Carroll said "doubting fans need to “do their homework”

[pehawk]

Could it be with the offensive line in shambles the Seahawks, really basic, to just win THIS week? It's not like they can get too exotic AND have newbies across the line. They're down three tackles, if you include Miller (which you should).

I've changed my mind on this. As much as I dislike Bevell, I think the Seahawks are shying away from anything fancy until they're at full strength.

 

[RolandDeschain]

DavidSeven, read my last reply. I'm talking about a flat-out dominant performance in all three phases of the game, regardless of the score. We did that against Bufflo and San Francisco in the same few-week stretch, too.

But do you remember how people were talking about how unprecedented that stretch was? Teams don't dominate opponents over a stretch like that on a regular basis. It's catching lightning in a bottle to do that, and to expect that we'll see that kind of thing again is unrealistic. To do it 3 times over the course of a season is a pretty impressive accomplishment. To do it 3 times in a row is incredibly improbable.

Yet, we did it. Three times in a row. It sounds like your point is basically that it was coincidence. Well, not three times in a row, it wasn't. Buffalo wasn't even a BAD team last year. Not good, but not bad, either. Including a team that played in the Super Bowl during that stretch, along with a Cardinals team that still had a very good defense for the year, and yes; plenty of things went right for us, but we also showed an absolutely ridiculous ability to beat the holy hell out of anyone and everyone that dares to take the field against us.

Like a 60-year whiskey, I got a taste and I want some more. Greedy? Perhaps. However, can you really, honestly tell me we shouldn't expect what we have seen our team be capable of?

I don't expect an entire 16-game season to have the same blowout differential that that three game stretch did last year, but I do expect for damned sure to see us stop making so many random mistakes when we proved we CAN do it for an extended period of time.

 

[Cartire]

Wilson also only played HALF A GAME against Arizona in our house last year.

played till half way through the third quarter and how does that effect passer rating?

 

[RolandDeschain]

Wilson also only played HALF A GAME against Arizona in our house last year.

played till half way through the third quarter and how does that effect passer rating?

He was pulled 5 minutes into the 3rd quarter, but in any case, much smaller sample size. You want to know how it affects passer rating? Really? How about you go look at Brady's passer rating in the 49ers @ Patriots game from last year 35 minutes into the game, then look at it at the end. Night and day.

 

[Laloosh]

DavidSeven, read my last reply. I'm talking about a flat-out dominant performance in all three phases of the game, regardless of the score. We did that against Bufflo and San Francisco in the same few-week stretch, too.

But do you remember how people were talking about how unprecedented that stretch was? Teams don't dominate opponents over a stretch like that on a regular basis. It's catching lightning in a bottle to do that, and to expect that we'll see that kind of thing again is unrealistic. To do it 3 times over the course of a season is a pretty impressive accomplishment. To do it 3 times in a row is incredibly improbable.

In iRo's defense, there were a lot of members talking about 31-35 point averages for the season this June/July. More than a few people convinced themselves that this offense was going to trample everyone that was unfortunate enough to play them.

I agree that aside from the JAX game, we have not put together a complete game. Fortunately, if one phase has been lacking, one or the other have made up for it. Will be interesting to see what a game looks like without the penalties, lack of 3rd down conversions, blocked field goals, broken coverage, etc.

 

[Cartire]

Wilson also only played HALF A GAME against Arizona in our house last year.

played till half way through the third quarter and how does that effect passer rating?

He was pulled 5 minutes into the 3rd quarter, but in any case, much smaller sample size. You want to know how it affects passer rating? Really? How about you go look at Brady's passer rating in the 49ers @ Patriots game from last year 35 minutes into the game, then look at it at the end. Night and day.

so your assumption is that Wilsons rating would have magically gone up while we were handily winning if he had stayed in. Brady was playing from behind.

Me thinks you crazy. Actually, its becoming more and more obvious.

And to comment on your other ridiculous reply. Your saying that, if we would have had only 1 dominate game, it could be considered a fluke. But because there was 3 in a row, that crazy streak should now be standard for us? I just.....I dont get you sometimes....

 

[scutterhawk]

My homework says we almost lost at home to Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Yeah, and does your Homework compute the likelihood of a once in a decade screw-up play that ADDS a fluke ONLY TD points to an opponents total score?
I know, I know, you were joking, right?

