Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Seahawks haven’t managed an opening drive TD in almost 2 yrs

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • Seattle’s last opening drive TD was Week 3 of the 2016 against the San Francisco 49ers, when Christine Michael scored his first touchdown on a 41-yard burst. Since then? Here are the ensuing end results over the next 31 weeks:

    Punt
    Punt
    Punt
    Punt
    Blocked Punt
    Field Goal
    Punt
    Punt
    Field Goal
    Field Goal
    Punt
    Fumble
    Field Goal
    Punt
    Field Goal
    Punt
    Field Goal
    Punt
    Punt
    Punt
    Punt
    Punt
    Interception
    Interception
    Field Goal
    Punt
    Fumble
    Punt
    Punt
    Punt
    Punt


    https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/9/19/17 ... statistics

    Hahahahahahahhahaha :pukeface:
    User avatar
    Mistashoesta
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1598
    Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:22 am


  • I heard that the other day yet I could have sworn that we finally broke that pathetic record (an all time NFL record) around game 28 (total) last year? Not sure which game, but a swear it ended??

    edit...hmmm could have been a TD kick return I thought ended it??
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5803
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • At least we're the best at something right? :stirthepot:
    User avatar
    Seahawk_Dan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 692
    Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:12 am
    Location: Bremerton, WA



  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:Surprised Jon Ryan's leg didn't fall off.


    I think that's why we drafted Dickson because we wanted to keep the trend alive and needed a fresh, young leg.
    User avatar
    Seahawk_Dan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 692
    Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:12 am
    Location: Bremerton, WA


  • Brings to mind Einstein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"
    canucklehead
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 27
    Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:28 am


  • canucklehead wrote:Brings to mind Einsein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"


    Technically Einstein didn't say that, though the quote is still attributed to him. Regardless the meaning is still the same.
    User avatar
    Seahawk_Dan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 692
    Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:12 am
    Location: Bremerton, WA


  • Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    canucklehead wrote:Brings to mind Einsein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"


    Technically Einstein didn't say that, though the quote is still attributed to him. Regardless the meaning is still the same.


    No, the meaning is still terrible, especially when attributed to a scientist.

    When you take measurements in a scientific process, you almost always get different results. That's what statistical distributions and the whole 95% confidence interval thing are for. But you do the same thing over and over.

    When I estimate how long it will take to drive across town? Always different results. Light timing and the existence of other cars and the behavior of the drivers would never allow for the same result.

    Baseball players throw and swing at the same kinds of pitches constantly. All sorts of different results.

    Football players do many of the same things over and over again. Different results.

    Einstein would have never said something so stupid.
    User avatar
    bmorepunk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2022
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 12:56 pm


  • Gotta love "Pete" ball.

    He again doubled down at his presser today. When asked about the offense. Something about staying the same, just gotta "stick with it" propaganda. And yes I am calling it propaganda at this point. You have to call it that after multiple years of this.

    Pete is insane.
    User avatar
    Fade
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1939
    Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:26 am
    Location: Truth Ray


  • Fade wrote:Gotta love "Pete" ball.

    He again doubled down at his presser today. When asked about the offense. Something about staying the same, just gotta "stick with it" propaganda. And yes I am calling it propaganda at this point. You have to call it that after multiple years of this.

    Pete is insane.


    If we drop to 1-6 and the Pete quotes stay the same then I imagine he's gone. Maybe not during the season but by the end.
    User avatar
    Seahawk_Dan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 692
    Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:12 am
    Location: Bremerton, WA


  • Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    canucklehead wrote:Brings to mind Einsein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"


    Technically Einstein didn't say that, though the quote is still attributed to him. Regardless the meaning is still the same.


    :34853_doh:

    That isn't the definition of insanity and that isn't what it means.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... nsanity-is
    User avatar
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2712
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:38 pm


  • Chapow wrote:
    Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    canucklehead wrote:Brings to mind Einsein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"


    Technically Einstein didn't say that, though the quote is still attributed to him. Regardless the meaning is still the same.


    :34853_doh:

    That isn't the definition of insanity and that isn't what it means.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... nsanity-is


    You're being stubborn if you think you can repeat your objections over and over again and get a different result ;)
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3303
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • bmorepunk wrote:No, the meaning is still terrible, especially when attributed to a scientist.

    When you take measurements in a scientific process, you almost always get different results. That's what statistical distributions and the whole 95% confidence interval thing are for. But you do the same thing over and over.

    When I estimate how long it will take to drive across town? Always different results. Light timing and the existence of other cars and the behavior of the drivers would never allow for the same result.

