The massively underappreciated Brian Schottenheimer

MontanaHawk05 · Jun 14, 2019

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2019/6/14/18 ... son-scheme

This was the second-highest scoring offense in the history of the franchise. It was not the gross failure most view it as.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/btrossler/status/1082673743527362561[/tweet]

It's not a one-sided praise-piece - Matty has some criticisms of Schotty. But this strikes me as a credible piece given Matty's earlier predisposition against our OC after the season. He was a lot more down on the guy at first, then went back and looked at the tape and data, and revised his opinions accordingly. Not many people can do that.

I particularly liked his subtle point that any discussion of running effectiveness needs to include personnel. Most teams don't perform as well when going run-first, true, but then again, most teams aren't built like the Seahawks, with a backfield like ours, an offensive line selected and trained to run-block first, and more variety in our run schemes than Cable ever came up with. Another spurious variable that the pass-first peanut gallery has never really given its due weight.

And his point about recency bias (i.e. the tendency to judge something based on its most recent performance, rather than its overall performance). Seattle was great running all year.

Own The West · Jun 14, 2019

Too lazy to look it up, but I suspect our revitalized running game has helped us win the time of possession battle, which makes our defense better, which gives our offense more drives, which ... oh, just give us the damn trophy!

JayhawkMike · Jun 14, 2019

A stubborn headed refusal to adjust the game plan when the running game isn't working was a hallmark of his father at both San Diego and Kansas City. It resulted in early outs in the playoffs and zero super bowl appearances.

His son isn't any different and I am worried we will get the same results. Nothing from last year changed my mind.

Tical21 · Jun 14, 2019

JayhawkMike":2uld99su said:
A stubborn headed refusal to adjust the game plan when the running game isn't working was a hallmark of his father at both San Diego and Kansas City. It resulted in early outs in the playoffs and zero super bowl appearances.

His son isn't any different and I am worried we will get the same results. Nothing from last year changed my mind.

When would you have adjusted your gameplan? When the Running game was going for 4 YPC after the first quarter and the passing game resulted in -20 yards? At halftime when Carson had 6 carries and we had the lead? In the 4th quarter when we had the lead on the road in a playoff game? You would have changed then? Yeah, maybe, considering we ran like once after that.

This is the most tired argument currently involving the Seahawks.

When would you have changed your gameplan in the Dallas game, and what would you have done differently?

Largent80 · Jun 14, 2019

He hurt us badly in the first 2 games with that pass happy offense. Hard to understand after the run first mantra before the season.

They recovered once his head got connected. He needs to adapt better and quicker. Otherwise it's Bevell 2.0

sutz · Jun 14, 2019

I think I'm just gonna :snack: on this one. :twisted:

DomeHawk · Jun 14, 2019

Own The West":28e65ya3 said:
Too lazy to look it up, but I suspect our revitalized running game has helped us win the time of possession battle, which makes our defense better, which gives our offense more drives, which ... oh, just give us the damn trophy!

We won the TOP by almost 3 minutes during the season, but when it really counted in the playoff game we lost it by almost 10 minutes.

Also, most of the positive stats are skewed by wins against non-playoff teams.

https://www.seahawks.com/team/stats/

https://www.espn.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=401038953

DomeHawk · Jun 14, 2019

JayhawkMike":1e423aby said:
A stubborn headed refusal to adjust the game plan when the running game isn't working was a hallmark of his father at both San Diego and Kansas City. It resulted in early outs in the playoffs and zero super bowl appearances.

His son isn't any different and I am worried we will get the same results. Nothing from last year changed my mind.

Yep, and that doesn't mean you have to have a "pass-happy" offense, it just means that you have to have an imaginative modern offense that isn't too predictable.

Chapow · Jun 14, 2019

DomeHawk":3thubjmk said:
Own The West":3thubjmk said:

Too lazy to look it up, but I suspect our revitalized running game has helped us win the time of possession battle, which makes our defense better, which gives our offense more drives, which ... oh, just give us the damn trophy!

Click to expand...

