Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Possible contender?

The Original Seattle Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute for Seahawks Talk, News, Rumors, Trades, and Analytics. LANGUAGE: PG-13
Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 2:05 pm
  • BASF wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Safe, conservative on offense for 3 quarters.


    Far too broad. That could describe the offense Brady runs with his quick passes which is as far from what we run as you can get.


    Except Brady uses the middle of the field, that's not safe according to Pete, to many chances of a tip for a interception or a missed catch that bounces up for an interception.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 35367
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 2:19 pm
  • It works in the regular season but not in the playoffs against the better teams (ie not in the wildcard games).

    So I can see why he does it. But it assures we are completely out of sorts when forced to play a different style of game (usually once we are down multiple TDs in the playoffs ...and often by halftime)

    But that isn't the question.

    Is this roster capable of being a contender? Sure, with maybe 3-5 other coaches though. Not with this coach.

    To be a contender with this roster, we would have to have both Clowney and some very fortunate matchups in the playoffs.

    I think this roster with Clowney would beat GB. Assuming Carroll gave up enough TDs early enough he shifted his gameplan BEFORE halftime.

    We certainly could beat most of the other NFC teams not in our division with him too. (likely the 49ers as well).

    What Clowney did for the Titans is immaterial. You have to look at what he did here...and he made a huge difference here. Even with someone as clueless as Norton running our defense.

    I don't think we could beat the Rams in the playoffs, even with Clowney. So we would have to miss them.

    But Clowney gives us the best shot of any potential player we could feasibly sign.

    Still, a low chance because Carroll coaching in the playoffs is still a handicap. Since the SB loss he has been exposed as a guy that cannot win anything other than wildcards, one reason Wilson wants out from under him. But Clowney would potentially make enough splash plays to win us a playoff game despite Carroll.

    It wouldn't be a guarantee though. Clowney would have to have one of those dominant games that you can never plan for or account for.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4917
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:48 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 2:19 pm
  • chris98251 wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Safe, conservative on offense for 3 quarters.


    Far too broad. That could describe the offense Brady runs with his quick passes which is as far from what we run as you can get.


    Except Brady uses the middle of the field, that's not safe according to Pete, to many chances of a tip for a interception or a missed catch that bounces up for an interception.


    Can you provide a link to the interview where Carroll said that please.
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1934
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 2:20 pm
  • BASF wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    Whats wrong with the eye test? Watching a team every week gives a person a strong indication of how good that team truly is. Again, the 12-4 was a paper record that wasnt a true outlier of the teams talent. I ask once again, how many teams above .500 did they beat? Wins accumulated with that creampuff schedule fooled people into the false belief that the team was better than they really were. By just watching the team, one should have known they were going to get thumped in the postseason, and they did. I guess some refuse to accept the obvious though. Worse than that, some might be unable to see the obvious.


    Yes, it was very easy to see that Russell Wilson had checked out the last month of the season except for against a pathetic New York team at home after feeling he could just show up against another pathetic New York team and getting smacked around. When your quarterback has checked out, your team will fail especially in the playoffs.


    Pete Ball will do that to a person. Sucks the soul right out of you.


    Define Peteball


    Its when Pete neuters the offense and it becomes predictable and stale and he continues to run the same schemes regardless if its working of not. Happens every year at some point. Thats why it doesnt matter who the OC is, Pete will trump all decisions eventually. People have cried for years for Pete to keep his hands off the offense, but it never happens.
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2032
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 2:25 pm
  • TwistedHusky wrote:It works in the regular season but not in the playoffs against the better teams (ie not in the wildcard games).

    So I can see why he does it. But it assures we are completely out of sorts when forced to play a different style of game (usually once we are down multiple TDs in the playoffs ...and often by halftime)

    But that isn't the question.

    Is this roster capable of being a contender? Sure, with maybe 3-5 other coaches though. Not with this coach.

    To be a contender with this roster, we would have to have both Clowney and some very fortunate matchups in the playoffs.

    I think this roster with Clowney would beat GB. Assuming Carroll gave up enough TDs early enough he shifted his gameplan BEFORE halftime.

    We certainly could beat most of the other NFC teams not in our division with him too. (likely the 49ers as well).

    What Clowney did for the Titans is immaterial. You have to look at what he did here...and he made a huge difference here. Even with someone as clueless as Norton running our defense.

    I don't think we could beat the Rams in the playoffs, even with Clowney. So we would have to miss them.

