Looks like Pete Ball is back on the Menu Boys

[Hollandhawk]

It's looking more and more like Pete was never the problem but rather the solution all along. If Pete still had the new-to-the-league Russell who listened and did what he was told, he could still be a great quarterback even with all of his limitations. Russell needs a boss more so now than ever. Unfortunately for him and the Broncos he somehow believes he is the boss.

Pete made Russell into a potential HOFer. Russell Wilson has single-handedly tossed his future gold jacket in the trash. At this point Russell needs Pete or at least a coach like Pete who can develop a team to support his skill set. If Russell continues to believe that he is a better Tom Brady, the ending to this story is not likely to turn out well.

I am looking forward to the ending of Pete Carroll's story. Seahawks football is fun again.

And Pete more and more is looking like a HOF lock.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I think we can alll agree (except for Fade and John) that it's too bad Russell wasted all of Pete's prime years.

 

[Nunya]

And can I ask how you know this? Are you in the room while this is happening? Lets be honest, if you are not in the room...you have no idea what is being said.

So how do you know that Pete calls the plays? Are you on the sideline during the game? Let's be honest, if you are not right down there next to him on the sidelines...you have no idea who is calling the plays.

Pete has said many times he does not call the plays. There is absolutely nothing that indicates Pete calls the plays...on offense or defense. He does not even carry around the playlist while on the sideline. As complicated offensive plays are in the NFL, calling offensive plays without having a playlist on hand would be a feat of genius.

 

[Spohawks]

So how do you know that Pete calls the plays? Are you on the sideline during the game? Let's be honest, if you are not right down there next to him on the sidelines...you have no idea who is calling the plays.

Pete has said many times he does not call the plays. There is absolutely nothing that indicates Pete calls the plays...on offense or defense. He does not even carry around the playlist while on the sideline. As complicated offensive plays are in the NFL, calling offensive plays without having a playlist on hand would be a feat of genius.

I am the sidelines!

 

[olyfan63]

My concern with Pete was that he was going to get us at .500 or near. And regardless of the roster, we would be bobbing around at mediocrity but still not getting the kind of draft slots we needed to get a top QB to turn this into a contending team again.

And as predicted, that is precisely what Pete is doing.
But not as predicted, it was the defense that struggled not the offense. The implications are pretty severe. Replacing the QB does not fix that. Especially when our QB is producing which was another unpredicted outcome.

So we don't have to worry about losing to get the QB, and things get more complicated from here. There is no clear answer, anotherwords.

Someone made the comparison between Pete and Al Davis (I think Fade?) and that is a perfect comparison. Al Davis exerted so much control over the team, he hurt it in his later years.

Maybe Pete flipped things, he is making some changes. But five games is not enough time to know. We will see.

The urgency isn't as significant because there was no loss of the top QB concern. Just as we aren't worried about a playoff slot. So we let it play out.

But one good game after some real disasters is not enough to allay concern. Can this at least be an average defense over time? That is the question.

This thread has been one of the more interesting ones in a while. Lots of gold from a lot of posters!

I understand why several people laughed at and mocked the above post from Twisted, e.g., the Al Davis comparison, I don't really see, but at the same time it had some elements of truth.

* Our defense has now had ONE good game. Can they follow that up with more good games? Or was this a one-off based on the state of the Cards offense, injured OLine and missing weapons? That IS pretty much how the Cards media is spinning it, that the Hawks D caught them in a weakened state. Not necessarily MY view, just a data point to consider. And as Twisted asked, "Can this at least be an average defense over time?" In 2005 an average-but-improving D took us all the way to the Owl with Holmgren's O.

* ...Pete IS making changes. Six games absolutely isn't enough time to know which ones will stick.
The old dog is not necessarily "learning new tricks", but the old dog brought in new pack lieutenants (Waldron, Desai) that bring new tricks, new schemes with them, Xs and Os, that Pete feels align with his overall philosophy.

* I am mildly concerned that we'll see too much Pete-Ball when I enjoy watching Shane-Ball much more. Vs Cards, 3rd down conversion was 28%, which felt like Pete-Russ-Ball. But, Cards game was a sample size of "1" with a lot of unique circumstances, rookie RB, high-pressure Vance Joseph defense.

