Some surprising numbers from the week 6 Carolina game

[kearly]

Before I start, I need to mention at the top that both Carolina and Seattle are significantly different teams today than they were back in week 6, so I'm not sure how much predictive power this post will have. But still, looking into the numbers in the Panthers game... it was a lot weirder than I remembered it being.

Back in week 6, Carolina beat Seattle 27-23. Even though Seattle led by two scores at one point, it felt like a totally legit win by Carolina. Carolina outgained Seattle by 49 yards, they won time of possession, and they won the first down battle by an astounding 25-14 margin. The Panthers had almost as many rushing first downs (10) as Seattle had total first downs.

So obviously, this result must have happened because Cam was hot right? Well, not exactly. His passer rating for the game was a Sanchezian 65.6, and none of his stats looked good. Low completion rate, relatively low YPA, and he threw two picks against 1 TD. And his one TD came on an infamous coverage breakdown. Newton was also sacked three times and rushed for only 30 yards. Devin Funchess led all Carolina WRs with just 24 receiving yards.

So if it wasn't the passing game, then it had to be Stewart steamrolling the Hawks without Wagner right? Well, the answer there is also a surprising no. Stewart averaged a surprisingly low 3.9 yards per carry, and his longest carry of the game was just 11 yards. Carolina did reach 145 yards rushing which is an excellent number, but they only made it so high due to a huge number of rush attempts thanks to having so many first downs.

So obviously, the Panthers must have had a great game on 3rd down right? Well... actually not really. Their 4/11 third down conversion rate (36.4%) is below the NFL average.

At this point I'm starting to get baffled. Maybe Carolina was gifted an avalanche of first downs by penalty? Nope, Carolina was only gifted one first down by penalty. Seattle was penalized 7 times overall for 48 total yards, both are numbers that Pete would probably take most weeks.

Maybe they racked up some desperation 4th down conversions? Nope, they went 0/1 on 4th down.

The simple amazing truth is that Carolina was very poor at QB play, and basically average at RB play, and still found a way to convert an unbelievable 20 first downs on 1st or 2nd down.

So how is this possible to get such amazing production with such feeble numbers across the board?

They did it by bunching that production into bursts in a remarkable way. Carolina averaged 80 yards per drive on their 4 TD drives, but on all other non-kneel down drives - 8 of them - the Panthers averaged just 7.9 (!) yards per drive while also throwing two picks.

It should also be noted that two of those 80 yard TD drives happened in the final 8 minutes back when Seattle was infamous for blowing 4th quarter leads.

I'm not trying to diminish what the Panthers did. Yards all count the same when you are playing in a tight football game. But what did give me comfort was just how odd and seemingly unrepeatable that kind of a performance is. To get your ass handed to you in epic fashion in 8 of 12 drives, but score 80 yard TD drives four times. 63 yards total over 8 drives. 320 yards total in the other 4 drives. That is nuts.

It makes me wonder how Carolina's offense might do in a rematch where the game flow is not nearly so unusual.

 

[SeaWolv]

That would seem to suggest that the Panthers are a streaky team that relies heavily on emotion.

 

[beaumaris]

Hope Pete reads this excellent post.

 

[ApnaHawk]

The loss of Wagner and the addition of Williams might have played a role in that. Wagner is back and Williams is replaced by someone who is 100x the DB he was. Not only that, our o-line has improved tremendously along with a more complex offense. We have a quick game that we didn't have in our playbook.

I did not feel confident about the Minny game as many other posters did around here. I knew the game would be closer because we played a weaker version of them in our earlier matchup. I feel the complete opposite this game. Their defense played an offense that did not know it's identity and over time they've lost key players in their back field. I think they're in for a whooping.

 

[SomersetHawk]

Really cool post, thanks for doing the research.

Seems they kind of played Seahawks football vs the Seahawks in that they laid an egg on offense for the majority but pulled out clutch drives when it mattered.

We've got a point to prove this week, having Wagner should be huge, having Lane is not insignificant, and having Kam back to his apparent best makes me optimistic we can progress.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

A question if you dont mind, Who besides us was a threat to them winning this season? Great read by the way. Much appreciated.

 

[mikeak]

A question if you dont mind, Who besides us was a threat to them winning this season? Great read by the way. Much appreciated.

Atlanta.....

 

[Sgt. Largent]

We held Carolina in check for 85% of the game, then our defense decided to uncharacteristically crap the bed down the stretch............so I guess the question is can that happen again?

It's possible, and we saw it again last week where the D doesn't give up a damn thing all day, then all of a sudden give up big plays. THAT'S what worries me. Our D isn't the lockdown finishing opponents off cutthroat kick them while their down D it's been the past couple of years.

We've let teams hang around, and in Carolina with the home crowd I imagine not allowing their team to give up even if down by a couple scores, it could happen again.

