The massively underappreciated Brian Schottenheimer

[mrt144]

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.

When a holistic ideal isn't met, I really hope that there's more to offer than 'well the holistic ideal wasn't met'. I agree wholly, yes, the defense especially needed to tighten up to maintain a lead - but that's predicating a holistic mode of operation on something that can rapidly change based on the baseline talent and structure they try to play in. I get it, ideals are great to strive for but they get flattened like anything else from time to time and then it's a question of what to do.

If we're looking at highest level reasons that game got away from us it was a combo of the defense salting away the lead while the offense did nothing to buttress it. The team stalled at a point where it wasn't apparent if it would haunt the Hawks or not. It did.

 

[McGruff]

Yeah, I dont know what the slim shady you were talking about in that first paragraph.

But I missed my naptime today.

 

[mrt144]

Okay so the gist of the first paragraph is that it is generally accepted that Pete has a holistic (all encompassing) vision of how the defense should operate and how the offense should and the integral interplay between the two. Play risk adverse offense which is supported by a smothering defense that can ensure that the game is tight and then land the punches you need to come out ahead in the end. We saw the power of this vision in 2013 where each piece did their part at the right times to have the most successful season with a ton of bacon saving plays that made them seem like a team of destiny.

But what is the plan if the defense doesn't hold up their end of the vision? How do you reduce the risk of ruin from a leaky defense at a point in the game where they are protecting a narrow lead?

Again, this is bordering on a nagging point but I don't disagree with the end point, I just don't see much oomph in the coaching tank when the ideal can't be achieved through latent talent gaps on the team. That ideal is great to strive for and can maybe be achieved but...there has to be something better than going down stoically sticking to your guns tactically when the talent is not there, either by injury or simple lack of aptitude.

I know that we shouldn't be harking back to the Dallas game so thoroughly as a source of gripes but it just didn't instill confidence that if presented with a similar situation, the team would find a way to confront and overcome it. Does that mean we can qualify PC and crew as bad coaches and they should be ousted? Nah, because they do a ton of good as coaches as well and are clearly proficient enough to win more than they lose, routinely. But...there's a lot of room for improvement in situational thinking and I hope they grab that opportunity for improvement by the short and curlies.

 

[McGruff]

Okay so the gist of the first paragraph is that it is generally accepted that Pete has a holistic (all encompassing) vision of how the defense should operate and how the offense should and the integral interplay between the two. Play risk adverse offense which is supported by a smothering defense that can ensure that the game is tight and then land the punches you need to come out ahead in the end. We saw the power of this vision in 2013 where each piece did their part at the right times to have the most successful season with a ton of bacon saving plays that made them seem like a team of destiny.

But what is the plan if the defense doesn't hold up their end of the vision? How do you reduce the risk of ruin from a leaky defense at a point in the game where they are protecting a narrow lead?

Again, this is bordering on a nagging point but I don't disagree with the end point, I just don't see much oomph in the coaching tank when the ideal can't be achieved through latent talent gaps on the team. That ideal is great to strive for and can maybe be achieved but...there has to be something better than going down stoically sticking to your guns tactically when the talent is not there, either by injury or simple lack of aptitude.

I know that we shouldn't be harking back to the Dallas game so thoroughly as a source of gripes but it just didn't instill confidence that if presented with a similar situation, the team would find a way to confront and overcome it. Does that mean we can qualify PC and crew as bad coaches and they should be ousted? Nah, because they do a ton of good as coaches as well and are clearly proficient enough to win more than they lose, routinely. But...there's a lot of room for improvement in situational thinking and I hope they grab that opportunity for improvement by the short and curlies.

That makes sense, and we have a ton of points of agreement.

I dont believe the answer will be to throw more, but I do hope the answer may be to throw differently.

The passing game needs to be more than a kill shot. We need some intermediate and short outside passing.

 

[DomeHawk]

Okay so the gist of the first paragraph is that it is generally accepted that Pete has a holistic (all encompassing) vision of how the defense should operate and how the offense should and the integral interplay between the two. Play risk adverse offense which is supported by a smothering defense that can ensure that the game is tight and then land the punches you need to come out ahead in the end. We saw the power of this vision in 2013 where each piece did their part at the right times to have the most successful season with a ton of bacon saving plays that made them seem like a team of destiny.

But what is the plan if the defense doesn't hold up their end of the vision? How do you reduce the risk of ruin from a leaky defense at a point in the game where they are protecting a narrow lead?

Again, this is bordering on a nagging point but I don't disagree with the end point, I just don't see much oomph in the coaching tank when the ideal can't be achieved through latent talent gaps on the team. That ideal is great to strive for and can maybe be achieved but...there has to be something better than going down stoically sticking to your guns tactically when the talent is not there, either by injury or simple lack of aptitude.

I know that we shouldn't be harking back to the Dallas game so thoroughly as a source of gripes but it just didn't instill confidence that if presented with a similar situation, the team would find a way to confront and overcome it. Does that mean we can qualify PC and crew as bad coaches and they should be ousted? Nah, because they do a ton of good as coaches as well and are clearly proficient enough to win more than they lose, routinely. But...there's a lot of room for improvement in situational thinking and I hope they grab that opportunity for improvement by the short and curlies.