    Baseball players throw and swing at the same kinds of pitches constantly. All sorts of different results.

    Football players do many of the same things over and over again. Different results.

    Einstein would have never said something so stupid.


    Chapow wrote::34853_doh:

    That isn't the definition of insanity and that isn't what it means.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... nsanity-is


    Yes on a scientific and definition stand point the quote is not only attributed to the wrong person, as I stated in my post, but the phrase itself is colloquial. Used so many times that it either lost it's original meaning or spawned a new one all together. However when someone says the phrase you understand the general meaning of what they're saying, despite being incorrect on a technical level when you look into it.
    User avatar
    Seahawk_Dan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 692
    Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:12 am
    Location: Bremerton, WA


  • New Rule:

    If you go 5 wide on 3rd and 2, you should be shot.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2194
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


  • Or at least tickled.
    User avatar
    bmorepunk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2022
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 12:56 pm


  • bmorepunk wrote:Or at least tickled.


    A fate worse than death really.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3303
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    bmorepunk wrote:No, the meaning is still terrible, especially when attributed to a scientist.

    When you take measurements in a scientific process, you almost always get different results. That's what statistical distributions and the whole 95% confidence interval thing are for. But you do the same thing over and over.

    When I estimate how long it will take to drive across town? Always different results. Light timing and the existence of other cars and the behavior of the drivers would never allow for the same result.

    Baseball players throw and swing at the same kinds of pitches constantly. All sorts of different results.

    Football players do many of the same things over and over again. Different results.

    Einstein would have never said something so stupid.


    Chapow wrote::34853_doh:

    That isn't the definition of insanity and that isn't what it means.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... nsanity-is


    Yes on a scientific and definition stand point the quote is not only attributed to the wrong person, as I stated in my post, but the phrase itself is colloquial. Used so many times that it either lost it's original meaning or spawned a new one all together. However when someone says the phrase you understand the general meaning of what they're saying, despite being incorrect on a technical level when you look into it.


    This is a reasonable, intelligent, and well stated response.

    The only possible explanation is you must be messing with me somehow.
    User avatar
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2712
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:38 pm


  • Chapow wrote:
    Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    bmorepunk wrote:No, the meaning is still terrible, especially when attributed to a scientist.

    When you take measurements in a scientific process, you almost always get different results. That's what statistical distributions and the whole 95% confidence interval thing are for. But you do the same thing over and over.

    When I estimate how long it will take to drive across town? Always different results. Light timing and the existence of other cars and the behavior of the drivers would never allow for the same result.

    Baseball players throw and swing at the same kinds of pitches constantly. All sorts of different results.

    Football players do many of the same things over and over again. Different results.

    Einstein would have never said something so stupid.


    Chapow wrote::34853_doh:

    That isn't the definition of insanity and that isn't what it means.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... nsanity-is


    Yes on a scientific and definition stand point the quote is not only attributed to the wrong person, as I stated in my post, but the phrase itself is colloquial. Used so many times that it either lost it's original meaning or spawned a new one all together. However when someone says the phrase you understand the general meaning of what they're saying, despite being incorrect on a technical level when you look into it.


    This is a reasonable, intelligent, and well stated response.

    The only possible explanation is you must be messing with me somehow.


    I assure you I'm not messing with you. Lol. Just stating that yes, both you and bmore are correct by definition but that the quote is a turn of phrase.
    User avatar
    Seahawk_Dan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 692
    Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:12 am
    Location: Bremerton, WA


  • Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    canucklehead wrote:Brings to mind Einsein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"


    Technically Einstein didn't say that, though the quote is still attributed to him. Regardless the meaning is still the same.


    It was created by an author in some book written in, I think in 83', that used the term towards alcoholism. I have know idea how this saying has been attributed to Einstein.
    "It's Ground Hawks Day" Chris Berman
    User avatar
    seahawkfreak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5067
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:36 pm
    Location: Aiken , SC


  • 2 years is just abysmal and sums up many of the O philosophy issues. It would be nice if Pete for once just thew caution to the wind and came out with hurry-up or a run 'n shoot style to change the pace, get the tempo going immediately and shock the opposing defense.

    After 2 years, try something-anything different!
    User avatar
    West TX Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2134
    Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 8:24 am


  • seahawkfreak wrote:
    Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    canucklehead wrote:Brings to mind Einsein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"


    Technically Einstein didn't say that, though the quote is still attributed to him. Regardless the meaning is still the same.

    It was created by an author in some book written in, I think in 83', that used the term towards alcoholism. I have know idea how this saying has been attributed to Einstein.


