49ers vs Seahawks Game Analysis and our Offensive woes

[Tokadub]

Anything specific that you disagree about? Or just hard to think of the team you love so critically. Pretty much every single one of my points is based on statistics so I'm really curious what you disagree about.

We do have some flaws, I think this post outlines them quite clearly.

Hmm.. every team has flaws, the difference is how big are they and how they apply to a situation.

Interesting that Hawks actually moved the ball fairly well, considering the level of the Niner's defense on the road. I thought that they played more than well enough to win and that the Niners made a play or two that the Hawks didn't have time to make. Good for the Niners, but offensive "woes"? LMAO!!!!!!

Game features 2 outstanding defenses, in SF. The only REAL mistakes by Seattle were penalties and even with that they were able to keep the game tight until the last seconds. I see no concerns going forward, not even if the Hawks had to play in Frisco again. Didn't the Hawks just bitch-slap the Saints the week before? Do you see the difference?

Right... Offensive Woes.. Nice story.

You can slice the game many ways. I prefer not to blame the loss on penalties since that stuff happens nearly every week.

Our special teams needs to stop having blocked punts, really don't trust those guys for punts. That guy just ran right through the middle no resistance at all, couldn't believe it.

Our defense played pretty dang well except for the one big run.

But here's what really gets me. The 49ers didn't look that good to me, they could have played much better. Not just trying to hate on them, but their offense looked pretty pathetic.

Kaepernick was mostly flustered and ineffective. He barely threw 50% completion rate with 15/29, and he also had an interception.

Their run game only averaged 4.9 yards per run even with the 51 yard game winner by Gore. If you took away that one play they would have rushed for 112 yards in 32 plays, or 3.5 yards per run. That's fewer yards per carry than we had on a day with 1 rushing first down...

We also had no fumbles which is always a good day when you run it as much as we do.

So what I'm saying is we lost on a day the 49ers looked really flat. This wasn't the same high flying 49ers that made it to the Super Bowl, they appear to have regressed and we should of won this game. I think we easily could of won with even slight adjustments to our offensive game plan.

When you hold the 49ers to 19 points at home which is nearly a touchdown less than their season average of 24.3, and on a day where they only score 1 touchdown and have an interception... that's really not a good sign if you can't win in those conditions.

Also it's not like we have a huge edge over the average team in scoring even though we are tied for total points at #3 with Dallas. You take away one field goal from our average and we are right around #15 alongside the likes of Minnesota ~24 per game. Not exactly something I would be dancing about although with our defense it's a lot more meaningful.

But we are 12th in yards per game behind teams such as:

- San Diego Chargers
- Green Bay Packers
- Washington Redskins
- Houstan Texans

We have less yards per game on offense than all those teams who don't even have a winning record. So I think to ignore even the warning signs of offensive problems would be foolish. We aren't an offensive juggernaut by any means the way we have played this season, several very close games.

On the road we are averaging 23 points per game, Superbowl is played on the East Coast this year in New Jersey not great weather most likely.

http://www.bsports.com/statsinsights/nf ... new-jersey

"By averaging the weather conditions for the last 30 years in East Rutherford, New Jersey we have come to expect a high temperature of 42°F with a low temperature of 26°F and an average wind speed of 8 MPH. Additionally, there been some form of precipitation (rain, snow, etc.) 60% of the time. "

"With an analysis of all NFL games played this season (playoffs included) focusing on the temperature and wind speed for each game, we have found that on average the 60 NFL games that were played this season in 49°F weather or cooler yielded fewer total points, total yards, and more turnovers per game than games played in 50°F or warmer or in Domes."

In other words we can expect the Super Bowl to be a very unpredictable game with more turnovers and less scoring. Can we get it done averaging 23 points on the road if he have offensive play calling like this on the East Coast in freezing weather?

I don't see why not, but it sure does cause me some concern when I don't trust our offensive coordinators ability to adjust appropriately for important games. We can't afford slow starts either I think we haven't scored in 1st quarters 6 times already this year, wouldn't want to see that in Super Bowl.