 

[volsunghawk]

DavidSeven, read my last reply. I'm talking about a flat-out dominant performance in all three phases of the game, regardless of the score. We did that against Bufflo and San Francisco in the same few-week stretch, too.

But do you remember how people were talking about how unprecedented that stretch was? Teams don't dominate opponents over a stretch like that on a regular basis. It's catching lightning in a bottle to do that, and to expect that we'll see that kind of thing again is unrealistic. To do it 3 times over the course of a season is a pretty impressive accomplishment. To do it 3 times in a row is incredibly improbable.

Yet, we did it. Three times in a row. It sounds like your point is basically that it was coincidence. Well, not three times in a row, it wasn't. Buffalo wasn't even a BAD team last year. Not good, but not bad, either. Including a team that played in the Super Bowl during that stretch, along with a Cardinals team that still had a very good defense for the year, and yes; plenty of things went right for us, but we also showed an absolutely ridiculous ability to beat the holy hell out of anyone and everyone that dares to take the field against us.

Like a 60-year whiskey, I got a taste and I want some more. Greedy? Perhaps. However, can you really, honestly tell me we shouldn't expect what we have seen our team be capable of?

I don't expect an entire 16-game season to have the same blowout differential that that three game stretch did last year, but I do expect for damned sure to see us stop making so many random mistakes when we proved we CAN do it for an extended period of time.

My point is not that it was coincidence, but that you have to have all the right factors go the right way to sustain that over three games.

First off, Arizona was in a tailspin due to their offensive woes, and it was having an effect on the D (see the 2013 Texans for a corollary), so it's a bit off to suggest that Arizona was still stepping it up on defense.

Second, Buffalo WAS a bad team last year. They were a 6-10 team that had just lost to the Rams at home before having to leave their own stadium and play in what amounted to a neutral field.

Third, we played SF after they just finished an emotional nailbiter against the Pats. We still kicked the hell out of them, but there WERE factors outside of our skill at play.

Fourth, those games were all played late in the season after the team had 12 games to find their timing, rhythm, etc. and manage to fine-tune on both sides of the ball. Check back with this team in December and see if they aren't playing better than they are right now.

 

[Cartire]

DavidSeven, read my last reply. I'm talking about a flat-out dominant performance in all three phases of the game, regardless of the score. We did that against Bufflo and San Francisco in the same few-week stretch, too.

But do you remember how people were talking about how unprecedented that stretch was? Teams don't dominate opponents over a stretch like that on a regular basis. It's catching lightning in a bottle to do that, and to expect that we'll see that kind of thing again is unrealistic. To do it 3 times over the course of a season is a pretty impressive accomplishment. To do it 3 times in a row is incredibly improbable.

In iRo's defense, there were a lot of members talking about 31-35 point averages for the season this June/July. More than a few people convinced themselves that this offense was going to trample everyone that was unfortunate enough to play them.

I agree that aside from the JAX game, we have not put together a complete game. Fortunately, if one phase has been lacking, one or the other have made up for it. Will be interesting to see what a game looks like without the penalties, lack of 3rd down conversions, blocked field goals, broken coverage, etc.

I would like a list of all the complete teams playing in the NFL right now. And before anyone mentions Denver, stop. That defense is anything but complete. Its an Achilles heal right now and getting trampled by bad teams. Peyton and the offense alone have been winning games.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I'm not saying it would have, I said it's a small sample size. It could have gone up, or down, or stayed the same. We habitually say you can't even judge a QB's performance off of one game in the NFL, but you are doing it for half of a game.

You also lack in reading comprehension. I specifically just said, it's not realistic to expect that kind of point differential blowout over 16 games, and I went on to say but I do expect us to stop making mistakes all the damned time, because we did have a three-game stretch where we BASICALLY made no mistakes, and look what happened.

Try understand what I say, rather than twisting it in your mind to suit your expectation of what you want me to say.

 

[KARAVARUS]

DavidSeven, read my last reply. I'm talking about a flat-out dominant performance in all three phases of the game, regardless of the score. We did that against Bufflo and San Francisco in the same few-week stretch, too.

Regardless of the score? I think outside of that fumble on the FG returned for a TD, we could say we dominated all the phases of the game on Sunday. I mean, we beat them handily offensively, defense was dominant, and reverse that special teams blunder and we pretty much owned them there too.

