Look What I Found

SacHawk2.0":3g79mst5 said:

http://badmanbureau.com/2014/08/04/the-seahawks-arent-just-gunning-for-a-repeat-theyre-on-the-heels-of-a-much-rarer-three-peat/

Click to expand...

Interesting however as usual there is some falsehoods in the write up. Specifically our offensive starting position which was 3rd in the league at 31.28 however the worst in the league was 25.35 not even a 6 yard difference and not that big a deal really. As a comparison Sf was 2nd at 31.56, GB was 15th at 27.83 barely 3 yards. Denver was 17th at 27.70 again a little over 3 yards difference. Some how I doubt that 3 yards makes that big a difference. The whole starting field position excuse is crap.

Anthony!":1tlg9b6e said:

SacHawk2.0":1tlg9b6e said:

http://badmanbureau.com/2014/08/04/the-seahawks-arent-just-gunning-for-a-repeat-theyre-on-the-heels-of-a-much-rarer-three-peat/

Click to expand...

Interesting however as usual there is some falsehoods in the write up. Specifically our offensive starting position which was 3rd in the league at 31.28 however the worst in the league was 25.35 not even a 6 yard difference and not that big a deal really. As a comparison Sf was 2nd at 31.56, GB was 15th at 27.83 barely 3 yards. Denver was 17th at 27.70 again a little over 3 yards difference. Some how I doubt that 3 yards makes that big a difference. The whole starting field position excuse is crap.

Click to expand...

Your thinking on the mathematics is flawed. You are being too simplistic.

Anthony!":29e36wu8 said:

SacHawk2.0":29e36wu8 said:

http://badmanbureau.com/2014/08/04/the-seahawks-arent-just-gunning-for-a-repeat-theyre-on-the-heels-of-a-much-rarer-three-peat/

Click to expand...

Interesting however as usual there is some falsehoods in the write up. Specifically our offensive starting position which was 3rd in the league at 31.28 however the worst in the league was 25.35 not even a 6 yard difference and not that big a deal really. As a comparison Sf was 2nd at 31.56, GB was 15th at 27.83 barely 3 yards. Denver was 17th at 27.70 again a little over 3 yards difference. Some how I doubt that 3 yards makes that big a difference. The whole starting field position excuse is crap.

Click to expand...

First, a 6-yard difference is an enormous deal. Second, the article is actually agreeing with you that the offense was good despite the great field position they were given. And finally, you didn't actually point out any falsehoods in the article.

Personally, I'm more interested to see how long they can keep their never-losing-by-more-than-one-possession streak going. They're already the only post-merger team to do it for two straight seasons, including playoffs.

Anthony!":iuegcjlp said:

SacHawk2.0":iuegcjlp said:

http://badmanbureau.com/2014/08/04/the-seahawks-arent-just-gunning-for-a-repeat-theyre-on-the-heels-of-a-much-rarer-three-peat/

Click to expand...

Interesting however as usual there is some falsehoods in the write up. Specifically our offensive starting position which was 3rd in the league at 31.28 however the worst in the league was 25.35 not even a 6 yard difference and not that big a deal really. As a comparison Sf was 2nd at 31.56, GB was 15th at 27.83 barely 3 yards. Denver was 17th at 27.70 again a little over 3 yards difference. Some how I doubt that 3 yards makes that big a difference. The whole starting field position excuse is crap.

Click to expand...

A 6 yard difference makes a lot more of a difference than you think when you factor in the time, in game-clock minutes, it takes to move that far up the field.

It's a game of inches...

LawlessHawk":2327cz04 said:

It's a game of inches...

Click to expand...

That's what she said....... :th2thumbs: :th2thumbs: :th2thumbs:

The odds of a threepeat defensively are not great since no other NFL team has done so in history. Not to say that the defense won't do it and I certainly am hoping they do, but a fall off to, say, one deviation is something that can be reasonably expected. They're young and I don't think they'll drop off much, they might not drop off at all. But the reasonable expectation is that the offense will have to pick up somewhat to maintain the level of play we've seen the past two seasons.

Perfundle":3j3fbosk said:

Anthony!":3j3fbosk said:

SacHawk2.0":3j3fbosk said:

http://badmanbureau.com/2014/08/04/the-seahawks-arent-just-gunning-for-a-repeat-theyre-on-the-heels-of-a-much-rarer-three-peat/

Click to expand...

