The Only Way I See the Skins Winning is.............

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • RolandDeschain wrote:Rdskns4eva, you do realize that Vegas lines have nothing to do with who they think is going to win, right? Those lines, and how they adjust and where they adjust to, are all about keeping betting action going on both sides so Vegas basically can't lose.



    You mean they aren't just there to be helpful ego-boosters for fans???? GET OUT.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2877
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • LuvMySkins wrote:It's funny how worried about the blitz you guys are and i'm sure it's all in your coaches heads as well. We went total opposite of the first gameplan we threw at Romo where we didnt Blitz at all. This is why it worked so well since they didnt expect it.

    Shanny is big on putting things on film to make teams prepare for it and I wouldnt be surprised if we showed a lot of blitzes and bailed pre-snap. We've also done this a lot.


    Shanny? That's so cute.

    The reason the Skins have to blitz so much is because their defense was mediocre to begin with (#26 in total defense), add in key injuries and voila you have no choice but to blitz to get any sort or pressure.

    Like I said, the ONLY way I see you guys winning is to continue this trend in hopes that the Hawks protection breaks down. If you back off then RW is going to carve you to pieces with accuracy, the read and copious amounts of Beast Mode.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3781
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Offensively, I'm concerned about how we cover/scheme for Fletcher. That dude has got to be targeted in the blocking schemes. If we can get past him, the RB's will have a good day. If we get the running game going early, then that will give us better opportunities in the air. Pass rush is not any more of a concern than normal. Russ will have his chances.

    Defensively, I agree with others who lean toward linebacker play. Our guys play very well collectively, are fast, and have good hands. If the LB's play well, the defense plays well. KJ has got to play big.
    Image
    "...Seattle has become the capital city of the New NFL" - Kip Earlywine
    :les: Remembering "The Radish"...
    User avatar
    HoustonHawk82
    * NET Mechanic *
     
    Posts: 7061
    Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 11:51 am
    Location: Beneath, Between & Behind


  • The Option Read can exploit the blitz - Russell can roll out with Lynch downfield ahead of him and just throw it over the blitzer's heads. We did this against SL and eked out a win. And like somebody said, the Skins don't blitz as good. Bring the corner blitz, man - we got the Read - let's see who wins.
    SEAHAWKS HEADED FOR BLOODBATH
    http://cover32.com/seahawks/2014/11/19/ ... bloodbath/
    Follow me on Twitter:
    @George_OGorman
    User avatar
    Lords of Scythia
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1421
    Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:32 am


  • RolandDeschain wrote:Rdskns4eva, you do realize that Vegas lines have nothing to do with who they think is going to win, right? Those lines, and how they adjust and where they adjust to, are all about keeping betting action going on both sides so Vegas basically can't lose.


    Yea, I know. The article just says that in games that the home team as the underdog in the Playoffs, the home team usually wins. Not all the time, but about 66% of the time (20 wins, 10 losses). Data goes back to 1980.
    rdskns4eva
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 145
    Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:25 am



  • HoustonHawk82 wrote:Offensively, I'm concerned about how we cover/scheme for Fletcher. That dude has got to be targeted in the blocking schemes. If we can get past him, the RB's will have a good day. If we get the running game going early, then that will give us better opportunities in the air. Pass rush is not any more of a concern than normal. Russ will have his chances.

    Defensively, I agree with others who lean toward linebacker play. Our guys play very well collectively, are fast, and have good hands. If the LB's play well, the defense plays well. KJ has got to play big.


    fletcher is like 40 years old isn't he? romo made him look like LT..... i guess he still has game, but does not worry me to the point we have to scheme for him like you would Aldon Smith, or Vaughn Miller , Matthews someone like that.. could be wrong.
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4058
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:If our coaching staff, Wilson and our O-Line don't effectively protect against the blitz.

    Shanahan and his staff knows that he's outmatched personnel wise, so he's going to do what they did in the Dallas game, blitz the hell out of Wilson to force mistakes and long down and distances. We saw the Rams do it last game, which resulted in six first half sacks and WAY TOO MANY 2nd/3rd and longs.

