mynorthwest.com/category/ ... k+and+Salk


Uhh…. they were down 2 scores from running it ineffectively the entire game. Down 2 scores in the 4th you have to throw, and they threw it effectively as well. :D :mrgreen: :lol:
 
OP
OP
ivotuk

ivotuk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
23,060
Reaction score
1,763
Location
North Pole, Alaska
Fade":vi54nkxk said:
ivotuk":vi54nkxk said:
In the Seattle - Dallas game, the Seahawks threw 27 times, and ran 24 times. More passes than throws.

John Clayton: "The score late in the 3rd Quarter was Seattle 14, Dallas 10, correct?" [Brock & Salk] "Correct"

John Clayton: "How many running plays did they have after that?! One! They passed the ball!"


http://sports.mynorthwest.com/category/ ... k+and+Salk


Uhh…. they were down 2 scores from running it ineffectively the entire game. Down 2 scores in the 4th you have to throw, and they threw it effectively as well. :D :mrgreen: :lol:

14 - 10 is "down 2 scores?" And they did throw it in the 4th quarter.

What about the Defense letting the Cowboys chew up clock and score 14 points late?
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
ivotuk":4q4qya62 said:
14 - 10 is "down 2 scores?" And they did throw it in the 4th quarter.

What about the Defense letting the Cowboys chew up clock and score 14 points late?

The Seahawks were down 2 scores in the 4th qtr.

14 to 24.

Clayton arguing that throwing too much at the end of the game is a false correlation and is asinine, especially when they were far more effective throwing the whole night than running.


The defense was gassed because the offense forced the run and continued going 3-'n-out too many times.

First 3 possessions. All 3-'n-outs, 9 plays 5 yards total.


Pete Carroll, Russell Wilson, and many intelligent football people have admitted, or stated they should've thrown more.
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
ivotuk":tfzc768r said:
In the Seattle - Dallas game, the Seahawks threw 27 times, and ran 24 times. More passes than throws.

John Clayton: "The score late in the 3rd Quarter was Seattle 14, Dallas 10, correct?" [Brock & Salk] "Correct"

John Clayton: "How many running plays did they have after that?! One! They passed the ball!"


http://sports.mynorthwest.com/category/ ... k+and+Salk


First, there was 5 minutes to go in the 3rd when this score happened. They ran only 14 plays the rest of the game. So let's look at that. Wilson threw it 10 times. So that means in 20 minutes of the game he threw 13 passes. Penalties killed two of the 3 drives and the one it did not we scored on. That means in the other 40 minutes he threw it 14 times. So what does that tell you? It tells you they only through when they had to for 40 minutes, by then our defense had been on the field 60% of the time. They waited too long to open it up period. If they did it earlier maybe there would not have been a 10-minute difference in time of possession. Let's look at our first 3 possessions run, run, 3rd and long punt. There you have it. The reality is we waited too late to let it loose
 

Seymour

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
7,459
Reaction score
22
John63":12uv7egz said:
ivotuk":12uv7egz said:
In the Seattle - Dallas game, the Seahawks threw 27 times, and ran 24 times. More passes than throws.

John Clayton: "The score late in the 3rd Quarter was Seattle 14, Dallas 10, correct?" [Brock & Salk] "Correct"

John Clayton: "How many running plays did they have after that?! One! They passed the ball!"


http://sports.mynorthwest.com/category/ ... k+and+Salk


First, there was 5 minutes to go in the 3rd when this score happened. They ran only 14 plays the rest of the game. So let's look at that. Wilson threw it 10 times. So that means in 20 minutes of the game he threw 13 passes. Penalties killed to of the 3 drives and the one it did not we scored on. That means in the other 40 minutes he threw it 14 times. So what does that tell you? It tells you they only through when they had to for 40 minutes, by then our defense had been on the field 60% of the time. They waited too long to open it up period. If they did it earlier maybe there would not have been a 10-minute difference in time of possession. Let's look at our first 3 possessions run, run, 34d and long punt. There you have it. The reality is we waited too late to let it loose

Thread winner. :irishdrinkers:

Clayton's point has zero merit.
 

