Are Brock Purdy’s day in SF numbered?

[Torc]

5-1
114-169 67.5%
1540 YRDS
12 TD- 3 INT

Translated against a 17 Game season he would have 4363 yards 34 TD and 8 INT ad a 14-3 record. You know what I don't think the hawks or the 12th man at Lumen scare Brock Purdy!

He's played only two of those games against the new coaching staff...and the previous staff was fired for a reason. In the first one, he played very well - 18/28, 255 yards, 3TDs. Nothing to sneeze at, clearly. Then again, the Seahawks were continuing a losing streak where they gave up 42 and 29 points (to the Giants!!).

The second game, after the coaching staff had made personnel and scheme adjustments, his second game was:
21/28, 159 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT.

Given the small sample size, it's hard to say which of those is more indicative of how the teams stack up against each other. Given that the Seahawks made some concrete changes to which players were on the field (cutting/trading two starters) and adding a player who made a huge difference in the D (Ernest Jones IV) between the two games, I'm pretty confident the second game is a better example.

Besides, I don't think Brock Purdy or the basement dwelling 6-11 Whiners scare the Seahawks either.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Yawn

 

[94Smith]

Given the small sample size, it's hard to say which of those is more indicative of how the teams stack up against each other. Given that the Seahawks made some concrete changes to which players were on the field (cutting/trading two starters) and adding a player who made a huge difference in the D (Ernest Jones IV) between the two games, I'm pretty confident the second game is a better example.

I'm pretty sure the second game is not a better example because Kittle was not playing. It was a lower scoring affair because they had some key penalties in the red zone. Purdy also had 40 yards rushing and 1 TD. They were still 7/11 on 3rd downs. It's not like they suddenly figured him out. His ESPN QBR for that game was 81.1 where 50 is average. (takes in the other metrics)

 

[Torc]

Seriously? I'm pretty sure the first game is a poor example, because the whiners won, and they only did that 5 other times last year. The Seahawks had a bad year. Rookie head coach, rookie staff, and an offensive coordinator that wasn't ready to call plays in the NFL. The defense took half the year to gel, the first half they were near the bottom ranked D. The offense wasn't good all year long. The Seahawks still ended up being a tiebreaker away from winning the division.

Meanwhile, the whiners went 6-11, were the bottom dwellers of the NFC West. Sorry, dude. No one is afraid of them at this point. You can't ride on previous years.

 

[94Smith]

Seriously? I'm pretty sure the first game is a poor example, because the whiners won, and they only did that 5 other times last year. The Seahawks had a bad year. Rookie head coach, rookie staff, and an offensive coordinator that wasn't ready to call plays in the NFL. The defense took half the year to gel, the first half they were near the bottom ranked D. The offense wasn't good all year long. The Seahawks still ended up being a tiebreaker away from winning the division.

Meanwhile, the whiners went 6-11, were the bottom dwellers of the NFC West. Sorry, dude. No one is afraid of them at this point. You can't ride on previous years.

So how long do you think the completely remodelled seahawk offense will take to gel? Heck you have absolutely no idea with a new OC , new wr , new qb , revamped o line