The running game is the key to winning. Period

[Maelstrom787]

You'd do well not to criticize people for going back to previous points when your posts follow a template of the same few clichés repeated ad nauseam.

Also, Seattle played with tempo all season, and the time to snap stats prove it.

pot kettle much. Again link to time to snap and again since you keep forgetting I will repost the post that makes you wrong again.

Sigh.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats ... stats/2021

6th quickest time to snap in the league this year.

thank you though I can only see the top 5 since it's paid and I have no way of knowing how it is broken down. also thast hwo many seconds per play that has no barring on when they snap it.


https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/pace-stats/2021

"These stats are computed from NFL Drive Charts and Scoring Summaries. The concept of situation-neutral pace was introduced in Pro Football Prospectus 2005. The intent is to describe pace as dictated by each team's game plan or style of play, not pace that is situation-induced. The current definition discards plays when the score differential is greater than 10 points in the first half, plays when the score differential is greater than 8 points in the 3rd quarter, plays in the 4th quarter or overtime, and plays in the last five minutes of the first half.

The Time Stats table displays Time of Possession and Game Time breakdowns for each team."

so basically half the plays don't count these are not snap times they don't say how much of the play clock you are using at all. it shows long the play itself takes. Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time. They do have a say in playtime as if they tackle quick the play is over quick. Sorry to say but this chart does not show what you think, but I do understand why you might have thought it did.


aspect 2 motion were they failed miserably till the last 2 games as I posted again.

what I posted bottom 5 in motion thanks for playing

This is absolutely, 100% not "how long the play itself takes." Plays themselves do not take nearly 30 seconds on average, John.

You're right, "time to snap" was an inexact and shorthanded way to summarize the sheet - but this is literally the average amount of time between snaps. It is the literal calculation of pace, and Seattle was fast. Fast teams aren't constantly running the play clock down. It's not possible.

Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time.

....what? Dude.

 

[John63]

pot kettle much. Again link to time to snap and again since you keep forgetting I will repost the post that makes you wrong again.

Sigh.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats ... stats/2021

6th quickest time to snap in the league this year.

thank you though I can only see the top 5 since it's paid and I have no way of knowing how it is broken down. also thast hwo many seconds per play that has no barring on when they snap it.


https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/pace-stats/2021

"These stats are computed from NFL Drive Charts and Scoring Summaries. The concept of situation-neutral pace was introduced in Pro Football Prospectus 2005. The intent is to describe pace as dictated by each team's game plan or style of play, not pace that is situation-induced. The current definition discards plays when the score differential is greater than 10 points in the first half, plays when the score differential is greater than 8 points in the 3rd quarter, plays in the 4th quarter or overtime, and plays in the last five minutes of the first half.

The Time Stats table displays Time of Possession and Game Time breakdowns for each team."

so basically half the plays don't count these are not snap times they don't say how much of the play clock you are using at all. it shows long the play itself takes. Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time. They do have a say in playtime as if they tackle quick the play is over quick. Sorry to say but this chart does not show what you think, but I do understand why you might have thought it did.


aspect 2 motion were they failed miserably till the last 2 games as I posted again.

what I posted bottom 5 in motion thanks for playing

This is absolutely, 100% not "how long the play itself takes." Plays themselves do not take nearly 30 seconds on average, John.

You're right, "time to snap" was an inexact and shorthanded way to summarize the sheet - but this is literally the average amount of time between snaps. It is the literal calculation of pace, and Seattle was fast. Fast teams aren't constantly running the play clock down. It's not possible.

Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time.

....what? Dude.

Sorry that is not what it shows and then by their own admission they leave out a large chunk of plays and 0the definition of the chart you showed says " The Time Stats table displays Time of Possession and Game Time breakdowns for each team."

We're does it say anything remotely about how much time is taken to snap the ball? It does not.

Further it says" These stats are computed from NFL Drive Charts and Scoring Summaries." We'll here is a problem those don't include the playclocks. Look at the ESPN Summaries, the don't include playclock.

What this shows is how long a play is. From snap to ball down. But not how long it takes to snap the ball.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Sigh.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats ... stats/2021

6th quickest time to snap in the league this year.

thank you though I can only see the top 5 since it's paid and I have no way of knowing how it is broken down. also thast hwo many seconds per play that has no barring on when they snap it.


https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/pace-stats/2021

"These stats are computed from NFL Drive Charts and Scoring Summaries. The concept of situation-neutral pace was introduced in Pro Football Prospectus 2005. The intent is to describe pace as dictated by each team's game plan or style of play, not pace that is situation-induced. The current definition discards plays when the score differential is greater than 10 points in the first half, plays when the score differential is greater than 8 points in the 3rd quarter, plays in the 4th quarter or overtime, and plays in the last five minutes of the first half.