Interesting however as usual there is some falsehoods in the write up. Specifically our offensive starting position which was 3rd in the league at 31.28 however the worst in the league was 25.35 not even a 6 yard difference and not that big a deal really. As a comparison Sf was 2nd at 31.56, GB was 15th at 27.83 barely 3 yards. Denver was 17th at 27.70 again a little over 3 yards difference. Some how I doubt that 3 yards makes that big a difference. The whole starting field position excuse is crap.

Click to expand...

First, a 6-yard difference is an enormous deal. Second, the article is actually agreeing with you that the offense was good despite the great field position they were given. And finally, you didn't actually point out any falsehoods in the article.

Click to expand...

In the big scheme of things 6 yards is not the huge advantage that some make it out to be and again the difference between the better teams and us is barely 3 yards., again not that big of a difference and if it was the big a deal than SF would have made the SB last year, and KC was first over 1.5 yards better than us. So while I get the whole game of inches in the big scheme of things 6 yards on avg over the course of the season is not much, especially when we are talking about starting field position. As to the falsehoods I did indeed misread that part.

Anthony!":l37mk1q5 said:

Perfundle":l37mk1q5 said:

Anthony!":l37mk1q5 said:

SacHawk2.0":l37mk1q5 said:

http://badmanbureau.com/2014/08/04/the-seahawks-arent-just-gunning-for-a-repeat-theyre-on-the-heels-of-a-much-rarer-three-peat/

Click to expand...

Interesting however as usual there is some falsehoods in the write up. Specifically our offensive starting position which was 3rd in the league at 31.28 however the worst in the league was 25.35 not even a 6 yard difference and not that big a deal really. As a comparison Sf was 2nd at 31.56, GB was 15th at 27.83 barely 3 yards. Denver was 17th at 27.70 again a little over 3 yards difference. Some how I doubt that 3 yards makes that big a difference. The whole starting field position excuse is crap.

Click to expand...

First, a 6-yard difference is an enormous deal. Second, the article is actually agreeing with you that the offense was good despite the great field position they were given. And finally, you didn't actually point out any falsehoods in the article.

Click to expand...

In the big scheme of things 6 yards is not the huge advantage that some make it out to be and again the difference between the better teams and us is barely 3 yards., again not that big of a difference and if it was the big a deal than SF would have made the SB last year, and KC was first over 1.5 yards better than us. So while I get the whole game of inches in the big scheme of things 6 yards on avg over the course of the season is not much, especially when we are talking about starting field position. As to the falsehoods I did indeed misread that part.

Click to expand...

On a one off basis, 6 yards doesn't mean much.
When you factor in 179 offensive drives, that works out as 1074 yards over the course of the season

Anthony!":oc8k5s20 said:

In the big scheme of things 6 yards is not the huge advantage that some make it out to be and again the difference between the better teams and us is barely 3 yards., again not that big of a difference and if it was the big a deal than SF would have made the SB last year, and KC was first over 1.5 yards better than us. So while I get the whole game of inches in the big scheme of things 6 yards on avg over the course of the season is not much, especially when we are talking about starting field position. As to the falsehoods I did indeed misread that part.

Click to expand...

So only stats that have the Super Bowl number one are worthy of attention? Field position is simply one part of what needs to be considered when comparing teams. It's an underrated part, because most people just look at offensive and defensive stats, but no one said it was the be-all and end-all.

Perfundle":2niy8hpq said:

Anthony!":2niy8hpq said:

In the big scheme of things 6 yards is not the huge advantage that some make it out to be and again the difference between the better teams and us is barely 3 yards., again not that big of a difference and if it was the big a deal than SF would have made the SB last year, and KC was first over 1.5 yards better than us. So while I get the whole game of inches in the big scheme of things 6 yards on avg over the course of the season is not much, especially when we are talking about starting field position. As to the falsehoods I did indeed misread that part.

Click to expand...

So only stats that have the Super Bowl number one are worthy of attention? Field position is simply one part of what needs to be considered when comparing teams. It's an underrated part, because most people just look at offensive and defensive stats, but no one said it was the be-all and end-all.

Click to expand...

HUh? I never said that all I said was that it was over rated and in the big scheme of things 6 yards is not that big a deal. Starting form the 30 as opposed to the 36 is not that big a deal. Sorry and again if you look at most of the top teams, ie in the playoffs the difference is barely 3. Most make it sound like we are always starting from the 40 while everyone else is starting form the 20, it is not true. Add tot hat they equate this supposed advantage to the Defense when in fact the special teams also has a lot to do with it. To me it is an excuse that some use to down play our offense and it is crap the difference is not big enough to even be an excuse.

