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

[nwgamer]

THIS! is just disturbing as all hell. :34853_doh:

 

[HawKnPeppa]

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

Was that about all about short-comings offense? Stay on subject, Debbie.

 

[CortezKennedyfan]

It would be a strawman if I offered it as an argument that you are wrong that TOP is an indicator, which, you know, I didn't. What I have said in the thread is that it is an indicator rather than a direct reason that teams.

I'm glad that you admit that you took a SSS and have not yet proven factually that TOP is not an indicator. Yes, if you get enough data, I am more than happy to agree that TOP is an indicator even though I already agree anyway. I just disagree that you have factually proven anything at this point, that's all.

Again, remember scope.

No matter your viewpoint, I most definitely HAVE proven that time of possession is a valid indicator of success in 71% of all games played in 2013.

I'm enjoying the research today. Had a particularly difficult case this morning, where one of my patients has passed and I am struggling with that, so to keep my mind off things, I think I will compile statistics for the last few seasons. It would be interesting and fun.

No harm intended. My curt dealing with findings once evidence is established is a particularly onerous trait of mine. I mean no disrespect to anyone in the thread. Just find the topic interesting, because it is one in which we really can prove or disprove something, and I have always wondered myself. (I wonder no more, though).

You have proven that teams that have the greater ToP have won their games more times than not. What you have not proven is that they won their games DUE TO ToP, which would make it important. They have accomplished a ToP advantage because they won, they did not win because they had a ToP advantage.

METAIRIE, La. (AP) — For Sean Payton and the New Orleans Saints, time of possession is of the essence.

"It's an important statistic," Payton said Monday, acknowledging the role that his team's ability to control the clock has played in its 5-0 start.

The Saints' fourth-ranked offense has had the ball for an average of 34:37 per game, which led the NFL heading into Monday night's game. The ability New Orleans' 11th-ranked defense to force some quick punts or turnovers has had something to do with that as well.

"Time of possession is really a team stat," safety Malcolm Jenkins said. "It's everybody. It's special teams, it's defense, it's offense, and that's showing you that we're winning as a team in all of our games."

Indeed, it was Jenkins' sack and strip of Jay Cutler — recovered by defensive end Cameron Jordan — that limited Chicago to a single play on its second drive Sunday, and helped New Orleans take an early 6-0 lead en route to a 26-18 victory.

The Saints, who play next at New England, had the ball for 36 minutes in Chicago — 12 minutes more than the Bears. New Orleans managed that despite rushing for only 66 yards.

The Saints entered Monday ranked 26th in rushing, averaging 78.2 yards.

Conventional football wisdom says teams must run well to control the clock. Apparently, that goes out the window in the case of Payton's innovative and prolific offense, which is built around the concept of isolating play-makers in mismatches and letting record-setting quarterback Drew Brees throw as often as needed.

"That's definitely unique — not doing it with a consistent run game," right guard Jarhi Evans said. "But coach Payton and Drew have those timing routes where he gets the ball out quick and those short throws actually go for big gains. We just try to stay on the field and keep converting, and that's what happens when you are converting on third downs, fourth-and-1, like we did."

Payton still sees himself as more of an aggressive than methodical play-caller. Late in the first half, he thought a 36-yard pass attempt intended for Robert Meachem in the end zone was well set up, and that the incompletion could have been ruled pass interference when defensive back Chris Conte pulled Meachem's jersey. Because of the Saints' ability to continue moving the ball after that — even converting a fourth-and-short on Pierre Thomas' run — the Saints kept the ball for an additional minute-and-a-half and still got in the end zone when Thomas scored on a 25-yard screen.

"It's just being productive with your down and distances," Payton said. "It meant taking advantage of a check-down as opposed to an incomplete down the field.

"You want to score every time you have it, so we're not purposely trying to create long drives. But be efficient with your plays, and if you're winning on third down, for instance, you're staying on the field. If you're turning the ball over, conversely, all of a sudden the drive ends," Payton continued. "There's a lot of things that factor into it."

For Payton, time of possession figures prominently in "complementary football," a concept stressed by coaches and often repeated by players at Saints headquarters. In other words, offenses must keep in mind the various things they can do to make the game easier on their defense, and vice versa, with special teams also playing its part to create favorable field position.

That is why Jenkins is quick to credit Brees & Co. for helping keep the Saints defense fresh.

"We're not very tired at all," Jenkins said. "It's not like our offense is going three-and-out and we're back on the field. They're sustaining drives. We're getting a good rest, being able to adjust on the sideline and then coming back out and playing fast."