    This game should be a bout quick hits, rollouts, draws, screens and big passing plays down field. If if takes Sweezy and the rest of the O-Line well into the 2nd half like the Rams game to get their protection issues figured out, it could be a long day for our offense.


    This game won't be lost because our offense wasn't good enough. This game will be lost because our defense couldn't hold RGIII and his WR's in the 4th quarter for a game-winning FG/TD. Our defense has not yet proven to anyone that they can stop an opposing offense on the road in the 4th quarter when the game is on the line.
    kmedic
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1344
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:36 am
    Location: Los Angeles, CA


  • Numbers also show that teams with either a top-3 offense or a top-3 defense are considerably more likely to win the Super Bowl than teams without either one of those. Seahawks are 4th on offense and defense, and 3rd in special teams. Redskins aren't top-5 in any of those. The most telling stat, IMO, is that in the history of the Super Bowl, only 2 bottom-half offenses have ever won it, and only 3 bottom-half defenses have. You guys have a bottom-half defense, making it very unlikely you can win the Super Bowl. The few teams that had both a top-5 offense and defense have won most of the Super Bowls they've made it to, but teams that rank that highly on both sides of the ball are just plain rare. Things are looking very good in Seahawks land, and most signs point to the Seahawks winning. Not that we can't lose; we certainly can. It's just not likely.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26660
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • RolandDeschain wrote:Numbers also show that teams with either a top-3 offense or a top-3 defense are considerably more likely to win the Super Bowl than teams without either one of those. Seahawks are 4th on offense and defense, and 3rd in special teams. Redskins aren't top-5 in any of those. The most telling stat, IMO, is that in the history of the Super Bowl, only 2 bottom-half offenses have ever won it, and only 3 bottom-half defenses have. You guys have a bottom-half defense, making it very unlikely you can win the Super Bowl. The few teams that had both a top-5 offense and defense have won most of the Super Bowls they've made it to, but teams that rank that highly on both sides of the ball are just plain rare. Things are looking very good in Seahawks land, and most signs point to the Seahawks winning. Not that we can't lose; we certainly can. It's just not likely.


    This post has given me more hope than all that I've read today.

    Whether you are a fan of statistics or not, they do not lie. I agree that so many of the planets are indeed in alignment here. This team, at this time, and with what has been accomplished and measured to date... it just feels right.
    Image
    "...Seattle has become the capital city of the New NFL" - Kip Earlywine
    :les: Remembering "The Radish"...
    User avatar
    HoustonHawk82
    * NET Mechanic *
     
    Posts: 7061
    Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 11:51 am
    Location: Beneath, Between & Behind


  • hawker84 wrote:fletcher is like 40 years old isn't he? romo made him look like LT..... i guess he still has game, but does not worry me to the point we have to scheme for him like you would Aldon Smith, or Vaughn Miller , Matthews someone like that.. could be wrong.

    That "40 years old" player just won NFC Defensive Player of the Month. Fletcher has been balling his tail off the last 4-5 games and is one of the best MLBs in the game. Don't sleep.
    LuvMySkins
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 31
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:46 pm


  • RolandDeschain wrote:Numbers also show that teams with either a top-3 offense or a top-3 defense are considerably more likely to win the Super Bowl than teams without either one of those. Seahawks are 4th on offense and defense, and 3rd in special teams. Redskins aren't top-5 in any of those. The most telling stat, IMO, is that in the history of the Super Bowl, only 2 bottom-half offenses have ever won it, and only 3 bottom-half defenses have. You guys have a bottom-half defense, making it very unlikely you can win the Super Bowl. The few teams that had both a top-5 offense and defense have won most of the Super Bowls they've made it to, but teams that rank that highly on both sides of the ball are just plain rare. Things are looking very good in Seahawks land, and most signs point to the Seahawks winning. Not that we can't lose; we certainly can. It's just not likely.



    We have a top 5 offense.