    But Clowney gives us the best shot of any potential player we could feasibly sign.

    Still, a low chance because Carroll coaching in the playoffs is still a handicap. Since the SB loss he has been exposed as a guy that cannot win anything other than wildcards, one reason Wilson wants out from under him. But Clowney would potentially make enough splash plays to win us a playoff game despite Carroll.

    It wouldn't be a guarantee though. Clowney would have to have one of those dominant games that you can never plan for or account for.


    You keep bringing up Clowney, but did you see him play last year. He is no longer what you believe him to be.
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1934
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 2:36 pm
  • Pitt is on point. The offense is extremely predictable quite often. His lack of willingness to adjust in game, let alone getting outcoached game after game...…..my confidence is way down with Pete.
    Shoot, how many times has Russ saved him over the years? SO many times.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17274
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 3:33 pm
  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Pitt is on point. The offense is extremely predictable quite often. His lack of willingness to adjust in game, let alone getting outcoached game after game...…..my confidence is way down with Pete.
    Shoot, how many times has Russ saved him over the years? SO many times.


    That's why Wilson leads the league in 4th qtr adn OT comeback wins since he came in the league, and what happens during these comebacks? Wilson calls all the plays at the line, and we change the tempo.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4307
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 3:52 pm
  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Pitt is on point. The offense is extremely predictable quite often. His lack of willingness to adjust in game, let alone getting outcoached game after game...…..my confidence is way down with Pete.
    Shoot, how many times has Russ saved him over the years? SO many times.

    And this is based on how many games you have watched with Shane Waldron as our Offensive Coordinator?

    You guys whine the offense is predictable, apparently Pete agrees, so the Seahawks fire the old OC and hire a new one, and you still complain it's predictable without even seeing the new guy's schemes.

    Ridiculous.

    How about we give it a chance before writing it off?
    KiwiHawk
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 3802
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 4:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 4:27 pm
  • KiwiHawk wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Pitt is on point. The offense is extremely predictable quite often. His lack of willingness to adjust in game, let alone getting outcoached game after game...…..my confidence is way down with Pete.
    Shoot, how many times has Russ saved him over the years? SO many times.

    And this is based on how many games you have watched with Shane Waldron as our Offensive Coordinator?

    You guys whine the offense is predictable, apparently Pete agrees, so the Seahawks fire the old OC and hire a new one, and you still complain it's predictable without even seeing the new guy's schemes.

    Ridiculous.

    How about we give it a chance before writing it off?



    I think they are saying up to now they have been, We dont know what it will be like with Waldron.

    But we have had 2 OCs and both had the same predictability problem. POC has had 3+ in his NFL career and again they all had predictable offenses. So given that dynamic, and the common denominator there is reason to believe we will again. Though I am willing to wait and see,
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4307
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 4:41 pm
  • Changing the OC won't change the outcome.

    Not sure it matters because Carroll is our coach. As Carroll is the one holding the team back, changing out the OCs would have to be incredible to overcome Carroll's inability to change, somehow adhere to his ridiculous gameplan, and still get results from the great players he has.

    Nothing is impossible but we are firmly at improbable.

    Clowney wouldn't automatically fix the above. Not even sure he would counter it.

    But if he had one of his randomly spectacular games for us, he could win a game that Carroll was doing everything to lose. Which is the point.

    We would need wildcards. One from Adams another from Clowney in a different game. Maybe one from Wilson if Carroll stopped his gutless stupidity enough to allow his QB to win for him.

    Chances would be slim. But at least possible.

    We don't need Clowney to be healthy. He could miss 10 regular-season games and it would be no issue. We need him in the playoffs just to win one game. That is it. He has to play for 1 game, not 16, not 17. The idea that his durability matters is a myth, because we get to the playoffs with this roster even without Clowney. Nobody should care if he plays more than 3 games if the games he plays in are playoff wins.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4917
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:48 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 5:14 pm
  • You guys have glommed on to Pete as the villain way too much. He has overridden play calls that he does not agree with. The only reason we know is because he admits when he fails at it. He doesn't do the post game interview and brag about how he got it right. Maybe he has pulled out victories for us many times, but gives the credit to his players.

    The he won't change thing is weird given the scheme changes we have gone through including last year when Wilson cost us wins (obviously early in the season he got us wins with throwing it everywhere, but once the defense figured out the scheme changes to be effective, Wilson literally cost us games). A poor coach shrugs his shoulders and allows his star to continue to cost the team wins and maybe we miss the playoffs entirely.
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1934
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 5:25 pm
  • BASF wrote:You guys have glommed on to Pete as the villain way too much. He has overridden play calls that he does not agree with. The only reason we know is because he admits when he fails at it. He doesn't do the post game interview and brag about how he got it right. Maybe he has pulled out victories for us many times, but gives the credit to his players.