    That makes it more appropriate. Pete is addicted to a particular style of crappy offense that used to give him a buzz after two series, but the effects of repeated indulgence, building up tolerance, opponents figuring it out, now it takes a full six pack or even half case of series to feel the same buzz he used to get from just two series.
    2018 Adopt-A-Rookie: Rashaad Penny
    2018 BounceBack Bet: C.J. Prosise
    User avatar
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2148
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:03 am


  • Mike Lombardi said you know you have a bad offensive coordinator when there first 15 scripted plays don't work. It is the easiest part of the game for a coordinator. These are the plays you practice the most. You know how defenses are going to react to your formations based on how they have done in the past. You know the weaknesses of the defenses and where to attack. Our last 2 coordinators have been jokes. We just run plays and hope they work. Without any true idea on where we want to attack. You know this because after the game they always say what they should have done. We don't have any unique motion or formations to make these plays work better. For years the only thing we could do is playground football. It has gotten very tiring.
    ojosdelgato
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 3
    Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:49 pm


  • seahawkfreak wrote:
    Seahawk_Dan wrote:
    canucklehead wrote:Brings to mind Einsein's quote about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result"


    Technically Einstein didn't say that, though the quote is still attributed to him. Regardless the meaning is still the same.


    It was created by an author in some book written in, I think in 83', that used the term towards alcoholism. I have know idea how this saying has been attributed to Einstein.



    "Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results
    Albert Einstein? Narcotics Anonymous? Max Nordau? George Bernard Shaw? George A. Kelly? Rita Mae Brown? John Larroquette? Jessie Potter? Werner Erhard?"

    https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/03/23/same/
    User avatar
    HansGruber
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2648
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:39 pm


  • Seymour wrote:I heard that the other day yet I could have sworn that we finally broke that pathetic record (an all time NFL record) around game 28 (total) last year? Not sure which game, but a swear it ended??

    edit...hmmm could have been a TD kick return I thought ended it??


    Tyler Lockett returned the first kickoff for a TD in week 17 last season.
    JGreen79
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 608
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:26 pm
    Location: Newberg, Oregon


  • I would like to see the percentage of opening drives for the Hawks that have gone 3 and out vs the NFL average.
    ZagHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1454
    Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:42 pm


  • The length of this streak tells me something very clearly.



    Scoring on offense is not important to Pete.

    It clearly cannot be the primary goal or you would at least hit it, even a few times, just given the sample size.

    It also shows the priority that Pete puts on offense itself.

    It is actually weird given the value that Pete puts on emotional impact and perception of value. Since scoring early sets a tone, you would expect (hope?) that we would push for this. We not only do not seem to push for this, but we also seem to dismiss it.

    This lines up with the beginning of the game is not important implied messaging throughout so much of his coaching though.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3355
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


  • CAN YOU WIN THE GAME IN THE FIRST QUARTER?!!
    irfuben32
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 108
    Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 9:07 am


  • It's not all on Pete or the coordinator, IMO it's more about Russell.

    For all that Russell is great at, and there's a lot...........unfortunately he's not a robot pocket passer like Brady or any other tall methodical pocket passer.

    Russell is a tempo/rhythm/confidence building type of QB that needs to get into rhythm and tempo in order to get going.........and that's killed us for entire 1st quarters and halves.

    How many times have you said "man Russell looks off" at the beginning of games? Like EVERY game? It's not until the end of the half or even into the 2nd half that Russell finally looks in rhythm.

    I have no idea how to fix that, and obviously neither does Pete and his staff, cause it hasn't been fixed in Russell's entire career here.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13794
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:It's not all on Pete or the coordinator, IMO it's more about Russell.

    For all that Russell is great at, and there's a lot...........unfortunately he's not a robot pocket passer like Brady or any other tall methodical pocket passer.

    Russell is a tempo/rhythm/confidence building type of QB that needs to get into rhythm and tempo in order to get going.........and that's killed us for entire 1st quarters and halves.

    How many times have you said "man Russell looks off" at the beginning of games? Like EVERY game? It's not until the end of the half or even into the 2nd half that Russell finally looks in rhythm.

    I have no idea how to fix that, and obviously neither does Pete and his staff, cause it hasn't been fixed in Russell's entire career here.


    A way to attempt to fix (fix is even too strong of a word here, attempt to mitigate might be better) it isn't seemingly on the table by dogmatic adherence to a tactical philosophy and a diminished coaching input - yes, no huddle, but not hurry up (let the clock run, ezpz), audible heavy opening drives. This gets RW engaged and focused right off the bat and helps the offensive staff see how the teams react to that situation. Not allowing subs for the defense and locking them into the base package they can exploit with a handful of potential plays. It would also keep the defense guessing from the get go because at this point, most defenses are probably not expecting that out of the Hawks the first drive at all. And on subsequent drives they might try and prepare for seeing that again with a different base package that is open to exploit.

