Bump: Why Seahawks made right call with OC pick

pittpnthrs

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
6,188
Reaction score
3,008
Not what I'm saying AT ALL. What I am saying it just because your "eye test" tells you something like "Geno's play is bad he's throwing picks!" and then I hear people like Huard or Schlereth say it's a combination of poor play call, poor blocking execution and poor route running, I'm way more likely to believe it's more nuanced as Schlereth and Huard suggest and not as simple as you did.

Understood, but I believe there's something more to it than that too. This isn't about Geno, but i'll use him as an example. I watched a game earlier this season where Geno just threw a pass up in the air for DK and it was almost picked. 50/50 balls happen, I get that, but the very next play i'm watching it develop and i'm saying to myself "he's going to do the exact same thing again and it's not there" and he did. This time the pass was picked. Now we can sit here and think if it's the play call, or if DK didn't fight hard enough, or the defensive look, etc,,,,. In my mind, i'm asking myself why he threw that pass when even I could see there was nothing there.

Another example for instance is say Daniel Jones. I watched him for years and my opinion was that he's a mediocre to bad QB. I don't need to hear how he could be this or that if he had this, this, and this. I've seen enough of him to form the opinion that he was never going to be great regardless of what he had. Turns out the league (coaches, pundits, what have you) finally realized that too. Thats the 'eye test' i'm talking about.
 

Rat

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
10,676
Reaction score
5,359
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
For those wondering where the 'idea' Geno plays better in situations where a team needs to come from behind, it comes from Geno playing much, much better in those situations.

2022-2024 (Min. 20 Games, 50 plays)

Team is Trailing, with 4 minutes or less in the 4th Quarter

Passing Touchdowns:

Geno - 11 (1st)
Carr - 5 (Tied - 6th)

Total Touchdowns:
Geno - 12 (1st)
Carr - 5 (Tied - 9th)

Passer Rating:
Geno - 103.2 (3rd)
Carr - 61.5 (26th)

ANY/A:
Geno - 8.20 (4th)
Carr - 4.68 (24th)

Completion Percentage:
Geno - 63.7 (5th)
Carr - 44.6 (32nd... out of 32)


Geno has literally been one of the absolute best QBs in the entire league in these situations and Derek Carr has been mediocre at best. Carr, overall, is a decent QB, same tier as Geno generally speaking (IMO)... but it's not particularly close in come from behind situations.


So, again, to whatever degree Kubiak's system failed to 'come from behind' because of the level of QB play, we are going to be much better off with Geno than Carr, hands down. To whatever degree that's because Kubiak's offense just isn't designed well for it? Well, this will be dude's 3rd-ish season as an OC, there's always the chance he adapts further.
How many actual games were they in those situations? And what were their records? There's no mention of how much these teams are trailing by on average. Not every trailing situation requires the same strategy and urgency. Why was four minutes chosen? Are teams down two scores with five minutes to go like, "eh we got plenty of time"?

Saying "minimum 20 games" and then using a bunch of volume stats makes it seem like there's an agenda.
 
Last edited:

DarkVictory23

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
1,933
Reaction score
2,840
There's a good chance Geno may not be with the Hawks next season, so, how much better could Kubiak's magic tansform Howell or that drafted QBOTF?
Well, if we're being completely serious about this, Kubiak did work with Purdy in San Francisco and adjusted his offense (a lot) when he lost Derek Carr in New Orleans this year.

Spencer Rattler was still pretty much cheeks, but he was trying to adapt his gameplan to the guy he had out there, not who he didn't have out there. Now, coming into the game in the 3rd quarter is not the same as having your backup QB(s) starting for 7 games, but I'm 99% certain that Kubiak would not have had Howell throwing for like 6 straight plays or whatever it was when he came in off the bench for Geno.


One thing, though, that I think is most interesting (and to me, promising) about Kubiak is he has a rushing identity, which is something we have lacked for 3 seasons (at least) now but was really missing last year. Kubiak likes wide zone rushing. He likes it between the 20s, he likes it in the red zone, he likes it to open a series, he likes it when he's ahead of the sticks, he likes it when he's behind the sticks... (he likes it on train, he likes it on a plane...)