We won the TOP by almost 3 minutes during the season, but when it really counted in the playoff game we lost it by almost 10 minutes.

What do you think is more likely to lead you to a more accurate conclusion, using a sample size of 1 or using a sample size of 16?

Also, most of the positive stats are skewed by wins against non-playoff teams.

Of course. It stands to reason that teams are generally going to put up better stats against bad teams then against good teams. For instance, I wonder if the Patriots offensive stats are skewed by playing the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins six times a year? Why would it be a bad thing if they were? Aren't good teams supposed to put up better numbers against bad teams?

https://www.seahawks.com/team/stats/

https://www.espn.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=401038953

acer1240 · Jun 14, 2019

Largent80":243yijp7 said:
He hurt us badly in the first 2 games with that pass happy offense. Hard to understand after the run first mantra before the season.

They recovered once his head got connected. He needs to adapt better and quicker. Otherwise it's Bevell 2.0

That was mandated by Pete. I remember he went out of his way to take the blame for it, although I do remember also reading that Schottie was really impressed with Wilson as a qb and wanted to play with his new toy.

Either way, both were at fault.

Nice post Montana.

DomeHawk · Jun 14, 2019

Chapow":1k2qc1i8 said:
DomeHawk":1k2qc1i8 said:

Own The West":1k2qc1i8 said:

Too lazy to look it up, but I suspect our revitalized running game has helped us win the time of possession battle, which makes our defense better, which gives our offense more drives, which ... oh, just give us the damn trophy!

Click to expand...

We won the TOP by almost 3 minutes during the season, but when it really counted in the playoff game we lost it by almost 10 minutes.

What do you think is more likely to lead you to a more accurate conclusion, using a sample size of 1 or using a sample size of 16?

When you consider we are sampling two different things: regular season and playoffs, then each has its own conclusion.

Also, most of the positive stats are skewed by wins against non-playoff teams.

Of course. It stands to reason that teams are generally going to put up better stats against bad teams then against good teams. For instance, I wonder if the Patriots offensive stats are skewed by playing the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins six times a year? Why would it be a bad thing if they were? Aren't good teams supposed to put up better numbers against bad teams?

Poor analogy, the Patriots have a coaching staff that can adapt to almost any situation it seems.

https://www.seahawks.com/team/stats/

https://www.espn.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=401038953

Click to expand...

AgentDib · Jun 14, 2019

DomeHawk":bbxxt0dz said:
We won the TOP by almost 3 minutes during the season, but when it really counted in the playoff game we lost it by almost 10 minutes.

We know a road playoff game is a tougher task than the average regular season game, and we know that our team was better without Baldwin, Fluker and Sweezy hurt. Do you think either of those could affect TOP?

Chapow · Jun 14, 2019

DomeHawk":3mar8nxn said:
Chapow":3mar8nxn said:

DomeHawk":3mar8nxn said:

Own The West":3mar8nxn said:

Too lazy to look it up, but I suspect our revitalized running game has helped us win the time of possession battle, which makes our defense better, which gives our offense more drives, which ... oh, just give us the damn trophy!

Click to expand...

We won the TOP by almost 3 minutes during the season, but when it really counted in the playoff game we lost it by almost 10 minutes.

What do you think is more likely to lead you to a more accurate conclusion, using a sample size of 1 or using a sample size of 16?

When you consider we are sampling two different things: regular season and playoffs, then each has its own conclusion.

Also, most of the positive stats are skewed by wins against non-playoff teams.

Of course. It stands to reason that teams are generally going to put up better stats against bad teams then against good teams. For instance, I wonder if the Patriots offensive stats are skewed by playing the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins six times a year? Why would it be a bad thing if they were? Aren't good teams supposed to put up better numbers against bad teams?

Poor analogy, the Patriots have a coaching staff that can adapt to almost any situation it seems.

https://www.seahawks.com/team/stats/

https://www.espn.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=401038953

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

No. They are not two different things. It's the same players, the same coaches, and the same offense doing the same thing. Playing a football game.