Still think we are the NFC favorites with home field advantage obviously, but after seeing that game vs the 49ers and remembering what happened against Atlanta last year this was really a bad one for me.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Sometimes you tip your cap to the other team for playing damn good defense, which is exactly what they did.

 

[chiltech500]

I know I'm late to this thread but the stats are as quoted.

From my far less professional analysis I am in total agreement on the pass/run balance and adapting play calling - look at New England for adaptability. We were near a TD and settled for a field goal on a series of 2 stuffed runs and 1 not very innovative pass. None of these plays looked anything but vanilla at a time when we needed that TD badly . I agree we don't need to expose Russell to injury with run options - but wasn't that the time to try at least once rather than 2 plays of Lynch off tackle?

 

[mjwhitay]

Anything specific that you disagree about? Or just hard to think of the team you love so critically. Pretty much every single one of my points is based on statistics so I'm really curious what you disagree about.

We do have some flaws, I think this post outlines them quite clearly.

Hmm.. every team has flaws, the difference is how big are they and how they apply to a situation.

Interesting that Hawks actually moved the ball fairly well, considering the level of the Niner's defense on the road. I thought that they played more than well enough to win and that the Niners made a play or two that the Hawks didn't have time to make. Good for the Niners, but offensive "woes"? LMAO!!!!!!

Game features 2 outstanding defenses, in SF. The only REAL mistakes by Seattle were penalties and even with that they were able to keep the game tight until the last seconds. I see no concerns going forward, not even if the Hawks had to play in Frisco again. Didn't the Hawks just bitch-slap the Saints the week before? Do you see the difference?

Right... Offensive Woes.. Nice story.

You can slice the game many ways. I prefer not to blame the loss on penalties since that stuff happens nearly every week.

Our special teams needs to stop having blocked punts, really don't trust those guys for punts. That guy just ran right through the middle no resistance at all, couldn't believe it.

Our defense played pretty dang well except for the one big run.

But here's what really gets me. The 49ers didn't look that good to me, they could have played much better. Not just trying to hate on them, but their offense looked pretty pathetic.

Kaepernick was mostly flustered and ineffective. He barely threw 50% completion rate with 15/29, and he also had an interception.

Their run game only averaged 4.9 yards per run even with the 51 yard game winner by Gore. If you took away that one play they would have rushed for 112 yards in 32 plays, or 3.5 yards per run. That's fewer yards per carry than we had on a day with 1 rushing first down...

We also had no fumbles which is always a good day when you run it as much as we do.

So what I'm saying is we lost on a day the 49ers looked really flat. This wasn't the same high flying 49ers that made it to the Super Bowl, they appear to have regressed and we should of won this game. I think we easily could of won with even slight adjustments to our offensive game plan.

When you hold the 49ers to 19 points at home which is nearly a touchdown less than their season average of 24.3, and on a day where they only score 1 touchdown and have an interception... that's really not a good sign if you can't win in those conditions.

Also it's not like we have a huge edge over the average team in scoring even though we are tied for total points at #3 with Dallas. You take away one field goal from our average and we are right around #15 alongside the likes of Minnesota ~24 per game. Not exactly something I would be dancing about although with our defense it's a lot more meaningful.

But we are 12th in yards per game behind teams such as:

- San Diego Chargers
- Green Bay Packers
- Washington Redskins
- Houstan Texans

We have less yards per game on offense than all those teams who don't even have a winning record. So I think to ignore even the warning signs of offensive problems would be foolish. We aren't an offensive juggernaut by any means the way we have played this season, several very close games.

On the road we are averaging 23 points per game, Superbowl is played on the East Coast this year in New Jersey not great weather most likely.

http://www.bsports.com/statsinsights/nf ... new-jersey

"By averaging the weather conditions for the last 30 years in East Rutherford, New Jersey we have come to expect a high temperature of 42°F with a low temperature of 26°F and an average wind speed of 8 MPH. Additionally, there been some form of precipitation (rain, snow, etc.) 60% of the time. "

"With an analysis of all NFL games played this season (playoffs included) focusing on the temperature and wind speed for each game, we have found that on average the 60 NFL games that were played this season in 49°F weather or cooler yielded fewer total points, total yards, and more turnovers per game than games played in 50°F or warmer or in Domes."

In other words we can expect the Super Bowl to be a very unpredictable game with more turnovers and less scoring. Can we get it done averaging 23 points on the road if he have offensive play calling like this on the East Coast in freezing weather?

I don't see why not, but it sure does cause me some concern when I don't trust our offensive coordinators ability to adjust appropriately for important games. We can't afford slow starts either I think we haven't scored in 1st quarters 6 times already this year, wouldn't want to see that in Super Bowl.

Still think we are the NFC favorites with home field advantage obviously, but after seeing that game vs the 49ers and remembering what happened against Atlanta last year this was really a bad one for me.

Stop telling me about YARDS and start telling me about POINTS.

This POST sucks. The poster is awesome and I'd be fine with him marrying my daughter, but the POST???? It sucks

 

[drdiags]

Nice post Ninerbuff. I like to see things from all sides just to keep perspective. Appreciate the feedback.

 

[Popeyejones]

I think among all fanbases there is a pretty normal inclination to blame the coordinators/play calling after a loss. I think this is particularly true for very good teams. Nobody is a "fan" of their coordinators the same way they're a fan of their players, or even in the same way that they might feel some type of personal relationship or attachment to the head coach. Blaming the coordinator means you don't have to blame the people you root for. Blaming the coordinator means you don't have to blame the people that you root for and believe in, as they're awesome, and rather than saying "my guys lost" or "those guys were better than my guys", it's much, much easier to blame it on something external to "those guys played better, or are better, than my guys": "It's the stupid refs that caused my guys to lose," or "it's the stupid play calling that caused my guys to lose," or "it's just a couple of unlucky bounces that caused my guys to lose," etc., etc., "but whatever it is, it's definitely not my guys."

Of course the most extreme version of this is the "it's not my guys, it's the NFL wide conspiracy to hold down my guys", but I think the "it's not my guys, it's the stupid playcalling" accomplishes the same work, if only in a more agreeable and legitimate form (as it being the playcalling and not one's guys could actually be reasonable).

FWIW I'm not saying any of this to imply that Hawks fans should just face the fact that their guys got beat on Sunday. My thoughts on this come from listening to 9ers fans after losses, and particularly tough losses. So, when I say I think it's a "pretty normal inclination", what I'm saying is I don't think it's atypical, and it's something that as fans many of us have in common.

 

[CEHawk]

The truth of the matter is, Bevell called the worst game of the year against the 49ers right after calling the best game of his career against the Saints. I ask any of you to go back and watch play by play and tell me he called a good game. It wasn't that he was just calling running plays it was when he was calling them, so predictable and constantly putting us in bad 3rd and long situations. We've had penalties all year, the 49ers game plan was to stop the run and contain Russ Wilson. We did absolutely nothing to counter that.

 

[Scottemojo]

I think among all fanbases there is a pretty normal inclination to blame the coordinators/play calling after a loss. I think this is particularly true for very good teams. Nobody is a "fan" of their coordinators the same way they're a fan of their players, or even in the same way that they might feel some type of personal relationship or attachment to the head coach. Blaming the coordinator means you don't have to blame the people you root for. Blaming the coordinator means you don't have to blame the people that you root for and believe in, as they're awesome, and rather than saying "my guys lost" or "those guys were better than my guys", it's much, much easier to blame it on something external to "those guys played better, or are better, than my guys": "It's the stupid refs that caused my guys to lose," or "it's the stupid play calling that caused my guys to lose," or "it's just a couple of unlucky bounces that caused my guys to lose," etc., etc., "but whatever it is, it's definitely not my guys."

Of course the most extreme version of this is the "it's not my guys, it's the NFL wide conspiracy to hold down my guys", but I think the "it's not my guys, it's the stupid playcalling" accomplishes the same work, if only in a more agreeable and legitimate form (as it being the playcalling and not one's guys could actually be reasonable).

FWIW I'm not saying any of this to imply that Hawks fans should just face the fact that their guys got beat on Sunday. My thoughts on this come from listening to 9ers fans after losses, and particularly tough losses. So, when I say I think it's a "pretty normal inclination", what I'm saying is I don't think it's atypical, and it's something that as fans many of us have in common.

Nobody wants to admit the other team is good. Even players have a tendency to chalk a loss up to them not making plays.
Case in point, the lips of many a hawk fan were planted firmly on Bevell's backside after beating the saints. A week later? He is an idiot.
But Bevell didn't make Okung hold Smith when Smith had no chance to make the play. He didn't make Robinson grab a facemask and wipe out a big gain. Bevell didn't fail to throw the flag when Vernon Davis had a hold on Sherman on SF's big run. And if Seattle had won, San Fran fans would be pointing at Roman and not making plays as why they lost, not saying the better team prevailed that day.

You are right, it's a pretty widespread reaction when fans of good teams have to face a loss. Because fans of good teams don't want to face the fact that their team might only be good, but not great.

 

[Anthony!]

I went back and looked at all the games before this one, and in the home games the play calling is crisp, exciting, daring for the most part, but in the away games stale, old, they remind me of the first few games last year were they were holding back. We are at our best when RW has the full playbook and can improvise, not when they are calling plays to not loose.

 

[Popeyejones]

Great examples Scottemojo, and of course, 9ers fans do it just as much.

And I wouldn't even go so far as to say the team might only be good and not great, particularly in the case of the Hawks, who I really do think are a great team this year (whereas the 9ers are simply a good team this year). Even great teams lose. I mean heck, it has been over 40 years ('72 Dolphins) since a great team hasn't lost a game or five.

 

[AgentDib]

I'm not saying the 49ers aren't a good defense, just that we could have called better plays and most likely won the game pretty easy.
It almost seems like we are trying to beat the 49ers at their own strength which is the run game (stubborn play calling if that's why we do it).

Were you sticking up for Bevell when everybody here was criticizing him for going away from the run too early?

Our offense did seem more conservative than usual, but remember that 1) a couple of our big plays were called back and 2) Pete Carroll is the main in charge when it comes to the overall risk profile on this team. If we are conservative on a possession that is 100% his decision. He has such faith in his defense that we are going to lose games like this every now and then when our defense fails to make the last stop.

If I was going to question anything, it would mostly be to wonder why we looked so aggressive vs. the Saints at home on offense and conservative vs. the 49ers on the road. Perhaps some combination of Carroll having more respect for the 49er defense, and assuming offensive difficulties playing on the road vs. an NFC West opponent who has lots of familiarity with our offense.

 

[plyka]

I'm not saying the 49ers aren't a good defense, just that we could have called better plays and most likely won the game pretty easy.

Just took a look at 49er's losses to try to see if there is some reason why we ran so much on them. This is what the offenses did against the 49ers to win.


49ers losses:

Seahawks:

Pass - Rush (attempts)
17 - 47

Pass - Rush (Yards)
142-172

passing: 17.8 per completion… 8.35 per attempt
rush : 3.7 per carry


Colts:

Pass - Rush (Yards)
152-184


Panthers:

Pass - Rush (Yards)
169-109


Saints:

Pass - Rush (Yards)
305-92


So in 2 of the 49ers losses they did indeed allow more rushing than pass yards but it was pretty close.

I'm still surprised we didn't pass more when we averaged 3.7 yards per rushing attempt and nearly 18 yards per completion the first time we played them this season.

It almost seems like we are trying to beat the 49ers at their own strength which is the run game (stubborn play calling if that's why we do it). 47 runs the first game?! That's pretty hilarious I gotta admit, at least it worked that time though.

This is ALWAYS the problem with the Hawks, they allow their idealogy to get in the way of adjusting. Their GOAL is to run the ball, play extra conservative and never take any risks, reduce the number of possessions that both teams have, and rely on the defense. This is their idealogy. So you could take slightly more risks --allowing Wilson to pass more, taking more risks with the playcalling, etc, but it goes against their idealogy. Against the Rams was most obvious, they did not allow ANY risks on offense, because they thought that they could win if they just eliminated turnovers, got the lucky score themselves, and relied on their defense. It worked, but it is unnecessary in my opinion. They could have blown out the Rams if they allowed more risks. But again, it's against the Hawks idealogy.

I think it's a mistake by the Hawks. They need to INCREASE the number of possessions both teams have --they are the superior team, with more possessions you increase your chances of winning, all else staying constant. They need to let Russell Wilson go, he is one of the best in the league, why not allow the Hawk to fly instead of clipping his wings? Makes zero sense to me, but perfect sense when you take into consideration their idealogy.

 

[chiltech500]

Playing not to lose is not the same as playing to win. yes we didn't really "need" the game per se but...

 

[EntiatHawk]

I am okay with the offense. Sometimes it just does not go as planned. Bevell's ofense is much like a pitcher setting up a play with other plays. Every once in a while you have to tip your hat to the opponent. Seattle is now tied for 3rd in total points per game thanks to the wild wild weekend and the Dallas Cowpukes.

So you couple the wins with points scored we are in pretty good shape. We missed some opportunities this weekend but that is the way it goes.

 

[General Manager]

What a disappointing loss, I feel we should have easily won but lost again thanks to Bevell not adjusting the game plan. Here are some stats and things I noticed about this game that really stand out to me.


1) We averaged 7.97 yards per pass attempt and 13.3 yards per completion.

We averaged 3.7 yards per run.

With over twice as many yards per pass play than run plays you would think any intelligent and adaptive offensive coordinator would start favoring a bit more passing?

Not Bevell... we had 25 pass attempts and 23 runs. One of our passes was a hail mary when we had already lost the game. So really Bevell called an almost exact 50/50 split with pass/rushing.

I really think he came into this game determined to go 50/50 with the pass and run. He didn't adjust his game plan even though it was obvious our run was failing today. I already knew in the first quarter that it looked like we were running too much and I even typed it in the chat room if anyone was there.

I think this kind of stubborn play calling from Bevell is a big weakness for our team, he does not adapt his game plan and seems determined to continue failing ones.


2) Similar to not adapting his play calling very well, it appears Bevell comes into games with terrible game plans. We yet again failed to score in the first quarter.

I know we had a good first quarter last week vs. the Saints. But last time I checked a few games ago we were averaging about 3 points per game in 1st and 7 in every other quarter.

These kinds of slow starts are unacceptable, we almost lost a few games this year because of it. And we lost to Atlanta last year because we were down 20 points after the first half.

I'm almost positive that it was our extremely predictable, and excessive run play calling that cost us both the Atlanta game and this one. Once they let Russel lose in the 2nd half vs. Atlanta we ripped them up for 28 points.

My whole point here is Bevell needs to recognize when our run isn't working and call more pass plays. There is no reason why Kaepernick had 29 passes in this game and Russel had only 25 when Russel is a far superior QB. You let Wilson open up and throw the ball just a little bit more and we would have destroyed the 49ers today.


3) We had 1 rushing 1st down today... we had 11 pass first downs.

When you have Lynch and Wilson there's really no excuse for 1 rushing 1st down. Our play calling was atrocious and never put us into 2nd and short or 3rd and short situations which would be ideal for running.


4) Wilson was sacked on 3rd down 3 times in the first quarter, one of which we had a 5 yard penalty so it won't show up on stats. Still put us in in a 3rd and 12 situation...

