In our 2 losses

[getnasty]

[urlTargetBlank][/urlTargetBlank]2 losses-7 turnovers
6 wins-4 turnovers

I actually beleive the offense is good enough to cover up a bad defense but it can't give away points.

Also both losses were to good teams on the road. We'll be ok.

 

[ducks41468]

Let's just continue to ignore the fact that we gave up 81 points in our two losses and continue to blame an offense that it doing absolutely all they possibly can and then some to overcome the literal worst defense in NFL history.

 

[TypeSly]

2 losses-7 turnovers
6 wins-4 turnovers

I actually beleive the offense is good enough to cover up a bad defense but it can't give away points.

Also both loses were to good teams on the road. We'll be ok.

Have you watched the games this season? There's been ONE game, where the opposition didn't march up and down the field on us at will. Thats was SF, and probably because they had a half of a roster.

 

[getnasty]

Let's just continue to ignore the fact that we gave up 81 points in our two losses and continue to blame an offense that it doing absolutely all they possibly can and then some to overcome the literal worst defense in NFL history.

I'm not blaming the losses on anyone really. I'm just making a point that in games we take care of the ball we win, in games we don't we lose.

 

[mistaowen]

Even taking away the 16 points off turnovers they gave up 28. It was 14-0 with 8 minutes left in the first quarter. They forced 1 punt yesterday and no turnovers. The offense put up 34 points on the road against a very good team.

Turnovers hurt but when you stop the other team 1 single time on defense, that is about as bad as it gets.

 

[Uncle Si]

does the bad defense completely overshadow the OP's point about turnovers?

Of course not.. and Wilson was particularly culpable in both losses.

it demonstrates the thin margins that the game is won and lost in the NFL.

My hope, however, is this does not cause PC to curtail the offense. Let them keep playing as is.

 

[getnasty]

They forced 2 punts and 4 FG opportunities. All 4 of the FG were on drives under 40 yards if i remember right. Bad i know they were bad about as bad as it gets but i'm telling you if the Offense doesn't turn the ball over we win that game yesterday.

Once again not trying to place blame on the offense because there's plenty of blame to go around. I guess somehow i'm more incourged that despite the defense playing horrible and offense turning the ball over i don't feel horrible about that loss.

 

[fire_marshall_bill]

We can win 11 or 12 games, especially with the Eagles, Giants, Jets, and "football team" all in a row. The issue is the playoffs. I'd like to think Pete is smart enough to get that Norton needs to go, but I really wonder.

 

[ducks41468]

We can win 11 or 12 games, especially with the Eagles, Giants, Jets, and "football team" all in a row. The issue is the playoffs. I'd like to think Pete is smart enough to get that Norton needs to go, but I really wonder.

That's the thing, if we win that many games the defense will be ignored. I actually saw yesterday that among historically bad defenses like ours, almost all teams won 4 or fewer games, with the Brees-led Saints managing 7 wins in 2012. For us to win 10+ games would be a remarkable testament to what the offense has done, yet people still choose to blame it for our struggles and expect us to win every game 41-38 with Russ throwing for 5 TD's and zero turnovers.

 

[getnasty]

We can win 11 or 12 games, especially with the Eagles, Giants, Jets, and "football team" all in a row. The issue is the playoffs. I'd like to think Pete is smart enough to get that Norton needs to go, but I really wonder.

That's the thing, if we win that many games the defense will be ignored. I actually saw yesterday that among historically bad defenses like ours, almost all teams won 4 or fewer games, with the Brees-led Saints managing 7 wins in 2012. For us to win 10+ games would be a remarkable testament to what the offense has done, yet people still choose to blame it for our struggles and expect us to win every game 41-38 with Russ throwing for 5 TD's and zero turnovers.

I'll bet you $100 donation to .net that the Seahawks defense is a top 20 defense the second half of the season.

 

[ducks41468]

We can win 11 or 12 games, especially with the Eagles, Giants, Jets, and "football team" all in a row. The issue is the playoffs. I'd like to think Pete is smart enough to get that Norton needs to go, but I really wonder.