Personally, I enjoy Fade's posts without necessarily agreeing with all the content, or even any of the content, to try out his viewpoints as a thought exercise, and sort of run them against the data to see which ones could be true. He might say 3 interesting "true" things and 5 catchy-sounding but fails-the-eye-test things in a single post, and his next post could be 6 "true" and 2 "fails", or even 8 "true" and "0" fails. Whatever else, his thread-starter post here led to a thread with a lot of terrific posts from a lot of different contributors.

Can anyone corroborate Fade's data point on the Waldron offense, that the standard operation is to call a pass play and run play at the same time in the huddle and then go with whichever one is best for the pre-snap D alignment, run vs light box, pass vs heavy box? And if true, do the plays look similar to the D when the play first starts? It was stated we are passing more on early downs because of this approach, that over 50% of the time, the pass play is the best option based on what the defense is showing us on 1st down.

The best part of this season so far is that the truth with regard to Pete and Russell is becoming abundantly clear: Russell held back Pete far more than Pete held back Russell, Pete protected and coddled Russell, etc. Sucks to be a Broncos fan right now. "So long, and thanks for all the picks!". It's exciting to be a Seahawks fan again, simple pleasures like feeling we have a 50-50 chance to convert 3rd-and-4 instead of a 10% chance as it felt like with Russell.

 

[BlueTalon]

Does Jay Inslee fill the potholes in front of your house?

I'd pay to see that.

 

[AgentDib]

Can anyone corroborate Fade's data point on the Waldron offense, that the standard operation is to call a pass play and run play at the same time in the huddle and then go with whichever one is best for the pre-snap D alignment, run vs light box, pass vs heavy box? And if true, do the plays look similar to the D when the play first starts? It was stated we are passing more on early downs because of this approach, that over 50% of the time, the pass play is the best option based on what the defense is showing us on 1st down.

That's broadly true of all offenses if they feel the QB can handle the pre-snap reads. Having a receiver in motion tells the QB if it is man or zone coverage. Being there early enough to fake the snap a couple of times usually tips the defense's hand about any last minute safety adjustments.

There is always one play call active and the QB has to check to another. They do fake checking out of plays sometimes, so when the broadcast announcer says they are changing the play that isn't always true. Checks are not always between a running play and a passing play, but can also be between, say, different types of passing plays. Most trickery will have accompanying checks to get out of the play if the defense is lined up in a good situation to prevent it.

One of the things that the McVay branch of the Shanahan offense does well is to make the pre snap alignments look as similar as possible for a wide range of plays, both running and passing. There's a tradeoff to doing so in that you won't always have your personnel in the optimal positions for each play, but keeping the defense off balance is viewed as worth that cost.

Your last point is the most important IMO. Fans love to criticize run/pass ratios with zero analysis of what the defense is doing on a given play. If the defense is selling out to stop the deep ball then the optimal play sequence could be run/run/run/run/run until you forced them to defend against it.

 

[sprhawk73]

I hate seeing predictability from any offense unless they are so good it is unstoppable. It was killing me last season because we were snapping the ball when the play clock hit 0 on damn near every play. It is so nice to see no huddles and quick outs again. It wasn't as bad against the Cards but this run, pass, pass/run crap is way too predictable.

I didn't realize the Cards were that bad. Murray isn't a bust but he's far from elite. Makes me wonder if we will be seeing a new QB next year.

 

[LeaveLynchAlone]

There are stories of him overriding and meddling with Schottenheimer. He also didn't let Schottenheimer bring his own playbook, they used Carroll's. There is some precedent for Pete getting involved in offensive play calling.

The problem with stories is that even if there is a hint of truth, the whole truth is more often than not far from the reality that is being peddled in the story. Have you ever played telephone? Have you ever read anything on the internet? Have you ever listened to shock-for-eyeballs media?

Once you opened with "there are stories of him..." my tendency is to discount the rest because stories are the furthest thing from an evidential point. Actual proof from the source is so much more effective than throwing out theories that sound plausible based upon a particular viewpoint or belief.

 

[LeaveLynchAlone]

I am the sidelines!

That's what she sad.

 

[TwistedHusky]

A few things,

1. If this defense can be average - we can do better than .500. We should have the defensive personnel for it. That part is frustrating. I've seen worse rosters do better, so it is possible.