erik2690

New member
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
356
Reaction score
0
The reason this is so silly is demonstrated by the TD drive we went ahead on. It was a 44 yard drive with 8 run plays and 1 pass, so running scored us that TD right? Not really. They went R-R-R to get to a 4th and 5 were bailed out by a Russ/Baldwin dime, then went right back to Mike Davis twice for 5 yards. Wilson had 2 keepers including the TD for 11 yards. So Wilson had 33 of 44 yards and half the yards were on 1 pass play. Also saying we were up going into the 4th and then citing just 4th Q numbers is a bit misleading. Dallas had the ball at the Q change and scored a TD right after. So our first possession in Q4 we trailed with no FG kicker. So again limiting to the 4th is tricky b/c as I said the last drive of Q3 was 8 runs and seemingly pretty poorly called. The 2nd drive of the 4th was the penalty laden 2nd&22 drive and we had to pass. I just think using just Q4 isn't a great representation.
 

chawx

Active member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,343
Reaction score
18
Location
Salt Lake City, UT
Fade":2u7wjblr said:
ivotuk":2u7wjblr said:
14 - 10 is "down 2 scores?" And they did throw it in the 4th quarter.

What about the Defense letting the Cowboys chew up clock and score 14 points late?

The Seahawks were down 2 scores in the 4th qtr.

14 to 24.

Clayton arguing that throwing too much at the end of the game is a false correlation and is asinine, especially when they were far more effective throwing the whole night than running.


The defense was gassed because the offense forced the run and continued going 3-'n-out too many times.

First 3 possessions. All 3-'n-outs, 9 plays 5 yards total.


Pete Carroll, Russell Wilson, and many intelligent football people have admitted, or stated they should've thrown more.

Bro,

When Seattle scored to go up 14-10, our defense then allowed a touchdown on a 9 play 67 yard drive that took 4:31 of clock . 17-14 Cowboys.

Seattle then goes 3 and out on a -1 yard run by Carson (last run play of the game for Seattle) and two throws (5 yards to Baldwin. Incomplete deep to Lockett on 3rd and 6).

Next drive for the Cowboys was the KJ Wright pick in the end zone. Could have been PI. I thought it was okay, but I'm a defense guy and liked how he played it.

Seattle goes 3 and out again on 4 straight short passes (could have been 2nd and 4 on the first throw, but holding was called...). No runs.

Cowboys get the killer drive. Seattle answers. Onside kick sucked. Game.

Can't really blame that Seattle ran it too much when they ran it only once after their TD drive that gave them the 14-10 lead.

The D failed us in the 4th, man. Simple as that. That was the game. The 3 quarters before that when they ran it "too much", they had the lead...was it a 20 point lead and total domination? No. Could they have mixed it up more to have a better lead going into the 4th? Yes! But they ended that game passing it. That's all OP and Clayton are saying...
 

StouffersPizza

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Pretty lame attempt at a hot take on Clayton's part. Lame and lazy and disingenuous, but other than that he might have a point. :stirthepot:
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
chawx":1czq5xsb said:
Fade":1czq5xsb said:
ivotuk":1czq5xsb said:
14 - 10 is "down 2 scores?" And they did throw it in the 4th quarter.

What about the Defense letting the Cowboys chew up clock and score 14 points late?

The Seahawks were down 2 scores in the 4th qtr.

14 to 24.

Clayton arguing that throwing too much at the end of the game is a false correlation and is asinine, especially when they were far more effective throwing the whole night than running.


The defense was gassed because the offense forced the run and continued going 3-'n-out too many times.

First 3 possessions. All 3-'n-outs, 9 plays 5 yards total.


Pete Carroll, Russell Wilson, and many intelligent football people have admitted, or stated they should've thrown more.

Bro,

When Seattle scored to go up 14-10, our defense then allowed a touchdown on a 9 play 67 yard drive that took 4:31 of clock . 17-14 Cowboys.

Seattle then goes 3 and out on a -1 yard run by Carson (last run play of the game for Seattle) and two throws (5 yards to Baldwin. Incomplete deep to Lockett on 3rd and 6).

Next drive for the Cowboys was the KJ Wright pick in the end zone. Could have been PI. I thought it was okay, but I'm a defense guy and liked how he played it.

Seattle goes 3 and out again on 4 straight short passes (could have been 2nd and 4 on the first throw, but holding was called...). No runs.

Cowboys get the killer drive. Seattle answers. Onside kick sucked. Game.