Notes: Jenkins said the Saints are ignoring a statistic, distributed this week by the NFL, which shows that 90 percent of teams which have opened 5-0 have advanced to the post season under the current playoff format. "You'd be an idiot to listen to that stat and think that you're automatically going to the playoffs," Jenkins said. "Winning five games literally gets you nothing but five games. So people are going to throw that around and look forward, but right now we're just trying to get six."

___

AP NFL website: http://www.pro32.ap.org

 

[Cartire]

It would be a strawman if I offered it as an argument that you are wrong that TOP is an indicator, which, you know, I didn't. What I have said in the thread is that it is an indicator rather than a direct reason that teams.

I'm glad that you admit that you took a SSS and have not yet proven factually that TOP is not an indicator. Yes, if you get enough data, I am more than happy to agree that TOP is an indicator even though I already agree anyway. I just disagree that you have factually proven anything at this point, that's all.

Again, remember scope.

No matter your viewpoint, I most definitely HAVE proven that time of possession is a valid indicator of success in 71% of all games played in 2013.

I'm enjoying the research today. Had a particularly difficult case this morning, where one of my patients has passed and I am struggling with that, so to keep my mind off things, I think I will compile statistics for the last few seasons. It would be interesting and fun.

No harm intended. My curt dealing with findings once evidence is established is a particularly onerous trait of mine. I mean no disrespect to anyone in the thread. Just find the topic interesting, because it is one in which we really can prove or disprove something, and I have always wondered myself. (I wonder no more, though).

You have proven that teams that have the greater ToP have won their games more times than not. What you have not proven is that they won their games DUE TO ToP, which would make it important. They have accomplished a ToP advantage because they won, they did not win because they had a ToP advantage.

METAIRIE, La. (AP) — For Sean Payton and the New Orleans Saints, time of possession is of the essence.

"It's an important statistic," Payton said Monday, acknowledging the role that his team's ability to control the clock has played in its 5-0 start.

The Saints' fourth-ranked offense has had the ball for an average of 34:37 per game, which led the NFL heading into Monday night's game. The ability New Orleans' 11th-ranked defense to force some quick punts or turnovers has had something to do with that as well.

"Time of possession is really a team stat," safety Malcolm Jenkins said. "It's everybody. It's special teams, it's defense, it's offense, and that's showing you that we're winning as a team in all of our games."

Indeed, it was Jenkins' sack and strip of Jay Cutler — recovered by defensive end Cameron Jordan — that limited Chicago to a single play on its second drive Sunday, and helped New Orleans take an early 6-0 lead en route to a 26-18 victory.

The Saints, who play next at New England, had the ball for 36 minutes in Chicago — 12 minutes more than the Bears. New Orleans managed that despite rushing for only 66 yards.

The Saints entered Monday ranked 26th in rushing, averaging 78.2 yards.

Conventional football wisdom says teams must run well to control the clock. Apparently, that goes out the window in the case of Payton's innovative and prolific offense, which is built around the concept of isolating play-makers in mismatches and letting record-setting quarterback Drew Brees throw as often as needed.

"That's definitely unique — not doing it with a consistent run game," right guard Jarhi Evans said. "But coach Payton and Drew have those timing routes where he gets the ball out quick and those short throws actually go for big gains. We just try to stay on the field and keep converting, and that's what happens when you are converting on third downs, fourth-and-1, like we did."

Payton still sees himself as more of an aggressive than methodical play-caller. Late in the first half, he thought a 36-yard pass attempt intended for Robert Meachem in the end zone was well set up, and that the incompletion could have been ruled pass interference when defensive back Chris Conte pulled Meachem's jersey. Because of the Saints' ability to continue moving the ball after that — even converting a fourth-and-short on Pierre Thomas' run — the Saints kept the ball for an additional minute-and-a-half and still got in the end zone when Thomas scored on a 25-yard screen.

"It's just being productive with your down and distances," Payton said. "It meant taking advantage of a check-down as opposed to an incomplete down the field.

"You want to score every time you have it, so we're not purposely trying to create long drives. But be efficient with your plays, and if you're winning on third down, for instance, you're staying on the field. If you're turning the ball over, conversely, all of a sudden the drive ends," Payton continued. "There's a lot of things that factor into it."

For Payton, time of possession figures prominently in "complementary football," a concept stressed by coaches and often repeated by players at Saints headquarters. In other words, offenses must keep in mind the various things they can do to make the game easier on their defense, and vice versa, with special teams also playing its part to create favorable field position.

That is why Jenkins is quick to credit Brees & Co. for helping keep the Saints defense fresh.

"We're not very tired at all," Jenkins said. "It's not like our offense is going three-and-out and we're back on the field. They're sustaining drives. We're getting a good rest, being able to adjust on the sideline and then coming back out and playing fast."