    Wait, are you talking yards, points or Pro Football focus stats? Just want to be certain because on this board cause it seems like Pro Football focus are the only stats people look at on here.
    rdskns4eva
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 145
    Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:25 am



  • rdskns4eva wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:Rdskns4eva, you do realize that Vegas lines have nothing to do with who they think is going to win, right? Those lines, and how they adjust and where they adjust to, are all about keeping betting action going on both sides so Vegas basically can't lose.


    Yea, I know. The article just says that in games that the home team as the underdog in the Playoffs, the home team usually wins. Not all the time, but about 66% of the time (20 wins, 10 losses). Data goes back to 1980.


    I found the data interesting. Thanks
    User avatar
    birdman5
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 110
    Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:31 am


  • Hawknballs wrote:http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2012/final-2012-dvoa-ratings

    he's talking DVOA, which may not be the universal measurement but it's probably better than just looking at 'yards'.



    Ok, just wanted to be sure, DVOA is fine, and I've aleady admitted that the Hawks have a better offense, but that does not mean that I dont think we are a top 5 offense. We are. We are number 4 in points and 5 in yards going by raw stats. Thats damn good.
    rdskns4eva
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 145
    Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:25 am


  • rdskns4eva wrote:
    Hawknballs wrote:http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2012/final-2012-dvoa-ratings

    he's talking DVOA, which may not be the universal measurement but it's probably better than just looking at 'yards'.



    Ok, just wanted to be sure, DVOA is fine, and I've aleady admitted that the Hawks have a better offense, but that does not mean that I dont think we are a top 5 offense. We are. We are number 4 in points and 5 in yards going by raw stats. Thats damn good.



    Should be a good matchup then vs. the Seahawks defense, #4 in yards allowed and #1 in points allowed.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2877
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • If there's any player I'm not worried about being eaten by a blitz it's Russell Wilson. You're going to see a lot of McCoy/Miller in this game and it's going to make skinz fans cry.

    The only reason this game is close is because I expect the crowd to show up and keep RGIII motivated. All the Shanny's in the world couldn't win this game for the 'Skinz.
    I enjoy ruining threads by making them about personal attacks and then commenting about how personal attacks make the other person's argument invalid.

    :les:
    User avatar
    SonicHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8357
    Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm


  • LuvMySkins wrote:
    hawker84 wrote:fletcher is like 40 years old isn't he? romo made him look like LT..... i guess he still has game, but does not worry me to the point we have to scheme for him like you would Aldon Smith, or Vaughn Miller , Matthews someone like that.. could be wrong.

    That "40 years old" player just won NFC Defensive Player of the Month. Fletcher has been balling his tail off the last 4-5 games and is one of the best MLBs in the game. Don't sleep.


    sorry dude that's great and all, but RW made Aldon smith and Patrick Willis and Bowman , three of the best LB's in the game look like chumps repeatedly... not worried about old ass London Fletcher.
    Last edited by hawker84 on Thu Jan 03, 2013 1:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4058
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


  • The interesting thing to me is we've been crucifying and vilifying our defense all year for not getting pressure with the sacks. It's been a weakness, and one of the more hand-wringing debate topics around these parts for most of the year. We finished with several more sacks on the season than the Redskins, and yet their fans seem to shrug it off thinking they'll still get to Wilson just fine. Sometimes I wish we had that optimism.
    World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
    Les Norton - gone but never forgotten. Rest in blue and green peace, my friend.
    User avatar
    Seahawk Sailor
    * .NET Navy Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 18919
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
    Location: The beautiful PNW


  • To me the key is our pass rush on the road, it has been non-existent most of the year. If we give RG3 all day, it could be a long day. Gotta' get pressure on him.
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3090
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Seahawk Sailor wrote:The interesting thing to me is we've been crucifying and vilifying our defense all year for not getting pressure with the sacks. It's been a weakness, and one of the more hand-wringing debate topics around these parts for most of the year. We finished with several more sacks on the season than the Redskins, and yet their fans seem to shrug it off thinking they'll still get to Wilson just fine. Sometimes I wish we had that optimism.


    I think there's a difference between sacks and pressure.