 

[WindCityHawk]

A question if you dont mind, Who besides us was a threat to them winning this season? Great read by the way. Much appreciated.

Atlanta, of course. I believe the Saints jumped out to a 14-0 lead on them one game. And of course NY almost stormed back and beat them before they ran out of clock.

Great analysis, Kearly. I can't wait for Sunday. Carolina's confidence is a house built on sand.

 

[hawknation2015]

Hope Pete reads this excellent post.

Pete could get this from looking at the box score.

The question that is not discussed in the OP is what led to Carolina having four 80-yard TD drives? That is a quite-impressive feat against the best defense in the league. It's not a fact we can simply discount as an anomaly. We know about the defensive coverage confusion, but what else did they do with their run game that allowed them to sustain those four 80-yard drives? I would be interested to read a breakdown on that.

 

[RichNhansom]

Hope Pete reads this excellent post.

Pete could get this from looking at the box score.

The question that is not discussed in the OP is what led to Carolina having four 80-yard TD drives? That is a quite-impressive feat against the best defense in the league. It's not a fact we can simply discount as an anomaly. We know about the defensive coverage confusion, but what else did they do with their run game that allowed them to sustain those four 80-yard drives? I would be interested to read a breakdown on that.

This is why Pete is aware of this. You can bet they are dissecting what Carolina did different on those drives and what was successful. Like you though, I would love to know.

Great analysis Kearly, thanks for taking the time.

 

[Hawkstorian]

Hope Pete reads this excellent post.

The Seahawks employ a lot of smart people. I have a suspicion they're aware of the situation.

 

[beaumaris]

Hope Pete reads this excellent post.

The Seahawks employ a lot of smart people. I have a suspicion they're aware of the situation.

At times you got to wonder though. :roll:

 

[kearly]

I don't know if I've ever seen a 72 yard discrepancy for TD drives vs other drives in a game where 4 TDs were scored. If Carolina had averaged 7.9 yards per drive in all 12 drives, they would have finished with 95 yards of offense. It would have been one of the most anemic offensive performances of the past several years. It's just so remarkable seeing four 80 yard TD drives come out of a game like that.

It doesn't make what they did illegitimate, maybe there are reasons why Carolina clicked on some drives and not others. But it definitely stands out as an insanely unusual game. Sometimes a team will struggle badly but still cobble together 1 or 2 nice drives out of character, but seeing 4 of them is pretty stunning.

 

[cesame]

I remember Stewart moving the pile on every play. They weren't big gains, but seemingly every run by him seemed like a success for Carolina because they were always gaining positive yardage. There weren't a lot of plays where the Dline made a play in the backfield and totally disrupted the play. Felt like Carolina was in control of their run game.

It was one of Seattle's weaker run D performances on the season from what I remember, which makes sense because Wagner was out.

 

[bigskydoc]

It would be interesting to look at other games from early in the season. This distribution really doesn't really surprise me. Many of these games I got the disctinct impression that we largely shut teams down, but had occasional lapses where opposing teams mounted big drives and this was where we lost games. Think about all the fourth quarter collapses where we largely controlled games until completely blowing it defensively in the fourth quarter. Same idea.

-bsd

 

[carolinablue]

Well if you look at how the game was played, when both teams were able to score a TD that drive always had an explosive play...a play for 20+yards. Sometimes more than one explosive play. Neither team was able to score a TD by working methodically down the field...except for Carolina's first TD which didn't have any "big" plays.

Seattle also got the ball twice off of a turnover already in FG range and was unable to score a TD either time. Had they scored a TD on either of those drives game might have turned out differently.

 

[StoneCold]

Slightly less nervous after reading your post. I may sit during half time. Thanks.

 

[sutz]

Two things come to my mind.

First: I have long thought that the 3rd down conversion stat can be seriously misleading. I've heard some ex-coaches on talk shows mention that all too often, that number depends heavily on success on early downs. I think we may need to split the 3rd down conversion rate into a long and short number. I think that would be very telling. It's the whole basis behind the "stop the run first" defensive philosophy.

Secondly: Could it be that with a lead in the 4th-starting at 2 TDs-we went to a defend the pass first mentality while Carolina, conversely, held to their running game? I don't remember the details of the game TBH, but like Kip mentioned, it seems obvious that they were making 1st downs before they even reached 3rd down on many plays. Also, while they may not have made many 1st downs through penalty directly, how many times did we jump offsides and give them 1st and 5? Early in the season, I seem to recall us doing a lot of that.

All in all a great read, Kip, and thank you very much for the work. I always-well almost always-enjoy your write-ups and find them informative and well written. I guess I'm saying that the answers to your questions might still be in the stats if we drill down a little deeper.

 

[hawk45]

Really great analysis Kearly, I was definitely surprised after reading your post. And feel better about our odds of limiting big drives with Kam and Lane out there, as well as the odds of being better in coverage and run stopping with Wagner.