Anthony!":2sd404od said:

Perfundle":2sd404od said:

Anthony!":2sd404od said:

In the big scheme of things 6 yards is not the huge advantage that some make it out to be and again the difference between the better teams and us is barely 3 yards., again not that big of a difference and if it was the big a deal than SF would have made the SB last year, and KC was first over 1.5 yards better than us. So while I get the whole game of inches in the big scheme of things 6 yards on avg over the course of the season is not much, especially when we are talking about starting field position. As to the falsehoods I did indeed misread that part.

Click to expand...

So only stats that have the Super Bowl number one are worthy of attention? Field position is simply one part of what needs to be considered when comparing teams. It's an underrated part, because most people just look at offensive and defensive stats, but no one said it was the be-all and end-all.

Click to expand...

HUh? I never said that all I said was that it was over rated and in the big scheme of things 6 yards is not that big a deal. Starting form the 30 as opposed to the 36 is not that big a deal. Sorry and again if you look at most of the top teams, ie in the playoffs the difference is barely 3. Most make it sound like we are always starting from the 40 while everyone else is starting form the 20, it is not true. Add tot hat they equate this supposed advantage to the Defense when in fact the special teams also has a lot to do with it. To me it is an excuse that some use to down play our offense and it is crap the difference is not big enough to even be an excuse.

Click to expand...

What does your data say about how we were affected by our starting field position?

Last year the median yards per drive for NFL teams was 28. Seattle was at 30 if we round to the nearest integer. Denver was at 38.

The worst offense and the best offense in the NFL by yards per drive are only separated by 14 yards per drive, and the worst team is only separated from the NFL median by 4 yards.

Considering these numbers, it's easy to see how a small number like 6 yards per drive from special teams is actually pretty significant. A net 6 yard advantage in this category would be enough to boost a terrible offense over the NFL median for overall effectiveness, and it would be enough for a barely above median level team like Seattle to sniff the Broncos.

It also helps explain why Seattle has been significantly better at scoring vs. yardage over the last few seasons.

kearly":kkuayxs7 said:

Last year the median yards per drive for NFL teams was 28. Seattle was at 30 if we round to the nearest integer. Denver was at 38.

The worst offense and the best offense in the NFL by yards per drive are only separated by 14 yards per drive, and the worst team is only separated from the NFL median by 4 yards.

Considering these numbers, it's easy to see how a small number like 6 yards per drive from special teams is actually pretty significant. A net 6 yard advantage in this category would be enough to boost a terrible offense over the NFL median for overall effectiveness, and it would be enough for a barely above median level team like Seattle to sniff the Broncos.

It also helps explain why Seattle has been significantly better at scoring vs. yardage over the last few seasons.

Click to expand...

Again perhaps, but it is still not the overwhelming advantage some like to make it out to be and it certainly is not an advantage that is all because of the defense, as again ST plays a huge part in it too.

For instance Chicago was the #2 scoring team last year at 27.8, yet their starting position was 13th at 27.92. If you look at the top 10 scoring offenses form last year they avg 28.04 points, they avg starting at 28.09 which puts them at. So what this tells me is every to scoring team gets good starting position and again the difference between this avg and the worst in the league is 3 yards. So again 1 to make it sound like Seattle has some great advantage compared to other great teams is stupid, and 21 3 yards is not that big of an advantage. So I start at the 27 instead of the 30, not a big deal. Its about what your offense can do with that field position, yes it is better to start form the 30 then the 27 but if you have a good offense you still going to move the ball. WAS was last in starting field position but were 23rd in scoring at 20.9. Denver was 17th in starting field position but first in scoring. Starting field position helps, but it is far from the huge difference maker people think it is, especially when you are talking on avg 3-6 yards difference per drive. Not when every starting QB in the league is avg over 6 ypa.

in the words of Mark Twain, who attributed it to Benjamin Disreali, there are three kinds of lies. lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Anthony!":10924gvk said:

HUh? I never said that all I said was that it was over rated and in the big scheme of things 6 yards is not that big a deal.

Click to expand...

You misunderstand how a 6-yard difference can come about. It's not because the offense has exactly 6 yards more field position on every drive. It's because the offense has roughly the same field position on most of their drives but incredibly good field position on some of them because of turnovers, of which Seattle forced the most, and long punt returns.

Most make it sound like we are always starting from the 40 while everyone else is starting form the 20, it is not true.

Click to expand...

Not one single person is doing that. Try again.

To me it is an excuse that some use to down play our offense and it is crap the difference is not big enough to even be an excuse.

Click to expand...

Again, who has been saying that? I don't see anyone saying that. Stop punching at strawmen.