We can't let Wilson get sacked so much in a single quarter obviously.



5) Seattle had 11 yards in first quarter. More proof our offense is terrible in first quarter and Bevell struggles to come up with good game plans leading up to the game. We can't afford such slow starts in the playoffs we could very easily lose when we do this.


6) As I've said our running game is way too predictable, any good defense shuts it down unless we mix it up intelligently.

We ran it too many times in general. We also ran it on 1st down WAY too much.

On the 4 drives where we ran the ball on both 1st and 2nd downs here are our results:

- 3 punts
- 1 FG

Running on 1st and 2nd downs accounted for 3 of our 6 punts, one of which was blocked and probably cost us the game.

Running it on 1st and 2nd down was a terrible game plan and super predictible. It was pretty obvious from the start of this game to me, and our 11 pass first downs to 1 rushing first downs supports this claim.

We need to do short pass plays to our tight ends or screens to Tate on the edge so we can put ourselves in 2nd and 2-3 yard situations. These 3rd and long situations are KILLING US.


7) We only had 1 FG the entire game!

Hauschka is 2nd in the league in scoring averaging almost 10 per game. If we can't even get this guy a chance at field goals you know our offensive play calling was terrible.


8) Russel Wilson has the highest yards per carry in the ENTIRE NFL @ 5.7!

He only had 1 run today for 2 yards and it was clearly not a designed run play. Why did we not utilize his running abilities a little more. If we lose by 1 point little things like that can make the difference...

I understand protecting him so he won't get injured but in a game like this we could have really used an extra first down or two.


9) I love Lynch, but out of the top 5 rushers in the league in total yards, he has the lowest yards per carry. He is 19th in the league in yards per carry according to ESPN.

So it's not like he is truly an unstoppable force that we need to rely upon EVERY game. We should be using him when it works and if it's not working like today then we should mix it up more.

Lynch would have a lot more yards per carry if our play calling wasn't so predictible and if we had better blocking. I'm not trying to downplay how amazing Lynch is. I'm simply saying that we aren't using him to his full potential at times due to predictable and stubborn play calling.

How many times this season have we been left scratching our heads about why won't they let him run on critical plays! And then days like today they use him incorrectly. It's like the offensive play calling is completely reversed from what it should be.

Bevell really just can't seem to get it right consistently. When we look good it's because we REALLY ARE THAT GOOD, but we saw today what happens with this play calling against a legit defense. I am VERY worried about this offensive play calling in the play offs. We need to let Russell fly, stop restricting him with bad game plans that aren't working.


10) Russel Wilson is ranked 17th in total yards that's pretty bad when you consider his other stats...

- #3 yards per attempt
- #7 completion percentage
- #6 tied touchdowns (everyone tied or above him HAVE BETWEEN 120-200 MORE PASS ATTEMPTS THAN WILSON!)
- Very respectable interception rate especially since some of his interceptions come in desperation hail marys like today.
- #3 Passer Rating only Petyon Manning and Nick Foles are higher.



Conclusion: We need to get our act together with our offensive play calling. I'm not saying we should abandon the run but statistically our passing offense is just as potent or even better.

I know the run helps to set up the pass, and give our defense time to rest. But I'm so sick of us relying on it 100% like today and most the other games we've lost recently.

We play as if we have Tim Tebow for QB, like we have to rely on the run or we have nothing. That's just simply not the case.

I love the idea of a balanced run/pass offense. But Bevell needs to be able to recognize when it's not working and stop trying to force it.

Wilson needs to have more control of the game PERIOD! When we run it 23 times today for 1 first down, you are obviously failing to utilize his talents. I'm so sick of giving Wilson 1 chance to pass per drive on days when our run isn't working. We had so many failed drives today where we ran it at least 2 times then punted.