    The he won't change thing is weird given the scheme changes we have gone through including last year when Wilson cost us wins (obviously early in the season he got us wins with throwing it everywhere, but once the defense figured out the scheme changes to be effective, Wilson literally cost us games). A poor coach shrugs his shoulders and allows his star to continue to cost the team wins and maybe we miss the playoffs entirely.



    Or a good coach gets with his OC and Qb and figure out a way to get back on track with what was working as opposed to going back to same old same old the we know does not work. Instead, PC alienates his QB, pisses off several other offensive players and then fires his OC.

    Lets remember 2 different OCs and with exception of that start of this season same crap, predictable offense and fyi his offense was like that in his other NFL stints.

    Also, when his run game craps the bed and costs us games his answer run more. When the pass game struggles his answer not fix it, not throw more but run more.

    So yeah hate to tell you the biggest issue is PC

    reality since PC has been here we have had several oline coaches, oline still sucks
    Several OCs offense can be dynamic but when they hit a bump PC reverts to form and gets profitable and runs.

    Guess what it was like that in PC other NFL jobs as well.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4307
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 5:38 pm
  • With an effective gameday coach, Wilson would win more games. With a great coach, he could be even better than he is with a system that facilitated his greatness not asked him to work outside the system to succeed.

    Carroll isn't a villain until he drives off Wilson, he is the defensive equivalent of a Mike McCarthy.

    He is a hindrance to winning our own team has to overcome though. He builds great rosters, but then uses them in ways that keeps them from being as successful as they could be without him.

    Going into games with Carroll as your coach is like running a race while wearing ankle weights and purposely waiting for a second or two after the other runners race off to bother running at all. You can still win games, but you are going to lose games you could have won with almost anyone else - because he was holding you back.

    He is old, dead weight, and more disadvantage than benefit right now. Not a villain yet (we still have Wilson), but certainly a net negative as a gameday coach, strategist, and tactician.

    The only thing that can bridge that gap is having great players to overcome all his problems.

    Yet another reason we had to have Adams and need a type like Clowney to have any shot at doing anything in the playoffs.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4917
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:48 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 6:40 pm
  • BASF wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Safe, conservative on offense for 3 quarters.


    Far too broad. That could describe the offense Brady runs with his quick passes which is as far from what we run as you can get.


    Except Brady uses the middle of the field, that's not safe according to Pete, to many chances of a tip for a interception or a missed catch that bounces up for an interception.


    Can you provide a link to the interview where Carroll said that please.


    No, it has been said several times over the years that tip balls happen for turnovers, why most of Russells passes are deep going towards the sidelines or over the receiver and also why out routes away from the defender are the mainstays.

    You rarely see inside break passes, usually during catch up time.

    Go back and watch TJack play, same type of routes were the primary routes.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 35367
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 7:41 pm
  • chris98251 wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    Far too broad. That could describe the offense Brady runs with his quick passes which is as far from what we run as you can get.


    Except Brady uses the middle of the field, that's not safe according to Pete, to many chances of a tip for a interception or a missed catch that bounces up for an interception.


    Can you provide a link to the interview where Carroll said that please.


    No, it has been said several times over the years that tip balls happen for turnovers, why most of Russells passes are deep going towards the sidelines or over the receiver and also why out routes away from the defender are the mainstays.

    You rarely see inside break passes, usually during catch up time.

    Go back and watch TJack play, same type of routes were the primary routes.


    No evidence, just supposition.
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1934
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 7:53 pm
  • John63 wrote:Also, when his run game craps the bed and costs us games his answer run more. When the pass game struggles his answer not fix it, not throw more but run more.


    You must not actually watch football games. Go back and watch the last half of the season and tell me that he ran more. Or just look at the box scores. The only game that is remotely as you are describing is when we ran the clock out against the Jets. Intellectual dishonesty again.
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1934
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:35 pm
  • BASF wrote:
    John63 wrote:Also, when his run game craps the bed and costs us games his answer run more. When the pass game struggles his answer not fix it, not throw more but run more.


    You must not actually watch football games. Go back and watch the last half of the season and tell me that he ran more. Or just look at the box scores. The only game that is remotely as you are describing is when we ran the clock out against the Jets. Intellectual dishonesty again.


