The massively underappreciated Brian Schottenheimer

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
2nd half possessions.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20190710-065305_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20190710-065305_Chrome.jpg
    115.9 KB · Views: 383

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
The two possessions before our final scoring drive.

We went 3 and out both times while throwing 6 of 7 snaps.
 

sutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
29,404
Reaction score
5,440
Location
Kent, WA
McGruff":3njcljvc said:
The two possessions before our final scoring drive.

We went 3 and out both times while throwing 6 of 7 snaps.
Oh, c'mon Mac, everybody knows that every 3 and out ever experienced was 2 short runs and a 3rd down desperation pass.

Every single one of them in football history.

Oh yeah, :sarcasm_off:
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
30,010
Reaction score
10,470
Location
Sammamish, WA
Fair enough, they could move the ball on Dallas. Just my opinion, that game was very winnable. The D wasn't exactly clutch either so......
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
SoulfishHawk":3d6bqeq8 said:
Fair enough, they could move the ball on Dallas. Just my opinion, that game was very winnable. The D wasn't exactly clutch either so......

The late game defensive collapse has more to do with that loss than the offense IMO.
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
SoulfishHawk":shrxyeor said:
Fair enough, they could move the ball on Dallas. Just my opinion, that game was very winnable. The D wasn't exactly clutch either so......

I'm just curious. Based on what data do you believe they could move the ball on Dallas in that game?
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
30,010
Reaction score
10,470
Location
Sammamish, WA
It's my opinion that they could be had. Dear God, can we just talk football ONCE w/out arguing on here?

Go Hawks
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
SoulfishHawk":2kfy5k7y said:
It's my opinion that they could be had. Dear God, can we just talk football ONCE w/out arguing on here?

Go Hawks

Are we arguing?

I thought we were discussing.

I am genuinely curious what is the basis for your opinion . . .
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
Dallas exposed a fatal flaw in our offense, which is that if you take away the big play, we dont have a counter in the passing game.

Of course, there are very few teams who can play to take away the deep zones and still play tough up front. Dallas is one of them, and they were no doubt aided by injuries to Sweezy and Fluker.
 

Tical21

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
82
SoulfishHawk":39lke56f said:
And our D wasn't exactly on point. Team loss.
No no no. It's been made abundantly clear that this was a Schotty loss.
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
Keep in mind that our very conservative, predictable offense got us to a 14-10 lead late in the 3rd on the road against a really good defense.

It wasn't pretty. In fact, it was maddening at times. Some 1st down passing would've been nice. But the Dallas defense played us perfectly, and there are very few fronts that could do what they did while still protecting the back end.

Having Fleezy hand Swuker hurt made it infinitely worse.
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
30,010
Reaction score
10,470
Location
Sammamish, WA
Hey, I dig the pound the rock and eat the clock thing. It works in Pete's overall vision of how he wants a team to work. But, at the same time they really need to stop being so damn conservative in the first half of games. It's all a matter of opinion, but my god, change it up at least once in awhile.
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
SoulfishHawk":1cr6ylrk said:
Nah, they were moving the ball well in the later part of the game when they actually started throwing it. Agree to disagree. Way too conservative in the 1st half of the game. They need to adjust better.


Not sure why this is an argument, PC himself already said case closed.
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
John63":2hk36810 said:
SoulfishHawk":2hk36810 said:
Nah, they were moving the ball well in the later part of the game when they actually started throwing it. Agree to disagree. Way too conservative in the 1st half of the game. They need to adjust better.


Not sure why this is an argument, PC himself already said case closed.

My point is it wouldn't have mattered. Unless the defense tightens up, we lose the game regardless.
 

Tical21

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
82
John63":sjwxcfvq said:
SoulfishHawk":sjwxcfvq said:
Nah, they were moving the ball well in the later part of the game when they actually started throwing it. Agree to disagree. Way too conservative in the 1st half of the game. They need to adjust better.


Not sure why this is an argument, PC himself already said case closed.
Yep because Pete Carroll is known for saying what he really feels.
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
McGruff":ulakpjwy said:
2nd half possessions.


So lets look ath those 3 drives

Drive 1
1st play run for negative yards so 2nd and long
2nd play pass for 5
3rd 3rd and long no go

So this started with a negative run that pretty much blew it up

Drive 2
1st play pass completed would have been 2nd and 4 but penalty now 1st and long
next play complete pass but another penalty
next play 2nd and 22 pass for 2 yards
next play pass for 13
punt

So on the 2 drives you are referencing we were forced to pass as opposed to dictating if we pass and both were blown up by either negative run or penalties. While, the end results you claim is correct the circumstances around them mitigate everything.

Now series 3 were we scored
6 straight passes, hmm


Lets look at the firsst series of the 3rd qtr
run, run, pass punt

2nd series
pass, run, run, run for huge loss, 2nd and long done


3rd series

run for 3, run for nothing, run for 2, pass for 22, run for 3, run for 2, pass for 7, run for 1, WIlson run for TD

So lets see in 6 non QB runs we got 11 yards for a whopping 1.8 ypc wow. Now let's add in Wilson 15 yards on 7 carries 2.1 ypc yeah running was working NOT
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
John63":31dr59ts said:
McGruff":31dr59ts said:
2nd half possessions.


So lets look ath those 3 drives

Drive 1
1st play run for negative yards so 2nd and long
2nd play pass for 5
3rd 3rd and long no go

So this started with a negative run that pretty much blew it up

Drive 2
1st play pass completed would have been 2nd and 4 but penalty now 1st and long
next play complete pass but another penalty
next play 2nd and 22 pass for 2 yards
next play pass for 13
punt

So on the 2 drives you are referencing we were forced to pass as opposed to dictating if we pass and both were blown up by either negative run or penalties. While, the end results you claim is correct the circumstances around them mitigate everything.

Now series 3 were we scored
6 straight passes, hmm


Lets look at the firsst series of the 3rd qtr
run, run, pass punt

2nd series
pass, run, run, run for huge loss, 2nd and long done


3rd series

run for 3, run for nothing, run for 2, pass for 22, run for 3, run for 2, pass for 7, run for 1, WIlson run for TD

So lets see in 6 non QB runs we got 11 yards for a whopping 1.8 ypc wow. Now let's add in Wilson 15 yards on 7 carries 2.1 ypc yeah running was working NOT

Never said running was working.

Simply said that passing wasnt either.

Dallas had our number.
 

Tical21

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
5,541
Reaction score
82
John63":5bi0c9r5 said:
McGruff":5bi0c9r5 said:
2nd half possessions.


So lets look ath those 3 drives

Drive 1
1st play run for negative yards so 2nd and long
2nd play pass for 5
3rd 3rd and long no go

So this started with a negative run that pretty much blew it up

Drive 2
1st play pass completed would have been 2nd and 4 but penalty now 1st and long
next play complete pass but another penalty
next play 2nd and 22 pass for 2 yards
next play pass for 13
punt

So on the 2 drives you are referencing we were forced to pass as opposed to dictating if we pass and both were blown up by either negative run or penalties. While, the end results you claim is correct the circumstances around them mitigate everything.

Now series 3 were we scored
6 straight passes, hmm


Lets look at the firsst series of the 3rd qtr
run, run, pass punt

2nd series
pass, run, run, run for huge loss, 2nd and long done


3rd series

run for 3, run for nothing, run for 2, pass for 22, run for 3, run for 2, pass for 7, run for 1, WIlson run for TD

So lets see in 6 non QB runs we got 11 yards for a whopping 1.8 ypc wow. Now let's add in Wilson 15 yards on 7 carries 2.1 ypc yeah running was working NOT
Drive 2 we came out passing and it put us behind the sticks as well. We needed to get another yard or two on a couple first down runs to setup 3rd and 5 instead of 3rd and 7. I always felt like we just needed to hit a 3rd down to get some kind of continuity going and things were going to get on track, and they just never did. We'd shoot ourselves in the foot or give up pressure or something. Neither Carson nor Wilson ever got into any rhythm. We needed an extra block here or there, find a way to make a completion and get it rolling, and just never did. But I don't know how you can logically feel that opening up the offense would've been the magic elixir, when it's usually a cause of disaster for us.
 

Latest posts

Top