Jerhawk wrote:I guess the way to look at it is: Do you trust this team more, led by Wilson, going into the 4th quarter down by 10, or up by 10? ... Care to elaborate?
Sure, let's dive into the two situations your question proposes.
Scenario 1: Seahawks trailing by 10 points going into the 4th quarter. NFL teams win 7% of the time in this situation. The Seahawks have been in this situation 27 times under Pete Carroll, and have won 3 times (11%), including the 2013 comeback against the Buccaneers. This is a completely awful situation for any team to be in, regardless of the QB.
Scenario 2: Seahawks up by 10 points going into the 4th quarter. NFL teams win 93% of the time in this situation. The Seahawks have been in this situation 50 times under Pete Carroll and have won 49 times (98%), with the sole loss being the 2011 OT collapse at the Bengals. This is a fantastic situation for any team to be in, regardless of the QB.
This would be a boring but fine question if you were actually trying to figure out which scenario was better. What makes it a bad question is that you aren't.
Excellent post! No argument against solid numbers!
I appreciate you taking the time to share these numbers, that's incredible. And I humbly accept your criticism.
Now, given these stats, do you feel that a more up tempo offense would create more Scenerio 1s, or Scenario 2s?
Thats the whole gist of this thread, if an up tempo offense would actually help the team. Would scoring more points result in more wins?
I'm on the side of yes, it would help, and create more scenerio 2s, going into the 4th quarter with a lead.
However, the counter argument, brought up by others, is it would expose the defense and basically put us into a shootout every game.
It's a fascinating debate and will be really interesting to see unfold, assuming they actually go through with it.