That makes sense, and we have a ton of points of agreement.

I dont believe the answer will be to throw more, but I do hope the answer may be to throw differently.

The passing game needs to be more than a kill shot. We need some intermediate and short outside passing.

Can you say "possession receiver?"

We passed one up and NE took him.

 

[McGruff]

Who was that?

Although a player isnt going to help.

 

[John63]

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.

And yet the passing was working as illustrated above and PCs own words

 

[John63]

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.

When a holistic ideal isn't met, I really hope that there's more to offer than 'well the holistic ideal wasn't met'. I agree wholly, yes, the defense especially needed to tighten up to maintain a lead - but that's predicating a holistic mode of operation on something that can rapidly change based on the baseline talent and structure they try to play in. I get it, ideals are great to strive for but they get flattened like anything else from time to time and then it's a question of what to do.

If we're looking at highest level reasons that game got away from us it was a combo of the defense salting away the lead while the offense did nothing to buttress it. The team stalled at a point where it wasn't apparent if it would haunt the Hawks or not. It did.

Ahh so he is saying g we could. It win a shout out, and yet we did during the season.

 

[McGruff]

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.

And yet the passing was working as illustrated above and PCs own words

But it wasnt.

2 consequetive drives with 3 and out.

 

[McGruff]

And Pete didnt say it was working. Just that it was worth a Try.

 

[John63]

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.

And yet the passing was working as illustrated above and PCs own words

But it wasnt.

2 consequetive drives with 3 and out.

Yes and look at why

1st drive negative run
2nd drive back to back penalties

Neither are due to the passing game which for the record we were 3/4 on passing in those 2 drives but its tough to do much when you are on behind the stick from the outset. we completed 67% of our passes at a 8.6 ypa so it was working, compared to the 3 ypc for the run.

 

[John63]

And Pete didnt say it was working. Just that it was worth a Try.

Noe he said they should have thrown more and sooner, which of course you only do when it is working. 6&% compltionn 8.6 ypa it was working.

"Considering how well Russell was playing, and how much you struggled with the run, do you wish you would have opened it up a little earlier? Carroll was asked after the game.

“Yeah, I would have liked to,” said Carroll, who paused for a moment before responding. “The protection was good on the passing plays, and Russell threw some strikes. Yeah. It’s easy to say that now.”"


https://www.seattletimes.com/sports...nning-into-wall-and-it-cost-them-playoff-win/

 

[SoulfishHawk]

And not much can be more annoying than hearing what team should have done......AFTER a loss. I'll stick to my opinion, way too conservative in that game and Dallas was not a better team than Seattle. They just were better THAT day. The two HUGE plays the D gave up were likely the difference, as much as not going to the passing game a little more. Props to Dallas, they were very prepared for that game.
But, on to the 2019 season, learn and grow from it.

 

[Tical21]

Never said running was working.

Simply said that passing wasnt either.

Dallas had our number.

And yet the passing was working as illustrated above and PCs own words

But it wasnt.

2 consequetive drives with 3 and out.

Yes and look at why

1st drive negative run
2nd drive back to back penalties

Neither are due to the passing game which for the record we were 3/4 on passing in those 2 drives but its tough to do much when you are on behind the stick from the outset. we completed 67% of our passes at a 8.6 ypa so it was working, compared to the 3 ypc for the run.

Weren’t the penalties from the passing game?

 

[John63]

And yet the passing was working as illustrated above and PCs own words

But it wasnt.

2 consequetive drives with 3 and out.

Yes and look at why

1st drive negative run
2nd drive back to back penalties

Neither are due to the passing game which for the record we were 3/4 on passing in those 2 drives but its tough to do much when you are on behind the stick from the outset. we completed 67% of our passes at a 8.6 ypa so it was working, compared to the 3 ypc for the run.

Weren’t the penalties from the passing game?

Really did the penalties get called on the QB or the WR? No they were on the online which do both runs and pass. Nice try though and do t forget PC himself said it. Game over

 

[McGruff]

Because Pete is always right.

 

[John63]

Because Pete is always right.

If all it was, was PC himself you might have a point, but you have the facts of the game, you have the HC, you have almost every expert, and you have the players themselves all saying it. So let see I can believe all that or 1 or 2 fans with an agenda. HMm Pretty simple

 

[Jville]

Looking forward to year two ..................

[tweet]https://twitter.com/CoachSchotty/status/1150505148453535745[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/CoachSchotty/status/1149680034841600000[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/CoachSchotty/status/1148629444942159872[/tweet]

.......................................... year two is going to be great. :2thumbs:

 

[Ozzy]

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.

Well it was at least in part. I still find it baffling that people want to remove all guilt when Wilson, Brown, Carroll and even Schott himself said in hindsight they should have played it a little different. This almost seems like partisan politics where people pick a side and can't be moved damn the evidence.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

They whole team should have played a lot better in that game, period.