Can't really blame that Seattle ran it too much when they ran it only once after their TD drive that gave them the 14-10 lead.

The D failed us in the 4th, man. Simple as that. That was the game. The 3 quarters before that when they ran it "too much", they had the lead...was it a 20 point lead and total domination? No. Could they have mixed it up more to have a better lead going into the 4th? Yes! But they ended that game passing it. That's all OP and Clayton are saying...


The problem with the way you are doing it ignores the first half was the defense was on the field for 60% of the time. They were gassed, any good HC would have known that and not waited to let it loose. PC says he runs the ball to limit TO, and to control the clock. It failed period
 

RCATES

New member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
749
Reaction score
2
This article has no place on a forum that believes RW is god and can do no wrong. It doesn't matter if it Schotty or Bevell there's still one common denominator. RW

You guys actually believe that a guy who spends 100's of hours studying game film and trying to scheme up ways to win is actually holding Wilson back? Like Bevell he's simply calling the game to Wilson's strength's. A empty backfield with Wilson in shotgun is not it. Take away the threat of the run and Wilson's effectiveness drops off a cliff. It's who he is and I'm ok with that.
 

Smellyman

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
1,034
Location
Taipei
RCATES":bhnuo9ud said:
This article has no place on a forum that believes RW is god and can do no wrong. It doesn't matter if it Schotty or Bevell there's still one common denominator. RW

You guys actually believe that a guy who spends 100's of hours studying game film and trying to scheme up ways to win is actually holding Wilson back? Like Bevell he's simply calling the game to Wilson's strength's. A empty backfield with Wilson in shotgun is not it. Take away the threat of the run and Wilson's effectiveness drops off a cliff. It's who he is and I'm ok with that.

No reason to have a forum and coaches never should be fired.

Great job Coach Schotty and Bevell!
 

Sports Hernia

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,755
Reaction score
3,372
Location
The pit
I generally really like John Clayton and his views/opinions, but he misses the boat on this one.
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
chawx":8afc7bfi said:
Fade":8afc7bfi said:
ivotuk":8afc7bfi said:
14 - 10 is "down 2 scores?" And they did throw it in the 4th quarter.

What about the Defense letting the Cowboys chew up clock and score 14 points late?

The Seahawks were down 2 scores in the 4th qtr.

14 to 24.

Clayton arguing that throwing too much at the end of the game is a false correlation and is asinine, especially when they were far more effective throwing the whole night than running.


The defense was gassed because the offense forced the run and continued going 3-'n-out too many times.

First 3 possessions. All 3-'n-outs, 9 plays 5 yards total.


Pete Carroll, Russell Wilson, and many intelligent football people have admitted, or stated they should've thrown more.

Bro,

When Seattle scored to go up 14-10, our defense then allowed a touchdown on a 9 play 67 yard drive that took 4:31 of clock . 17-14 Cowboys.

Seattle then goes 3 and out on a -1 yard run by Carson (last run play of the game for Seattle) and two throws (5 yards to Baldwin. Incomplete deep to Lockett on 3rd and 6).

Next drive for the Cowboys was the KJ Wright pick in the end zone. Could have been PI. I thought it was okay, but I'm a defense guy and liked how he played it.

Seattle goes 3 and out again on 4 straight short passes (could have been 2nd and 4 on the first throw, but holding was called...). No runs.

Cowboys get the killer drive. Seattle answers. Onside kick sucked. Game.

Can't really blame that Seattle ran it too much when they ran it only once after their TD drive that gave them the 14-10 lead.

The D failed us in the 4th, man. Simple as that. That was the game. The 3 quarters before that when they ran it "too much", they had the lead...was it a 20 point lead and total domination? No. Could they have mixed it up more to have a better lead going into the 4th? Yes! But they ended that game passing it. That's all OP and Clayton are saying...

The D had to deal with the effect.

There was a cause.

Which was the D gassed out. Thanks to the offense going 3-'in-out 6 times, and leaving them on the field for far too long.
 

erik2690

New member
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
356
Reaction score
0
RCATES":bwuh1nan said:
This article has no place on a forum that believes RW is god and can do no wrong. It doesn't matter if it Schotty or Bevell there's still one common denominator. RW

You guys actually believe that a guy who spends 100's of hours studying game film and trying to scheme up ways to win is actually holding Wilson back? Like Bevell he's simply calling the game to Wilson's strength's. A empty backfield with Wilson in shotgun is not it. Take away the threat of the run and Wilson's effectiveness drops off a cliff. It's who he is and I'm ok with that.

This doesn't even make sense. Under this logic no OC would ever get fired and they're all equal. I don't think anyone is claiming Schotty is schemeing to hinder the team as a goal. But the argument that b/c Pete named him the OC he's beyond reproach is incredibly silly.
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
RCATES":1qdwg4cw said:
This article has no place on a forum that believes RW is god and can do no wrong. It doesn't matter if it Schotty or Bevell there's still one common denominator. RW

You guys actually believe that a guy who spends 100's of hours studying game film and trying to scheme up ways to win is actually holding Wilson back? Like Bevell he's simply calling the game to Wilson's strength's. A empty backfield with Wilson in shotgun is not it. Take away the threat of the run and Wilson's effectiveness drops off a cliff. It's who he is and I'm ok with that.


Hmm now, all you need to do is prove all that. especially since this "A empty backfield with Wilson in shotgun is not it. Take away the threat of the run and Wilson's effectiveness drops off a cliff. It's who he is and I'm ok with that" is factually incorrect. See 2016 when he was the leading rusher and was a decent FG kicker form 11 wins. Or least year leading the league in TD with the 23rd ranked run game. I can go on but you get it, well I hope, we will see.
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
erik2690":1e5qmy6h said:
RCATES":1e5qmy6h said:
This article has no place on a forum that believes RW is god and can do no wrong. It doesn't matter if it Schotty or Bevell there's still one common denominator. RW

You guys actually believe that a guy who spends 100's of hours studying game film and trying to scheme up ways to win is actually holding Wilson back? Like Bevell he's simply calling the game to Wilson's strength's. A empty backfield with Wilson in shotgun is not it. Take away the threat of the run and Wilson's effectiveness drops off a cliff. It's who he is and I'm ok with that.

This doesn't even make sense. Under this logic no OC would ever get fired and they're all equal. I don't think anyone is claiming Schotty is schemeing to hinder the team as a goal. But the argument that b/c Pete named him the OC he's beyond reproach is incredibly silly.


Not to mention he forgot the biggest common denominator PC
 

mrt144

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
4,065
Reaction score
0
erik2690":16ufehzb said:
RCATES":16ufehzb said:
This article has no place on a forum that believes RW is god and can do no wrong. It doesn't matter if it Schotty or Bevell there's still one common denominator. RW

You guys actually believe that a guy who spends 100's of hours studying game film and trying to scheme up ways to win is actually holding Wilson back? Like Bevell he's simply calling the game to Wilson's strength's. A empty backfield with Wilson in shotgun is not it. Take away the threat of the run and Wilson's effectiveness drops off a cliff. It's who he is and I'm ok with that.

This doesn't even make sense. Under this logic no OC would ever get fired and they're all equal. I don't think anyone is claiming Schotty is schemeing to hinder the team as a goal. But the argument that b/c Pete named him the OC he's beyond reproach is incredibly silly.

Especially when PC and JS are the ones who are more in love with RW than Cates is and Cates can't even with that and refuses to cast a doubtful gaze at RW enablers!
 

justafan

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2011
Messages
2,102
Reaction score
3
ivotuk":w347y2ss said:
Fade":w347y2ss said:
ivotuk":w347y2ss said:
In the Seattle - Dallas game, the Seahawks threw 27 times, and ran 24 times. More passes than throws.

John Clayton: "The score late in the 3rd Quarter was Seattle 14, Dallas 10, correct?" [Brock & Salk] "Correct"

John Clayton: "How many running plays did they have after that?! One! They passed the ball!"


http://sports.mynorthwest.com/category/ ... k+and+Salk


Uhh…. they were down 2 scores from running it ineffectively the entire game. Down 2 scores in the 4th you have to throw, and they threw it effectively as well. :D :mrgreen: :lol:

14 - 10 is "down 2 scores?" And they did throw it in the 4th quarter.

What about the Defense letting the Cowboys chew up clock and score 14 points late?

That was the back breaker. Daks 14 yard TD killed momentum. Ya our O could have done more but we were playing a top 10 D. Playcalling didnt kill us not being able to run and not stopping the run was the problem IMO. Lost in the trenches.
 
Top