    Yes Clemons and Irvin have had good years with sacks, but IMO there's still a problem with getting consistent pressure on the QB, especially from the interior. Bradford is a perfect example last week..........WAY too much time in the pocket.

    With the Hawks it seems to be feast or famine in regards to the D-Line. I'll still put our line up against 75% of the league, but I'd still like to see more consistent pressure from the front 4.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3781
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • kmedic wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:If our coaching staff, Wilson and our O-Line don't effectively protect against the blitz.

    Shanahan and his staff knows that he's outmatched personnel wise, so he's going to do what they did in the Dallas game, blitz the hell out of Wilson to force mistakes and long down and distances. We saw the Rams do it last game, which resulted in six first half sacks and WAY TOO MANY 2nd/3rd and longs.

    This game should be a bout quick hits, rollouts, draws, screens and big passing plays down field. If if takes Sweezy and the rest of the O-Line well into the 2nd half like the Rams game to get their protection issues figured out, it could be a long day for our offense.


    This game won't be lost because our offense wasn't good enough. This game will be lost because our defense couldn't hold RGIII and his WR's in the 4th quarter for a game-winning FG/TD. Our defense has not yet proven to anyone that they can stop an opposing offense on the road in the 4th quarter when the game is on the line.


    That's not true. They did it twice against Carolina- First in stopping Newton inside the 2 yard line and then Irvin's strip-sack of Newton to end the game.
    jlwaters1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2433
    Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:48 pm


  • Seahawk Sailor wrote:The interesting thing to me is we've been crucifying and vilifying our defense all year for not getting pressure with the sacks. It's been a weakness, and one of the more hand-wringing debate topics around these parts for most of the year. We finished with several more sacks on the season than the Redskins, and yet their fans seem to shrug it off thinking they'll still get to Wilson just fine. Sometimes I wish we had that optimism.


    While I don't think we'll sack RGIII I think we'll be able to contain him. We're fast, just not good enough to shed the pass block. Unfortunately RGIII is a solid pocket passer. Unfortunately for him, we eat pocket passers for lunch.

    Sherman bait time!
    I enjoy ruining threads by making them about personal attacks and then commenting about how personal attacks make the other person's argument invalid.

    :les:
    User avatar
    SonicHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8357
    Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm


  • Point out where Skins fans are saying they'll get to Wilson just fine please? I think most of us are well aware of our defensive problems. Especially with pressuring the QB. The Cowboys game surprised all of us with both the amount of blitzing we did and the effectiveness of it.
    LuvMySkins
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 31
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:46 pm


  • I think the folks that have mentioned that a lack of pass rush will hurt the Seahawks chances are right on the money. That played a big role in our last two losses against Miami and Detroit. Our struggling to block Soliai and Wake when we wanted to run the ball also killed us against the Phins.

    Not to mention getting gashed in the run game ourselves against the Phins, and the first San Fran game.

    As usual, the team that wins the line of scrimmage battle will win the game.
    camdawg
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 111
    Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:22 pm


  • rdskns4eva wrote:We have a top 5 offense.


    Wait, are you talking yards, points or Pro Football focus stats? Just want to be certain because on this board cause it seems like Pro Football focus are the only stats people look at on here.


    Uh, we don't really look at Pro Football Focus around here. We primarily use Football Outsiders, and they have your offense ranked 6th. They're also by FAR the best stats website out there. If you disagree or aren't sure, read the basics of how they calculate their statistics: http://footballoutsiders.com/info/methods They factor in how good your opponents are. Quick example; QB1 and QB2 have identical stats across the board for a particular game, but QB1 took 3 sacks, and QB2 took 2 sacks. If the opponent QB2 faced has a far weaker pass rush than QB1's opponent, QB1 has a better ranking despite worse stats because they factor in how good the opponent is. There's a lot more to it than that, which you can read the basics of on the link I just posted, and I recommend that you do so. Stats can and do lie, but Football Outsiders has by far the most "truthful" stats, you might say. DVOA = win.

    Yards are almost irrelevant. Look at the Lions, 6,540 total offense yards, good for 3rd in the league; yet they finished 4-12. The Redskins finished the season ranked 4th in points per game, but Football Outsiders penalizes you some for it because of the strength (or lack thereof, in your case) of your opponents.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26660
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • jlwaters1 wrote:
    kmedic wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:If our coaching staff, Wilson and our O-Line don't effectively protect against the blitz.

    Shanahan and his staff knows that he's outmatched personnel wise, so he's going to do what they did in the Dallas game, blitz the hell out of Wilson to force mistakes and long down and distances. We saw the Rams do it last game, which resulted in six first half sacks and WAY TOO MANY 2nd/3rd and longs.

    This game should be a bout quick hits, rollouts, draws, screens and big passing plays down field. If if takes Sweezy and the rest of the O-Line well into the 2nd half like the Rams game to get their protection issues figured out, it could be a long day for our offense.


    This game won't be lost because our offense wasn't good enough. This game will be lost because our defense couldn't hold RGIII and his WR's in the 4th quarter for a game-winning FG/TD. Our defense has not yet proven to anyone that they can stop an opposing offense on the road in the 4th quarter when the game is on the line.


    That's not true. They did it twice against Carolina- First in stopping Newton inside the 2 yard line and then Irvin's strip-sack of Newton to end the game.


    Firstly, since that game, they've lost to Detroit and Miami both in the 4th quarter after the defense couldn't hold the lead. They also would have lost the game in Chicago if it hadn't been for the heroics of RW.

    Secondly, that game against Carolina we got extremely lucky. Remember they drove down the field and had 1st and goal to put the game away. There was a wide open TE in the end zone and thanks to Newton's horrible throw we got off the hook....barely.

    I haven't seen our defense make a "play" late in the 4th quarter in those situations to ice the game. Every single time on the road in a close game the opposing team has driven down the field and either won it or tied (or in the case of Carolina choked).

    I'm not saying that we're gonna lose this week's game, but if we do, I would bet money this is the way it will occur.
    kmedic
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1344
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:36 am
    Location: Los Angeles, CA


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    rdskns4eva wrote:We have a top 5 offense.


    Wait, are you talking yards, points or Pro Football focus stats? Just want to be certain because on this board cause it seems like Pro Football focus are the only stats people look at on here.


    Uh, we don't really look at Pro Football Focus around here. We primarily use Football Outsiders, and they have your offense ranked 6th. They're also by FAR the best stats website out there. If you disagree or aren't sure, read the basics of how they calculate their statistics: http://footballoutsiders.com/info/methods They factor in how good your opponents are. Quick example; QB1 and QB2 have identical stats across the board for a particular game, but QB1 took 3 sacks, and QB2 took 2 sacks. If the opponent QB2 faced has a far weaker pass rush than QB1's opponent, QB1 has a better ranking despite worse stats because they factor in how good the opponent is. There's a lot more to it than that, which you can read the basics of on the link I just posted, and I recommend that you do so. Stats can and do lie, but Football Outsiders has by far the most "truthful" stats, you might say. DVOA = win.

    Yards are almost irrelevant. Look at the Lions, 6,540 total offense yards, good for 3rd in the league; yet they finished 4-12. The Redskins finished the season ranked 4th in points per game, but Football Outsiders penalizes you some for it because of the strength (or lack thereof, in your case) of your opponents.


    Sorry, I meant to say Pro Football Outsiders.

    I dont think yards are irrelevant to a certain degree...passing yards can be, but not rushing yards. I dont think anyone is saying that Petersons yards are irrelevant. It depends on the context. I said in another post that passing yards are the most overrated stat in football today because everyone throws for 4000+ yards a year now.

    Also, while I do like the stats breakdown on PFO, if you are ranked in the top 5 in points and yards and are top 5 in the NFL in turnover ratio (the most important stat of them all), you're doing something right.
    rdskns4eva
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 145
    Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:25 am


  • You guys have a very good offense, I'm not saying otherwise; but it's not top 5 by the best metric out there, is all. Though, very close to it. :)
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26660
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA




It is currently Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:30 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online