That's the thing, if we win that many games the defense will be ignored. I actually saw yesterday that among historically bad defenses like ours, almost all teams won 4 or fewer games, with the Brees-led Saints managing 7 wins in 2012. For us to win 10+ games would be a remarkable testament to what the offense has done, yet people still choose to blame it for our struggles and expect us to win every game 41-38 with Russ throwing for 5 TD's and zero turnovers.

I'll bet you $100 donation to .net that the Seahawks defense is a top 20 defense the second half of the season.

Sure. Top 20 overall at the end of the season or just over the second half? I think the defense falls just short of the 2012 Saints record in yards allowed, only because of the Jets game.

 

[hoxrox]

[urlTargetBlank][/urlTargetBlank]2 losses-7 turnovers
6 wins-4 turnovers

I actually beleive the offense is good enough to cover up a bad defense but it can't give away points.

Also both losses were to good teams on the road. We'll be ok.

Yup, definitely can't give away easy points, and expect to win ball games. The defense is not good enough to cover to these deadly mistakes by the offense.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The context of those turnovers is important.

At least 2 were Wilson throwing into coverage on 3rd or 4th down because he knew that if we went for a FG, the defense would just give up a TD.

1 was Wilson throwing in the EZ. That should not translate into a score for the Bills. It only did because our defense is so inept.

Wilson is forcing things because the defense is forcing him to. A consequence of forcing things is an increase in turnovers. Suggesting the turnovers were a massive contributing factor in the loss ignores the reality that without Wilson pressing we do not score as much and lose anyway.

Our only chance was to score on every available possession.

The bulk of the turnovers were once the defense had already given up multiple scores. To suggest it was a significant factor in the loss was disingenuous because we had a few scores that were the result of that same pressing that led to the turnovers. We only came close to catching up because of that.

The turnovers are not the cause of the loss they are the symptom of the holes that the defense put the offense in.

 

[getnasty]

We can win 11 or 12 games, especially with the Eagles, Giants, Jets, and "football team" all in a row. The issue is the playoffs. I'd like to think Pete is smart enough to get that Norton needs to go, but I really wonder.

That's the thing, if we win that many games the defense will be ignored. I actually saw yesterday that among historically bad defenses like ours, almost all teams won 4 or fewer games, with the Brees-led Saints managing 7 wins in 2012. For us to win 10+ games would be a remarkable testament to what the offense has done, yet people still choose to blame it for our struggles and expect us to win every game 41-38 with Russ throwing for 5 TD's and zero turnovers.

I'll bet you $100 donation to .net that the Seahawks defense is a top 20 defense the second half of the season.

Sure. Top 20 overall at the end of the season or just over the second half? I think the defense falls just short of the 2012 Saints record in yards allowed, only because of the Jets game.

Top 20 in the second half of the season

 

[AlaskaHAWK]

The context of those turnovers is important.

At least 2 were Wilson throwing into coverage on 3rd or 4th down because he knew that if we went for a FG, the defense would just give up a TD.

1 was Wilson throwing in the EZ. That should not translate into a score for the Bills. It only did because our defense is so inept.

Wilson is forcing things because the defense is forcing him to. A consequence of forcing things is an increase in turnovers. Suggesting the turnovers were a massive contributing factor in the loss ignores the reality that without Wilson pressing we do not score as much and lose anyway.

Our only chance was to score on every available possession.

The bulk of the turnovers were once the defense had already given up multiple scores. To suggest it was a significant factor in the loss was disingenuous because we had a few scores that were the result of that same pressing that led to the turnovers. We only came close to catching up because of that.

The turnovers are not the cause of the loss they are the symptom of the holes that the defense put the offense in.

You are 100% correct on this. The two losses have resulted in 7 turnovers by Russ. This is because he is pressing. He is playing the better teams and our defense cannot even begin to slow them down. He knows he has to score every drive. This putting him in an impossible situation and is inevitably going to lead to turnovers.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

16 QB hits yesterday. I just don't see how a guy can get comfortable in that situation. Not making excuses as he def. made some bad decisions. But dayum……...