    But hey, if the Hawks don't really practice this mode of offense, it's probably not going to approach a fix.

    I think doing it this way would also be a morale boost to some extent for all the offensive players although (hey, we're actually playing with some fire rather than doing flaccid crap to get a 3 and out), I bet Pete would hate it working well because it would undermine what he thinks is the best way to win, despite you know, it seemingly not being such at this point.

    I would love to see an offense operate on this principle of catching the defense in a specific personnel package and then just hammering the hell out of the weakness of that package until a busted down allows for a huddle again. But again, like I've said too many times - you don't practice that, it probably won't be great.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3303
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:It's not all on Pete or the coordinator, IMO it's more about Russell.

    For all that Russell is great at, and there's a lot...........unfortunately he's not a robot pocket passer like Brady or any other tall methodical pocket passer.

    Russell is a tempo/rhythm/confidence building type of QB that needs to get into rhythm and tempo in order to get going.........and that's killed us for entire 1st quarters and halves.

    How many times have you said "man Russell looks off" at the beginning of games? Like EVERY game? It's not until the end of the half or even into the 2nd half that Russell finally looks in rhythm.

    I have no idea how to fix that, and obviously neither does Pete and his staff, cause it hasn't been fixed in Russell's entire career here.



    I respect your opinion but I find this totally hard to believe

    IMO, to believe what you're saying, we would all have to believe that 31 other teams in the league, with Quarterbacks far worse than Russell can manage opening drives. It seems far more plausible that this is game plan and coaching/playcalling. After all, it's not like we've seen Russ with anyone other than Pete

    Is it possible? Sure. But I'm willing to guess that if Russell played for another team we'd see a different story
    User avatar
    Scorpion05
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 885
    Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:05 am


  • Or, more likely, both are a problem.
    Vpk0718
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 546
    Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:42 pm


  • Scorpion05 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:It's not all on Pete or the coordinator, IMO it's more about Russell.

    For all that Russell is great at, and there's a lot...........unfortunately he's not a robot pocket passer like Brady or any other tall methodical pocket passer.

    Russell is a tempo/rhythm/confidence building type of QB that needs to get into rhythm and tempo in order to get going.........and that's killed us for entire 1st quarters and halves.

    How many times have you said "man Russell looks off" at the beginning of games? Like EVERY game? It's not until the end of the half or even into the 2nd half that Russell finally looks in rhythm.

    I have no idea how to fix that, and obviously neither does Pete and his staff, cause it hasn't been fixed in Russell's entire career here.



    I respect your opinion but I find this totally hard to believe

    IMO, to believe what you're saying, we would all have to believe that 31 other teams in the league, with Quarterbacks far worse than Russell can manage opening drives. It seems far more plausible that this is game plan and coaching/playcalling. After all, it's not like we've seen Russ with anyone other than Pete

    Is it possible? Sure. But I'm willing to guess that if Russell played for another team we'd see a different story


    You mean the other 20-25 teams with a revolving door of QB every year because they're going through the same inconsistently to downright awful QB play?

    That's why there's only a handful of "elite" QB's that can deliver those opening drive TD's on a regular basis, everyone else is in the same boat we are. I'm trying to explain WHY we're in that boat.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13794
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Start the game with a 4-minute offense. Include some read option. Some scripted plays. Spread the ball around. Anything but what they've been doing.
    User avatar
    hoxrox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1518
    Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 5:29 pm


  • Sometimes I think the coaching has regressed RW to TJack and the sad thing is, IMO, it is on purpose. Not the suckiness but the QB style.
    "It's Ground Hawks Day" Chris Berman
    User avatar
    seahawkfreak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5067
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:36 pm
    Location: Aiken , SC


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Scorpion05 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:It's not all on Pete or the coordinator, IMO it's more about Russell.

    For all that Russell is great at, and there's a lot...........unfortunately he's not a robot pocket passer like Brady or any other tall methodical pocket passer.

    Russell is a tempo/rhythm/confidence building type of QB that needs to get into rhythm and tempo in order to get going.........and that's killed us for entire 1st quarters and halves.

    How many times have you said "man Russell looks off" at the beginning of games? Like EVERY game? It's not until the end of the half or even into the 2nd half that Russell finally looks in rhythm.