I thought I saw some signs recently of Bevell starting to improve his play calling being more unpredictable and really using Lynch correctly. But then he lays a stinker like today, and I really don't think this guy understands how to win when it counts. If we win the superbowl it will be entirely the talent of our team, Bevell simply just doesn't have the right play calling instincts and game plans. He has good plays, but he doesn't know how to use them correctly.

Like others in the chat were saying today we didn't take any shots down the field today, never gave Tate, Kearse, or Bouldin a chance to win the game for us. We never gave Russel a chance to win the game for us.

I really hope Carrol see's what I'm seeing and has a long talk with Bevell. I'm not saying Bevell is completely worthless, but if he doesn't reach his full potential and can't understand how to call the proper plays consistently we are in big trouble in our Super Bowl hunt.

I agree they ran to much on first and second down , and said so on game day. I also made the point the other day that in the playoffs this approach could be a problem because teams will load up to stop the run. The fact that we don't have a lot at WR without Harvin could be a problem because you will have to be able to throw the ball in the playoffs to win. Thus we need to address this issue in the draft. I love Tate but he is only one guy and he isn't on the same level as an some of the top tier WR's in the NFL.

 

[Ad Hawk]

Remember what Sherman was saying in the huddle, "this is practice"?

Perhaps the offensive coordinators used this game against a good D to really practice some things they want to improve on down the road. It may sound a bit stupid, as every team simply wants wins. But what better opportunity to see how the run-game is against a really good D-line, and keep pounding it looking for improvement?

If this is the case, it makes the tight score even more acceptable.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

11-2>9-4

 

[Chapow]

Great post I couldn't agree more! Our running game is a little below average while our passing game is well above average when we chose to utilize it. I don't see any reason why you would ignore your strength when you have someone as capable as Russell as your qb.

Dude, what are you talking about? Our rushing game is below average? Our passing game is well above average? You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

Our running game is the 3rd best in the league.

Our passing game is 21st in the league.

Which one is our strength again?


And to address the OP, look, our offense didn't play as well as we would have liked on Sunday, but guess what? Our offense took the lead with 6 minutes left in the game. It was our defense that lost us that game. They allowed basically the worst case scenario in that situation, an 11 play 6 minute scoring drive that gave the 9ers the lead with almost no time left.

To me, the most important offensive stat is points per game. We are 3rd in the league in that category, 11-2, and currently the #1 seed in the NFC. Should we really start messing around with what got us to this point?

Again, our offense had an off day (yet still put us in a position to win) and of course there are always things that any team could improve on, but we have the 3rd highest scoring offense in the NFL. Hardly "offensive woes".

 

[Ad Hawk]

Great post I couldn't agree more! Our running game is a little below average while our passing game is well above average when we chose to utilize it. I don't see any reason why you would ignore your strength when you have someone as capable as Russell as your qb.

Dude, what are you talking about? Our rushing game is below average? Our passing game is well above average? You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

Our running game is the 3rd best in the league.

Our passing game is 21st in the league.

Which one is our strength again?


And to address the OP, look, our offense didn't play as well as we would have liked on Sunday, but guess what? Our offense took the lead with 6 minutes left in the game. It was our defense that lost us that game. They allowed basically the worst case scenario in that situation, an 11 play 6 minute scoring drive that gave the 9ers the lead with almost no time left.

To me, the most important offensive stat is points per game. We are 3rd in the league in that category, 11-2, and currently the #1 seed in the NFC. Should we really start messing around with what got us to this point?

Again, our offense had an off day (yet still put us in a position to win) and of course there are always things that any team could improve on, but we have the 3rd highest scoring offense in the NFL. Hardly "offensive woes".

If your stats are regarding yardage, don't let those lead you astray. Neither is a weakness vs. strength. Rather, those are just tendencies and reflect play-calling. RW can make the throws; they're just not happening as often as Brees, P. Manning, or Rivers.

 

[Chapow]

Would you agree with edogg23 that our rushing game is a little below average?

That is mostly what I was addressing as I find that statement absurd.