What was our rushing philosophy last year? No idea. We had some games where we ran Duos quite a bit, we had some games where we ran Counter quite a bit, but we had no consistent identity that we could build off of.

I think the way Kubiak calls his running game could benefit both Walker and Charbonnet (I think we're going to have much more of a 1-2 punch situation going forward, less of a starter/backup thing), but who I think it will really help is our offensive line. Because they will have a base blocking philosophy that:
1) They're going to get a ton of practice and reps in. That consistency in scheme is going to improve how well they work together and O-line communication, which has been a problem and
2) We can start to build our offense off of this base running scheme. Our play action game is going to be built off of that wide zone running scheme, our screen passing game is going to be built off of that. We'll have a similar look when we line up, but we'll have a variety of plays we will be doing off of that look. Because of that, defenses will have to respect a variety of scenarios in our base formation rather than being able to tee off on the O-Line for the pass rush.

Is Kubiak a 'home run' hire? I don't know, probably not. But everyone has lamented the lack of an identity for our offense for a while now. Kubiak is going to bring one with him.
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
12,584
Reaction score
8,372
Location
SoCal Desert
Well, if we're being completely serious about this, Kubiak did work with Purdy in San Francisco and adjusted his offense (a lot) when he lost Derek Carr in New Orleans this year.

Spencer Rattler was still pretty much cheeks, but he was trying to adapt his gameplan to the guy he had out there, not who he didn't have out there. Now, coming into the game in the 3rd quarter is not the same as having your backup QB(s) starting for 7 games, but I'm 99% certain that Kubiak would not have had Howell throwing for like 6 straight plays or whatever it was when he came in off the bench for Geno.


One thing, though, that I think is most interesting (and to me, promising) about Kubiak is he has a rushing identity, which is something we have lacked for 3 seasons (at least) now but was really missing last year. Kubiak likes wide zone rushing. He likes it between the 20s, he likes it in the red zone, he likes it to open a series, he likes it when he's ahead of the sticks, he likes it when he's behind the sticks... (he likes it on train, he likes it on a plane...)

What was our rushing philosophy last year? No idea. We had some games where we ran Duos quite a bit, we had some games where we ran Counter quite a bit, but we had no consistent identity that we could build off of.

I think the way Kubiak calls his running game could benefit both Walker and Charbonnet (I think we're going to have much more of a 1-2 punch situation going forward, less of a starter/backup thing), but who I think it will really help is our offensive line. Because they will have a base blocking philosophy that:
1) They're going to get a ton of practice and reps in. That consistency in scheme is going to improve how well they work together and O-line communication, which has been a problem and
2) We can start to build our offense off of this base running scheme. Our play action game is going to be built off of that wide zone running scheme, our screen passing game is going to be built off of that. We'll have a similar look when we line up, but we'll have a variety of plays we will be doing off of that look. Because of that, defenses will have to respect a variety of scenarios in our base formation rather than being able to tee off on the O-Line for the pass rush.

Is Kubiak a 'home run' hire? I don't know, probably not. But everyone has lamented the lack of an identity for our offense for a while now. Kubiak is going to bring one with him.
Bevell felt like a homerun hire in 2013 until he was not after the meltdown.

I am of the opinion that anything that involves creativities has a limited span. A great writer may produce a series of good books within a time span, then the creativities run dry. The same might apply to OCs that design stuff, they may run out of ideas at some point.

Fresh young minds are valuable, and we focused on hiring one of them.
 

SeaWolv

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
1,721
Reaction score
1,060
Understood, but I believe there's something more to it than that too. This isn't about Geno, but i'll use him as an example. I watched a game earlier this season where Geno just threw a pass up in the air for DK and it was almost picked. 50/50 balls happen, I get that, but the very next play i'm watching it develop and i'm saying to myself "he's going to do the exact same thing again and it's not there" and he did. This time the pass was picked. Now we can sit here and think if it's the play call, or if DK didn't fight hard enough, or the defensive look, etc,,,,. In my mind, i'm asking myself why he threw that pass when even I could see there was nothing there.
Geno is obviously not perfect and he's going to try and hero ball a throw like that from time to time. We also need to realize that plays like that can happen because he made a bad choice or because some receivers didn't run their routes properly and DK was his best option in a 3rd down situation. Maybe he felt he had to go for it or the game may be lost. Or the line didn't hold the rush long enough for DK to get to the optimal place in the route to be open so Geno throws it too early or takes a loss of down or yardage. So many reasons why stuff like that can happen and they're not always Geno sucks, as you know. But not every observer understands the variables which leads some to blame the easiest target instead of the correct target(s).