 

[hoxrox]

The context of those turnovers is important.

At least 2 were Wilson throwing into coverage on 3rd or 4th down because he knew that if we went for a FG, the defense would just give up a TD.

1 was Wilson throwing in the EZ. That should not translate into a score for the Bills. It only did because our defense is so inept.

Wilson is forcing things because the defense is forcing him to. A consequence of forcing things is an increase in turnovers. Suggesting the turnovers were a massive contributing factor in the loss ignores the reality that without Wilson pressing we do not score as much and lose anyway.

Our only chance was to score on every available possession.

The bulk of the turnovers were once the defense had already given up multiple scores. To suggest it was a significant factor in the loss was disingenuous because we had a few scores that were the result of that same pressing that led to the turnovers. We only came close to catching up because of that.

The turnovers are not the cause of the loss they are the symptom of the holes that the defense put the offense in.

You are 100% correct on this. The two losses have resulted in 7 turnovers by Russ. This is because he is pressing. He is playing the better teams and our defense cannot even begin to slow them down. He knows he has to score every drive. This putting him in an impossible situation and is inevitably going to lead to turnovers.

So basically the logic for beating the Hawks is easy... start first on offense. Score fast on our bad defense. Cause Russ to press. Then he will give up turn overs and short fields. Game over.

If indeed Russ is "pressing" more. Then he needs to "press" less. Yes he wants to be great and try to make heroic plays every game, but it's causing deadly mistakes. Or Shotty needs to put him into better situations. This is something the offense can control - more so when we get our RBs healthy. Don't put everything on the bad defense.

 

[AlaskaHAWK]

The context of those turnovers is important.

At least 2 were Wilson throwing into coverage on 3rd or 4th down because he knew that if we went for a FG, the defense would just give up a TD.

1 was Wilson throwing in the EZ. That should not translate into a score for the Bills. It only did because our defense is so inept.

Wilson is forcing things because the defense is forcing him to. A consequence of forcing things is an increase in turnovers. Suggesting the turnovers were a massive contributing factor in the loss ignores the reality that without Wilson pressing we do not score as much and lose anyway.

Our only chance was to score on every available possession.

The bulk of the turnovers were once the defense had already given up multiple scores. To suggest it was a significant factor in the loss was disingenuous because we had a few scores that were the result of that same pressing that led to the turnovers. We only came close to catching up because of that.

The turnovers are not the cause of the loss they are the symptom of the holes that the defense put the offense in.

You are 100% correct on this. The two losses have resulted in 7 turnovers by Russ. This is because he is pressing. He is playing the better teams and our defense cannot even begin to slow them down. He knows he has to score every drive. This putting him in an impossible situation and is inevitably going to lead to turnovers.

So basically the logic for beating the Hawks is easy... start first on offense. Score fast on our bad defense. Cause Russ to press. Then he will give up turn overs and short fields. Game over.

If indeed Russ is "pressing" more. Then he needs to "press" less. Yes he wants to be great and try to make heroic plays every game, but it's causing deadly mistakes. Or Shotty needs to put him into better situations. This is something the offense can control - more so when we get our RBs healthy. Don't put everything on the bad defense.

Yes. Pressing less would be the goal, but when the defenses has put you in a big hole and you don’t really have much of a run game at the moment and you need to score pretty much on every drive you end up with the unfortunate “pressing” situations. Maybe if Shoty could develop some kind of reasonable short passing game, especially to counter the blitz, Russell might have some reasonable chance of moving the ball without pressing.

 

[getnasty]

Russ had zero reason to press in the Arizona game because he lead the entire time up until the end. Yesterday on the other hand i get him having to press a bit.

 

[Tusc2000]

16 QB hits yesterday. I just don't see how a guy can get comfortable in that situation. Not making excuses as he def. made some bad decisions. But dayum……...

^^^ This. For me, pass protection is the biggest concern. Russ and the receivers can outscore a lot of teams -- but not if he's getting pounded.