I thought we were pretty close to dominating them in that game, but was not totally happy with the score.

To talk about other parts of the conversation. I think we are right where we want to be as far as rushing goes, just wishing more of those yards were Lynch's as opposed to RW's. Teams that lead in passing are indicative of a team who's abandoned the run or is constantly playing from behind. Yards don't matter as much to me as wins, so I think the 5-1 argument should suffice in most cases. I'm not saying we shouldn't point out difficiencies, but sometimes we are flat out greedy and entitled as a fan base.

 

[Smelly McUgly]

My homework says we almost lost at home to Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Yeah, and does your Homework compute the likelihood of a once in a decade screw-up play that ADDS a fluke ONLY TD points to an opponents total score?
I know, I know, you were joking, right?

Well, since we have had TDs returned off of FG attempts TWICE in two weeks now, I guess it's not once-in-a-decade.

But yeah, your point about holding TEN to six points of offense is well-taken otherwise.

 

[Smelly McUgly]

The Saints are playing well in all three phases consistently, loss last weekend aside.

 

[AbsolutNET]

Our last home game of the season last year our offense wasn't necessarily "sharp" against the Rams. It happens. Expecting 50 points a game is unrealistic. Be happy we are winning and can get better.

Am I allowed to be happy AND critique the team and expect improvements in some areas?

 

[Cartire]

I'm not saying it would have, I said it's a small sample size. It could have gone up, or down, or stayed the same. We habitually say you can't even judge a QB's performance off of one game in the NFL, but you are doing it for half of a game.

You also lack in reading comprehension. I specifically just said, it's not realistic to expect that kind of point differential blowout over 16 games, and I went on to say but I do expect us to stop making mistakes all the damned time, because we did have a three-game stretch where we BASICALLY made no mistakes, and look what happened.

Try understand what I say, rather than twisting it in your mind to suit your expectation of what you want me to say.

I want you to stop saying delusional things. I want you to realize that we dont play nobodies no matter how much you think it so. I want you to give other teams credit for, you know, being professional football players. Football is more then just a game of chess. Its not just making the right decisions, its winning the battles when the other team makes the right decisions as well. We are 5-1 because we played better then the other teams we faced. You expected it, like some entitlement, because last year, during a 3 game stretch, we did what we did.

This is football, nothing is given. You take the plays you can, you salvage whatever is left. Stop pretending like this is a video game and as long as you hit the right combo, you are guaranteed to win.

 

[Blitzer88]

I look at it this way, love being 5-1, however, there are still things that can be done to improve an offense that just can't get into the endzone consistently enough.

 

[Sarlacc83]

I'm not saying it would have, I said it's a small sample size. It could have gone up, or down, or stayed the same. We habitually say you can't even judge a QB's performance off of one game in the NFL, but you are doing it for half of a game.

You also lack in reading comprehension. I specifically just said, it's not realistic to expect that kind of point differential blowout over 16 games, and I went on to say but I do expect us to stop making mistakes all the damned time, because we did have a three-game stretch where we BASICALLY made no mistakes, and look what happened.

Try understand what I say, rather than twisting it in your mind to suit your expectation of what you want me to say.

Another instance where you claim other people misunderstand your point rather than accepting that you're the one in the wrong.

 

[Laloosh]

I would like a list of all the complete teams playing in the NFL right now. And before anyone mentions Denver, stop. That defense is anything but complete. Its an Achilles heal right now and getting trampled by bad teams. Peyton and the offense alone have been winning games.

I'm not sure that your point does much for your argument. I'm not arguing that there are other teams playing to their potential. I'm simply stating that our team is not playing to their potential. Do you disagree with that?

If so, we disagree. If not, I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

 

[volsunghawk]

The Saints are playing well in all three phases consistently, loss last weekend aside.

Actually, the Saints are giving up TONS of yardage, and the defense is living off of turnovers.

The Saints lost the TO battle against the Patriots, and lost the game.

The Saints were even with the winless Bucs in the TO battle and escaped with a 2 point win.

The Saints are pretty much still doing it all with offense.

 

[DavidSeven]

The Saints are playing well in all three phases consistently, loss last weekend aside.

According to Football Outsiders, Saints are just above-average on Defense and ST. SEA is top-10 in all three phases (only team in the NFL that can claim that).