    Ahh actually I do watch the games every game in fact and rewatch. If you look u will find first 8 games 193 rush attempts. 2nd half 218 so yeah we ran more. More over 1st 8 games 65% of runs 2nd half. 2nd 8 65% 1st half. Also most pass attempts in 2nd half of season in 2nd half with over 70% of those being in the 4th qtr of games we were behind in.

    So first games we ran after we had leads. 2nd 8 we ran until we had no choice but to pass, which is the PC special. Like said when run game struggles PCs answer run more, pass game struggles PCs answer run more.

    That did hopefully I will change and he will keep his nose out of the offense .
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4307
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


Re: Possible contender?
Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:27 pm
  • John63 wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    John63 wrote:Also, when his run game craps the bed and costs us games his answer run more. When the pass game struggles his answer not fix it, not throw more but run more.


    You must not actually watch football games. Go back and watch the last half of the season and tell me that he ran more. Or just look at the box scores. The only game that is remotely as you are describing is when we ran the clock out against the Jets. Intellectual dishonesty again.


    Ahh actually I do watch the games every game in fact and rewatch. If you look u will find first 8 games 193 rush attempts. 2nd half 218 so yeah we ran more. More over 1st 8 games 65% of runs 2nd half. 2nd 8 65% 1st half. Also most pass attempts in 2nd half of season in 2nd half with over 70% of those being in the 4th qtr of games we were behind in.

    So first games we ran after we had leads. 2nd 8 we ran until we had no choice but to pass, which is the PC special. Like said when run game struggles PCs answer run more, pass game struggles PCs answer run more.

    That did hopefully I will change and he will keep his nose out of the offense .


    Your rushing attempts are wrong. Looking at the stat sheet does not differentiate runs that were a break down of a pass attempt and actual rushing attempts. Here is the actual rushing attempts from last season by your own split: First eight games was 161 and the second eight games was 194. Pretty strong split there and it illustrates your point. Or does it?

    Taking large chunks of season trying to illustrate one thing without taking other factors into account is once again intellectually dishonest. Here is the more important thing that happened that most people do not put enough attention on, the quality of defenses we faced in the first eight were pretty poor. Let us eliminate the 49ers and Cardinals since they are common opponents in both halves of the season. What we have left is the Patriots with the eighth ranked pass defense, but they were only twenty-seventh in sacks. That is not exactly something that inspires a change in offensive approach. The Dolphins did finish eleventh in sacks, but their pass defense ranked a fairly poor twenty-third. Those two opponents were the ones that had the most balanced rush attempts and pass attempts in the first eight games. Strange how that would happen.

    The second half of the season saw much better defenses with much better pass rushes. Maybe you have heard of the strategy of slowing down a pass rush by running the football so they can't just tee off on your QB? Again eliminating the Niners and Cards, the worst defense we faced was the Jets and of course we waxed them. The next worst pass rush we faced was the Giants who finished just one sack behind the best pass rush we faced in the first eight games. So, facing better pass rushes and better pass defenses our coach did the intelligent thing and dialed up more rushing attempts.

    What it actually got us was victories. The truth is the first eight games is not what most of the Seahawks fans talk about as Pete allowing Wilson to cook, it was the first nine. After that Pete cut Wilson and the offense off the knees as some have lamented. But those last seven games we were 6-1. Facing much better defenses, with home field advantage within our grasp, Carroll went with a more balanced attack in most of them and it got us wins. The two games that Carroll did not dial up a more balanced attack and put the game directly in Wilson's passing hands was the first Rams game and the Giants game. Those two game totals were thirty rushing attempts and ninety-four pass attempts. Sure looks like letting Russ cook in those two games. Both were losses, including an embarrassing loss to the Giants whom everyone just assumed we would laugh out of our building.

    So, if we break this down, the two more balanced of the first eight games we were undefeated. Then we had a balanced attack in all but two of the second eight games and were undefeated in those. Letting Russ cook with a pass happy offense netted us a 4-4 record. 8-0 with a balanced attack is far better than a 4-4 let Russ cook record. So, why do Seahawks fans complain about more rushing attempts? Could it be that they are more interested in Wilson's numbers as fantasy football fans? Could it be that they are more interested in looking better as they win instead of just actually winning?
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1934
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


Previous


It is currently Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:29 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ SEATTLE SEAHAWKS FOOTBALL ]




Information
  • Who is online