The Time Stats table displays Time of Possession and Game Time breakdowns for each team."

so basically half the plays don't count these are not snap times they don't say how much of the play clock you are using at all. it shows long the play itself takes. Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time. They do have a say in playtime as if they tackle quick the play is over quick. Sorry to say but this chart does not show what you think, but I do understand why you might have thought it did.


aspect 2 motion were they failed miserably till the last 2 games as I posted again.

what I posted bottom 5 in motion thanks for playing

This is absolutely, 100% not "how long the play itself takes." Plays themselves do not take nearly 30 seconds on average, John.

You're right, "time to snap" was an inexact and shorthanded way to summarize the sheet - but this is literally the average amount of time between snaps. It is the literal calculation of pace, and Seattle was fast. Fast teams aren't constantly running the play clock down. It's not possible.

Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time.

....what? Dude.

Sorry that is not what it shows and then by their own admission they leave out a large chunk of plays and 0the definition of the chart you showed says " The Time Stats table displays Time of Possession and Game Time breakdowns for each team."

We're does it say anything remotely about how much time is taken to snap the ball? It does not.

Further it says the info is broken from charts and game breakdown. We'll here is a problem those don't include the playclock.

What this shows is how long a play is. From snap to ball down. But not how long it takes to snap the ball.

The plays are left out to get down to neutral situation data - otherwise, bad teams would be at the top of the sheet due to their tendency to play from behind. Otherwise, the data would be basically worthless.

Same concept as pass/rush splits. You need to get to neutral situation, otherwise the bad teams will show as the pass-heaviest regardless of philosophy.

 

[John63]

thank you though I can only see the top 5 since it's paid and I have no way of knowing how it is broken down. also thast hwo many seconds per play that has no barring on when they snap it.


https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/pace-stats/2021

"These stats are computed from NFL Drive Charts and Scoring Summaries. The concept of situation-neutral pace was introduced in Pro Football Prospectus 2005. The intent is to describe pace as dictated by each team's game plan or style of play, not pace that is situation-induced. The current definition discards plays when the score differential is greater than 10 points in the first half, plays when the score differential is greater than 8 points in the 3rd quarter, plays in the 4th quarter or overtime, and plays in the last five minutes of the first half.

The Time Stats table displays Time of Possession and Game Time breakdowns for each team."

so basically half the plays don't count these are not snap times they don't say how much of the play clock you are using at all. it shows long the play itself takes. Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time. They do have a say in playtime as if they tackle quick the play is over quick. Sorry to say but this chart does not show what you think, but I do understand why you might have thought it did.


aspect 2 motion were they failed miserably till the last 2 games as I posted again.

what I posted bottom 5 in motion thanks for playing

This is absolutely, 100% not "how long the play itself takes." Plays themselves do not take nearly 30 seconds on average, John.

You're right, "time to snap" was an inexact and shorthanded way to summarize the sheet - but this is literally the average amount of time between snaps. It is the literal calculation of pace, and Seattle was fast. Fast teams aren't constantly running the play clock down. It's not possible.

Also, they have them for defense why would they have the same thing for defense if it is about a snap time when the defense does not control snap time.

....what? Dude.

Sorry that is not what it shows and then by their own admission they leave out a large chunk of plays and 0the definition of the chart you showed says " The Time Stats table displays Time of Possession and Game Time breakdowns for each team."

We're does it say anything remotely about how much time is taken to snap the ball? It does not.

Further it says the info is broken from charts and game breakdown. We'll here is a problem those don't include the playclock.

What this shows is how long a play is. From snap to ball down. But not how long it takes to snap the ball.

The plays are left out to get down to neutral situation data - otherwise, bad teams would be at the top of the sheet due to their tendency to play from behind. Otherwise, the data would be basically worthless.

Same concept as pass/rush splits. You need to get to neutral situation, otherwise the bad teams will show as the pass-heaviest regardless of philosophy.

Again their own definition makes it clear this is not snap time.

 

[keasley45]

Don't waste your time. Everyone on earth knows the identity of the hawks is run first and pass off the run + stout defense. It's the only thing that brought as a championship or any real success.