Another example for instance is say Daniel Jones. I watched him for years and my opinion was that he's a mediocre to bad QB. I don't need to hear how he could be this or that if he had this, this, and this. I've seen enough of him to form the opinion that he was never going to be great regardless of what he had. Turns out the league (coaches, pundits, what have you) finally realized that too. Thats the 'eye test' i'm talking about.
This is a very different scenario as Jones goes pick #6 in the 2019 draft out of Duke and never lived up to what people thought his potential was. Kiper had him going at #32. He was drafted way too high in a light QB draft featuring Kyler Murray, Dwayne Haskins and Drew Lock. He had a good combine and most of the measurables but not the arm strength. He played in a weak ACC which made his college career look better than it was. He had a decent season in 2022 but other than that did nothing to show he belonged. He's a backup at best and never should have sniffed a starting role but NYG had too much invested to do otherwise. Pundits started to come around after the 2023 injury season when he clearly wasn't the same.
 

OneLofaTatupu

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
4,055
Reaction score
2,263
Location
Seattle, WA
"You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time." I'm just going to keep that in mind while I read this message board. I am excited for Klint Kubiak to get to work here. Will he be great? Who the F really knows! But he'll be better than what we had last year with I-don't-use-running-backs-Grubb.
I just keep in mind it is a message board - keeps everything in perspective
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
11,361
Reaction score
6,033
Not what I'm saying AT ALL. What I am saying it just because your "eye test" tells you something like "Geno's play is bad he's throwing picks!" and then I hear people like Huard or Schlereth say it's a combination of poor play call, poor blocking execution and poor route running, I'm way more likely to believe it's more nuanced as Schlereth and Huard suggest and not as simple as you did.

Huard also said Geno can be much better in this regard and many of his mistakes are just at terrible times with no one else to blame but himself. He put 8-9 of them completely on Geno and Geno had many that were dropped.

Geno flat out has to protect the ball better especially for a 12 year vet and even Macdonald has stated this
 

SeaWolv

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
1,721
Reaction score
1,060
Huard also said Geno can be much better in this regard and many of his mistakes are just at terrible times with no one else to blame but himself. He put 8-9 of them completely on Geno and Geno had many that were dropped.

Geno flat out has to protect the ball better especially for a 12 year vet and even Macdonald has stated this
If you read the back and forth you would know this was an example to illustrate a larger point about the "eye test".

As you should know, since we've debated it before, I do understand that Geno makes mistakes. More than I would like. But he is not solely responsible for the Hawks offensive woes, he's not even the biggest problem on that side of the ball.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
11,361
Reaction score
6,033
If you read the back and forth you would know this was an example to illustrate a larger point about the "eye test".

As you should know, since we've debated it before, I do understand that Geno makes mistakes. More than I would like. But he is not solely responsible for the Hawks offensive woes, he's not even the biggest problem on that side of the ball.
I agree he's not the biggest issue too
 

TwistedHusky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
7,093
Reaction score
1,263
Be interested in hearing how the fans of the teams he was on feel about him.

Is it true that he was on five teams in five years?

If so, that is a GLARING red flag.

He's here, so we have to hope it works out.
This is a tough place for an OC to succeed. Our strengths are the passing game, but our weakness is a godawful OL and trash tier RB room. Our OL struggles in pass pro AND run blocking.
 

DarkVictory23

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
1,933
Reaction score
2,840
How many actual games were they in those situations? And what were their records? There's no mention of how much these teams are trailing by on average. Not every trailing situation requires the same strategy and urgency. Why was four minutes chosen? Are teams down two scores with five minutes to go like, "eh we got plenty of time"?