2. Being compared to Al Davis is NOT an insult. Al was a visionary and he changed the game. His Raiders teams were monsters and YES he was a big reason for that. Like Pete, he had absolute power over his teams, staff, roster, etc. Both of them drafted for upside instead of focusing on the best available player now. It was more about hitting home runs than filling gaps. And yes, Al stayed too long. that was/is the worry with Pete. Not sure if recent events change that, but certainly it looks like the other option might not have been good either. The sample size is still small, though. Need to see more than 1-2 games of winning football to judge.

3. Maelstrom probably should take a bow. He steadfastly pointed out his belief that Geno could run this team effectively. Says a lot about Waldron that he is getting this success with Geno as well. But Maelstrom took a lot of crap for that take and it looks like he was correct.

4. I still think Wilson could have attracted a good coach/staff. The keyword is THINK. So that is subjective. But regardless, if our QB produced like the current Wilson? It would have been a disaster.
(Something still doesn't make sense. Wilson is either injured or has the yips. But no matter what, I would never have resigned Russ to a new contract without seeing how he played on whatever coach. Surprised Denver did it, honestly.)
Either way, this likely doesn't become a playoff team until both sides are at least average and one side is significantly better than that. I expected a solid defense and a struggling offense. But a solid offense and struggling defense still puts up the same results. Which is close to .500. Geno playing balls out and then us still losing 50% of the time isn't great.

I don't think Denver will be so bad that they will give us a top 3 pick but I don't know if a new QB fixes us either. And this Defense makes me concerned that even future 1 or 2 stars won't fix it. And for the flaming disaster that Denver is, with everything going right that was unexpected - we are 1 single game in the W/L column difference in results from them. We need 2-3 more games before a clearer picture emerges.

 

[Fade]

Pete Carroll is a meddler.

From Mike Holmgen:


14:00 Mark

 

[LeaveLynchAlone]

A few things,

1. If this defense can be average - we can do better than .500. We should have the defensive personnel for it. That part is frustrating. I've seen worse rosters do better, so it is possible.

2. Being compared to Al Davis is NOT an insult. Al was a visionary and he changed the game. His Raiders teams were monsters and YES he was a big reason for that. Like Pete, he had absolute power over his teams, staff, roster, etc. Both of them drafted for upside instead of focusing on the best available player now. It was more about hitting home runs than filling gaps. And yes, Al stayed too long. that was/is the worry with Pete. Not sure if recent events change that, but certainly it looks like the other option might not have been good either. The sample size is still small, though. Need to see more than 1-2 games of winning football to judge.

3. Maelstrom probably should take a bow. He steadfastly pointed out his belief that Geno could run this team effectively. Says a lot about Waldron that he is getting this success with Geno as well. But Maelstrom took a lot of crap for that take and it looks like he was correct.

4. I still think Wilson could have attracted a good coach/staff. The keyword is THINK. So that is subjective. But regardless, if our QB produced like the current Wilson? It would have been a disaster.
(Something still doesn't make sense. Wilson is either injured or has the yips. But no matter what, I would never have resigned Russ to a new contract without seeing how he played on whatever coach. Surprised Denver did it, honestly.)
Either way, this likely doesn't become a playoff team until both sides are at least average and one side is significantly better than that. I expected a solid defense and a struggling offense. But a solid offense and struggling defense still puts up the same results. Which is close to .500. Geno playing balls out and then us still losing 50% of the time isn't great.

I don't think Denver will be so bad that they will give us a top 3 pick but I don't know if a new QB fixes us either. And this Defense makes me concerned that even future 1 or 2 stars won't fix it. And for the flaming disaster that Denver is, with everything going right that was unexpected - we are 1 single game in the W/L column difference in results from them. We need 2-3 more games before a clearer picture emerges.

Do you not realize everything that you wrote is SUBJECTIVE?

 

[Nunya]

Pete Carroll is a meddler.

From Mike Holmgen:


14:00 Mark

So now you are resorting to gas-lighting? Holmgren didn't even come close to implying that PC meddles in the offensive play calling. I'm not too sure about Mike Holmgen though. Didn't even hear that guy talk.

 

[Nunya]

Pete's response to Fade:

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxxZdWgdR9DYhL6ljC_EMN8hxd8I4D1S4W

 

[toffee]

Guess what? Broncos' coaching staff are studying PETEBALL, in order to salvage something out of their franchise QB.

Just sayin'.

 

[sutz]

Guess what? Broncos' coaching staff are studying PETEBALL, in order to savage something out of their franchise QB.

Just sayin'.

I think you mean "salvage" but I get your point.