My second comment wasn't an analogy and you appear to have missed the point completely or chosen to disregard it so I'm just going to move on.

scutterhawk · Jun 14, 2019

DomeHawk":i650vjog said:
JayhawkMike":i650vjog said:

A stubborn headed refusal to adjust the game plan when the running game isn't working was a hallmark of his father at both San Diego and Kansas City. It resulted in early outs in the playoffs and zero super bowl appearances.

His son isn't any different and I am worried we will get the same results. Nothing from last year changed my mind.

Click to expand...

Yep, and that doesn't mean you have to have a "pass-happy" offense, it just means that you have to have an imaginative modern offense that isn't too predictable.

Some Lincoln Riley influence maybe?
It's not like injuries to key Offensive players (Baldwin / Dissley) didn't have a negative impact on plays that were available to his formulating game plans, Wilson, Lockett, & Carson kept the Seahawks in the mix.

TreeRon · Jun 14, 2019

JayhawkMike":ojz0pc3i said:
A stubborn headed refusal to adjust the game plan when the running game isn't working was a hallmark of his father at both San Diego and Kansas City. It resulted in early outs in the playoffs and zero super bowl appearances.

His son isn't any different and I am worried we will get the same results. Nothing from last year changed my mind.

Yea, every son is just like or mostly like his father right ?

I know I am nothing like my father other than being an "A" personality and I bet most of us are quite different than our fathers.
BTW, my 4 sons are different from each other and none are like me nor my father.

knownone · Jun 14, 2019

Fieldgull's is one of the major voices behind undervaluing Schotty. Now they are playing both sides of the issue they've been fueling. I know polarization leads to discussion which leads to more views, but anyone whose been pragmatic about the situation realizes that Schotty isn't the dumpster fire he's been portrayed as.

xray · Jun 14, 2019

He's got a sophomore year coming up just like several players. let's see how it goes. Players and coaches can't really hide . They are right out there in front of the world every week. Coaches are as important as a franchise QB. IMO

getnasty · Jun 14, 2019

I give most of the credit to Solari but i will say Schotty was better then i thought. Still not good but better then i thought.

Sports Hernia · Jun 15, 2019

My gripe about Schottenheimer is he is too slow in making adjustments. The *allas playoff game was a glaring example.
.....but is he following Pete’s orders on this? Or maybe they are both at fault on this,
I don’t know.

I will say I like him better than the previous guy, but that’s a pretty low bar to step over IMHO.

Jville · Jun 15, 2019

MontanaHawk05":3syxk92k said:
https://www.fieldgulls.com/2019/6/14/18 ... son-scheme

This was the second-highest scoring offense in the history of the franchise. It was not the gross failure most view it as.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/btrossler/status/1082673743527362561[/tweet]

Click to expand...

It's not a one-sided praise-piece - Matty has some criticisms of Schotty. But this strikes me as a credible piece given Matty's earlier predisposition against our OC after the season. He was a lot more down on the guy at first, then went back and looked at the tape and data, and revised his opinions accordingly. Not many people can do that.

I particularly liked his subtle point that any discussion of running effectiveness needs to include personnel. Most teams don't perform as well when going run-first, true, but then again, most teams aren't built like the Seahawks, with a backfield like ours, an offensive line selected and trained to run-block first, and more variety in our run schemes than Cable ever came up with. Another spurious variable that the pass-first peanut gallery has never really given its due weight.

And his point about recency bias (i.e. the tendency to judge something based on its most recent performance, rather than its overall performance). Seattle was great running all year.

Enjoyed the linked article and your accompanying perspective. :2thumbs: It's so easy to get hung up on a singular game or play or stat and miss out on the entirety of it all. I've come to appreciate the growth of Matty Brown's work. The links to his previous articles provide an open book on his work. Work that seems to be improving over time. Fieldgulls is fortunate to have found such a developing talent.

Thanks for posting!

The massively underappreciated Brian Schottenheimer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

DomeHawk

Guest

DomeHawk

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

DomeHawk

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads