......as we are getting TD's (the critical stat,......IMO), while NOT piling-up a huge number of "pointless" yardage totals.

All I'm sayin' is,............

....we have the one of the most EFFICIENT Offenses in the league.

Just saying.

Paschtorian wrote:......as we are getting TD's (the critical stat,......IMO), while NOT piling-up a huge number of "pointless" yardage totals.

All I'm sayin' is,............

....we have the one of the most EFFICIENT Offenses in the league.

Just saying.

Atta boy. Stats are fine for people that can't live without them. But normally in the real world the only stats that count are wins/losses.

Agreed.

Wins are ALL that matters.

I just love the "forward progress" the Seahawks' Offense is showing this season (helmed by a rookie QB).

And as far as the Defense is concerned,....

....fugedaboudit!

Well of course stats without context (in the efficiency argument, total possessions) are useless. Making it like any other kind of analysis. If you tend to look at just yardage to determine the quality of an offense, the stats are not the problem. YOU are, because you're grabbing one slice of data and trying to support an argument about something far more complex.

BTW, more advanced stats out there take into account opportunity, defense, situation, etc. Those rate the Seahawks offense quite highly.

we have more DVOAs than anyone!!!

Easy 'Homie,.........

.......just trying to do the positive "spin".

Of course there are more complex equations (than my intuition) that deal with stats out there.

I wad told there would be no MATH.

Forgive me.

"Efficient" seems a euphemism for "minimalist" these days. I've been a defender of Carroll for a while now, but the "just enough to win" offense is driving me crazy, I'm not gonna lie.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:"Efficient" seems a euphemism for "minimalist" these days. I've been a defender of Carroll for a while now, but the "just enough to win" offense is driving me crazy, I'm not gonna lie.

Just enough to win is good enough for me, especially on the road against Chicago. Only the Texans have managed to do that this season, and the score was close there as well.

hawksfan515 wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:"Efficient" seems a euphemism for "minimalist" these days. I've been a defender of Carroll for a while now, but the "just enough to win" offense is driving me crazy, I'm not gonna lie.

Just enough to win is good enough for me, especially on the road against Chicago. Only the Texans have managed to do that this season, and the score was close there as well.

The problem has been the Seahawks haven't done just enough to win and have left road wins on the table by being too conservative on offense and not scoring enough points. Instead of "Russell, don't lose the game for us" if Pete and Darrell had opened it up a bit earlier with "Russell, score early and often" and let the rook sling it, I believe we'd be at least +2 wins of where we are now. (Detroit, Miami and the Lambs road losses, we'd get 2 of the 3). Wilson is a Brees/Fouts/Moon gunslinger and we need to let the kid do his thing. Instead of taking advantage of the opponents weakness, we tried to pound it (and got our shorts handed to us by Miami) and then Wilson had to pass in extra-pressure situations. I think if we'd come into a couple of those games with a pass-first game plan, we'd have scored 2 more TDs, been playing from more ahead, and created situations our D would have feasted on for turnovers.

I'd say more than anything that it indicates we have a tendency to fail early in our drives, or go all the way.