    I have no idea how to fix that, and obviously neither does Pete and his staff, cause it hasn't been fixed in Russell's entire career here.



    I respect your opinion but I find this totally hard to believe

    IMO, to believe what you're saying, we would all have to believe that 31 other teams in the league, with Quarterbacks far worse than Russell can manage opening drives. It seems far more plausible that this is game plan and coaching/playcalling. After all, it's not like we've seen Russ with anyone other than Pete

    Is it possible? Sure. But I'm willing to guess that if Russell played for another team we'd see a different story


    You mean the other 20-25 teams with a revolving door of QB every year because they're going through the same inconsistently to downright awful QB play?

    That's why there's only a handful of "elite" QB's that can deliver those opening drive TD's on a regular basis, everyone else is in the same boat we are. I'm trying to explain WHY we're in that boat.


    Who else is in the same boat we are regarding the TD-less opening drive streak? Or more generally the impotent offensive start to games?
    User avatar
    OpHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 364
    Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 9:26 am


  • This is silly, you dont win in the first quarter. This is even more silly because Seahawks has the second best record since Wilson arrived.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 665
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


  • Just to add more to this silliness, we actually had an opening drive td in 2017 against Falcons in the playoffs. Guess what we lost.

    Also when we won our Superbowl in 2013 we only had 1 opening drive td.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 665
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:It's not all on Pete or the coordinator, IMO it's more about Russell.

    For all that Russell is great at, and there's a lot...........unfortunately he's not a robot pocket passer like Brady or any other tall methodical pocket passer.

    Russell is a tempo/rhythm/confidence building type of QB that needs to get into rhythm and tempo in order to get going.........and that's killed us for entire 1st quarters and halves.

    How many times have you said "man Russell looks off" at the beginning of games? Like EVERY game? It's not until the end of the half or even into the 2nd half that Russell finally looks in rhythm.

    I have no idea how to fix that, and obviously neither does Pete and his staff, cause it hasn't been fixed in Russell's entire career here.

    Every Quarterback needs to get into a tempo, even Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Aaron Rodgers. Holmgren always talked about tempo, rhythm and its importance in Quarterback play/offensive production.

    In Pete Carroll's offense there is no chance for the passer to get in a rhythm. As someone said here earlier, he skips the foreplay and goes for the big plays right off the bat. This leaves the Quarterback no chance to get in a proper rhythm or get a proper feel for the game.

    Pete Carroll's offense makes no sense from a modern NFL prospective. It was an offensive ideology that died in the 80s. It makes sense, because this is when Carroll was learning how to coach. He grew up as a player, and then as a coach in these types of systems. My main gripe about this system is that you can run an offense that airs it out, but also can attack defense underneath. Good examples of this are the Shannahan father/son west coast system. There are modern iterations of the Air Coryell system that do this as well. Within the context of the Seahawks we run a more varied offense in the 4th quarter of games. More uptempo with a bigger variety of routes.

    Carroll really needs to take his hands completely off of the offense and leave it in Schottenheimer's and Wilson's hands. Carroll is dragging his team down with his offensive philosophy.
    Spin Doctor
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2703
    Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:31 am


  • Blame me.

    I have a massive venting thread in the Shack posted that day when Seattle ran through the Niners defense like a hot knife through butter.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1665
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 7:06 pm


  • ojosdelgato wrote:Mike Lombardi said you know you have a bad offensive coordinator when there first 15 scripted plays don't work. It is the easiest part of the game for a coordinator. These are the plays you practice the most. You know how defenses are going to react to your formations based on how they have done in the past. You know the weaknesses of the defenses and where to attack. Our last 2 coordinators have been jokes. We just run plays and hope they work. Without any true idea on where we want to attack. You know this because after the game they always say what they should have done. We don't have any unique motion or formations to make these plays work better. For years the only thing we could do is playground football. It has gotten very tiring.

    So true.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24072
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


  • Yay, people can finally stop crying about this!
    User avatar
    DJrmb
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1429
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • The unicorn of seahawks football
    World champs sb48

    Aros wrote:

    Wait, MizzouHawkGal is a DUDE??
    User avatar
    hawksincebirth
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 569
    Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:12 pm
    Location: Marysville


  • Awesome, finally. Classic Pete ball though. He’s okay with scoring early but he doesn’t want high risk throws early to accomplish that feat. Now that our running game is back, the offense breaks the streak
    User avatar
    Scorpion05
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 885
    Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:05 am


  • Didn't happen in the US so it doesn't count.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    .NET Poster of the Month
     
    Posts: 4616
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA




It is currently Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:24 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information