Saying "minimum 20 games" and then using a bunch of volume stats makes it seem like there's an agenda.
I'd say spamming this with a bunch of 'whatabouts' and then inaccurately referring to the stats I posted as a 'bunch of volume stats' (most of those stats are NOT volume stats, so I guess 2 out of 5 counts as 'a bunch'?) makes it seem like there's an agenda, but to try and engage this in good faith...


These stats come from Pro-Football-Reference. Their passing splits allows you to pick between trailing with 2 minutes left or 4 minutes left because the concepts of 4-minute offense and 2-minute offense are longstanding football concepts, not because of some conspiracy.

In fact, I picked 4-minute instead of 2-minute specifically because I was trying to capture gameplay that would be late game, when your team is desperate to score, but not just 2-minute drill only. You can also look at 4th quarter splits (no score differential), trailing (at any point in the game) or 2-minute drill trailing.

Geno ranks significantly higher in all 3 of those phases. When it's late game, Geno's been better. When his team is trailing, Geno's been better. When it's late game AND his team is trailing, Geno's been much better. I picked 4-minutes left while trailing because it best represented the point, but I could have picked any of these others and gotten similar results.

I picked minimum of 20 games for 2 reasons:
First, to try and get the number of QBs included to approximately 32, which I think helps people understand these rankings better. Being 19th out of 60ish is hard to parse. We are trying to rate Geno and Carr as two starting QBs, so let's put them in a ranking that approximates that.
Second, I was trying to remove QBs with a season or less of gameplay who may have only been in one or two of these situations. This helps Carr more than Geno. Geno's sitting at 3rd in passer rating. If I lower the required number of games down to like 9--a half season--Geno's still going to be top 10. But Derek Carr gets dropped to the 50's. Do we really care, in this comparison, that CJ Beathard has a better passer rating in this situation than Derek Carr? No.

In terms of the number of games they were in these situations, team records, average score differential, Pro-Football-Reference doesn't make it easy to link those 2 things, but to the best I can tell (without diving through each individual game), the Seahawks went 5-6 with Geno in those situations while down by an average of about 8.5 points, the Raiders and Saints went 2-14 while down by an average of 9.5 with Carr.


But my main point (before it got turned into yet another 'Geno vs. Insert Other QB' debate), was to comment on Kubiak's offense. One of the criticisms of what he did in New Orleans was that he couldn't engineer wins when teams fell behind. All I was trying to do was point out that, to the degree that was based on personnel, he'd be coming into a better situation here in Seattle. The numbers back this point up unambiguously, but because it requires us to say something positive about Geno, we end up with this.


Be interested in hearing how the fans of the teams he was on feel about him.

Is it true that he was on five teams in five years?

If so, that is a GLARING red flag.

He's here, so we have to hope it works out.
This is a tough place for an OC to succeed. Our strengths are the passing game, but our weakness is a godawful OL and trash tier RB room. Our OL struggles in pass pro AND run blocking.
I don't agree about the 'trash tier' RB room stuff, but yes, this will be his 5th team in 5 years, but that's already been somewhat addressed.

He finished in Minny as the OC, which was an internal promotion from the same team. After the HC got fired, he went to Denver and had an in-season promotion to play caller--but that entire season was doomed and his HC was fired, so he took a lateral position in SF. He left SF for a promotion to be OC again and now will be keeping that status here.

He only had to take 1 unambiguous step back (leaving Minny for Denver) but had 3 promotions across the same timeframe. He was never himself fired by a Head Coach across these time frames. He either left for a promotion (SF to NO) or because his head coach was fired (Minny, Denver, New Orleans).
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
12,584
Reaction score
8,372
Location
SoCal Desert
Be interested in hearing how the fans of the teams he was on feel about him.

Is it true that he was on five teams in five years?

If so, that is a GLARING red flag.

He's here, so we have to hope it works out.
This is a tough place for an OC to succeed. Our strengths are the passing game, but our weakness is a godawful OL and trash tier RB room. Our OL struggles in pass pro AND run blocking.
His employment record wasn't impressive even with help from papa dear, that said, he is a bit of a coach version of Geno Smith. Geno's employment record wasn't remarkable until his comeback player of the year season.
 

Latest posts

Top