This year, without fail, everytime we led with a run first, balanced approach, we won. No magic there. And every time we didn't, we lost. And we were never skewing our stats because he HAD to pass. We passed because we wanted to.

But it will still be made about how we don't need the run because one year... one of our worst in terms of overall effectiveness, Russel went all world and was 98% of the offense. Which is HOF worthy by itself. But the opposite of proving that we don't need a running game. We failed that year because we didn't have one.

Or that it's not really the run necessarily, or primarily balance, but jet sweeps and presnap motion.

I'm confident that next year we will get back to who we are and be more balanced. It's dumb not to be given the ethos of this team. And within that balance and commitment to the run, we'll be better than before for having Shane Waldron mixing things up a bit.

#Let Carson and Penny Cook in '22

 

[Chawker]

It was apparent with Lynch, Carson (when healthy), and now Penney (when healthy) that Pete Carroll coached teams win or lose based on the running game. If Pete stays (which I have thought for some time he will) solidifying the run must be the first priority. What happened this year with no running game before a few weeks ago should be the most eye opening part for management in that in order for the team to comPete, they need a good running game. Wilson just can’t do it on his own anymore.

Fix the run game (and D scheme) and win.

I 100% agree with the topic thread and seabowl !

Without a good running game you are like a one legged man in a a s s kicking contest.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I don't think running is the key to winning. People too often look at things in a vacuum, when in reality the situation is nuanced.

You have a strong offense and convert third downs when you play strong situational football. Too often under Pete Carroll we've had the mentality "we're going to do what we're going to do" regardless of what our opponents were doing. A good example of this was 2018 against the Cowboys. We kept trying to force the run against one of the best rushing defenses in the NFL. This season we've done the same thing. I believe in one of our games we ran the same exact running play something like 11 times in a row against a stacked box.

The last four games our approach changed. We'd come out looking like we were going to pass and we'd run a lot of pre-snap motions and then we'd hand it off to Penny instead. In fact, much of the success Penny had was because he wasn't running the ball into stacked boxes. Samuel Gold has a really good breakdown on the Seahawks run success. It essentially boils down to; we were smarter about planning our runs.

I hope that they keep this ethos. I'm sick and tired of trying to force the run into crowded boxes and I hope we don't revert to that next season. I want to keep this McVay style of attack going.

 

[AgentDib]

I believe in one of our games we ran the same exact running play something like 11 times in a row against a stacked box.

If you're referencing that streak of runs that posters were tossing around as a criticism earlier this season, I've previously posted the full breakdown. It was mostly a bunch of successful runs in a row against a light box, including one run against zero defensive linemen. I can dig up the exact details if you're interested.

 

[John63]

It was apparent with Lynch, Carson (when healthy), and now Penney (when healthy) that Pete Carroll coached teams win or lose based on the running game. If Pete stays (which I have thought for some time he will) solidifying the run must be the first priority. What happened this year with no running game before a few weeks ago should be the most eye opening part for management in that in order for the team to comPete, they need a good running game. Wilson just can’t do it on his own anymore.

Fix the run game (and D scheme) and win.

I 100% agree with the topic thread and seabowl !

Without a good running game you are like a one legged man in a a s s kicking contest.

Same can be said for not having a good passing game. As I did takes both.

 

[Chawker]

It was apparent with Lynch, Carson (when healthy), and now Penney (when healthy) that Pete Carroll coached teams win or lose based on the running game. If Pete stays (which I have thought for some time he will) solidifying the run must be the first priority. What happened this year with no running game before a few weeks ago should be the most eye opening part for management in that in order for the team to comPete, they need a good running game. Wilson just can’t do it on his own anymore.

Fix the run game (and D scheme) and win.

I 100% agree with the topic thread and seabowl !

Without a good running game you are like a one legged man in a a s s kicking contest.

Same can be said for not having a good passing game. As I did takes both.

I agree with you john !

But, we have RBs that are wooden and often break, unlike M. Lynch who was made out of granite and was always there getting those tuff yards for us.

Solution to are problem would be to draft Isiaiha Spiller Texas A&M : great between the tackles runner who can do it all, he's not flashy by know means. Can he block, yes, can he catch the ball, yes, can he get the tuff yards or first downs yes. And most important YAC yes.

I'd trade both Carson and Penny for Spiller. Just think of the cap saving.

Cheers

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Any relation to C.J. Spiller?