Notes: Jenkins said the Saints are ignoring a statistic, distributed this week by the NFL, which shows that 90 percent of teams which have opened 5-0 have advanced to the post season under the current playoff format. "You'd be an idiot to listen to that stat and think that you're automatically going to the playoffs," Jenkins said. "Winning five games literally gets you nothing but five games. So people are going to throw that around and look forward, but right now we're just trying to get six."

___

AP NFL website: http://www.pro32.ap.org

:0190l:

 

[davidonmi]

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

I understand people saying we were unimpressive but didn't almost lose. The game was over halfway through the 4th quarter. This wasn't a squeaker IMO

 

[MontanaHawk05]

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

Was that about all about short-comings offense? Stay on subject, Debbie.

I was also hoping for quite a bit more pass rush.

 

[firebee]

Seattlepi.com
Russell Wilson, Pete Carroll: Seahawks offense is just fine
Monday, October 14, 2013 by:Sam Barbee

http://blog.seattlepi.com/football/2013 ... just-fine/

Carroll said doubting fans need to “do their homework” about the explosive capabilities of his offense.

“I think we’re just concerned with the points not on the board,” Carroll said. “We’re moving the football, doing some good things. Red zone has not been quite as sharp, third down has not been quite as sharp as we will be. I think we’re on the verge of being really good, and fortunately we’re 5-1 here and we’re still improving.”

At 5-1 who can disagree with Carroll or Wilson :mrgreen: :th2thumbs: :thirishdrinkers:

I don't think anybody doubts the explosiveness of this offense... It's the consistency that worries me. There were a few dropped passes, some missed blocks, penalties and a few too many turnover opportunities for my liking. Russell Wilson was in sync with the game and made great decisions with the ball, but that doesn't mean all our guys on offense are in sync. Fortunately these are things that will improve as the younger guys get more gametime experience. Missing our two starting offensive tackles is going to have an effect, but that'll improve. This offense is capable of blowing up a scoreboard, but everybody on offense has to be on top of the game and focused on winning the individual battles to make it happen... CONSISTENTLY from Start to Finish.

 

[AgentDib]

I agree with the Time of Possession crowd that conceptually it should matter somewhat. I think most (all?) of us can see why defenses tire out more easily than offenses, given that they are the ones forced to react to the offense's play. They have to make up for that with superior speed and force, both of which use more energy. If time is not a factor than a Seahawks 5 minute drive followed by a field goal is preferable to a Seahawks 30 second drive followed by a field goal, because the outcome of the drive is the same but the extra rest should be more advantageous to our defense than to the opposing team's offense.

That being said, that effect on future drives likely has a smaller impact than the outcome of the current drive. As a rule, coaching should probably not consider play calls that will be good for time of possession but with a lower expected value for the outcome of the drive. If you want to establish your running game early it is most important that your team is effective at those plays.

You have proven that teams that have the greater ToP have won their games more times than not. What you have not proven is that they won their games DUE TO ToP, which would make it important. They have accomplished a ToP advantage because they won, they did not win because they had a ToP advantage.

MOCHawk is correct here to apply the "correlation does not imply causation" principle. It is one of those concepts that most people know and if questioned may agree that is logically sound, but do not actually believe. The idea is that A and B may tend to happen at the same time, but that alone does not give you enough information to explain why. A could be causing B, but it is also possible that B is causing A, or C is causing both of them, or they are both simply coincidences.

In this case, it is very likely that teams who are winning a game will start to do well in time of possession in the fourth quarter because of the score differential (B causing A). Knowing this, a superior strategy would be to correlate ToP over the first quarter, first half, and first three quarters of games with the likelihood of winning that game.

 

[volsunghawk]

You're just using an inflammatory soundbyte for effect, and it's a load of crap.

You cannot convince me that the tone around here would be just as optimistic if a team featuring an awful QB had walked into the Clink and beat us at home. You cannot convince me. Fitzpatrick wasn't supposed to be the guy who stayed out of the way while his defense won, not against our home defense. He was supposed to be the guy who threw the game away in true John Skelton fashion. Did I put things harshly? Maybe. I'm on the Tech Worlds part of the spectrum right now, brutally hard on the team. But I do it because I have Super Bowl expectations. The last time we played a game like Sunday's, we won 58-0. We should have dominated. Instead, we looked like idiots at halftime and trailed against a good defense. AT HOME.

The tone around here is optimistic? That's news to me. Going by a lot of the posts I'm seeing, we actually did lose, and I just dreamed the win. As for your comparison of Fitzpatrick to Skelton, that only shows that you don't follow many QBs outside of Seattle. Fitzpatrick is a good deal better than Skelton, but that didn't matter in the end, because he did NOTHING against us. And furthermore, the fact that you equated a 3-2 Titans team with QB issues to a 4-9 Cardinals team with SEVERE QB issues without considering all the other factors that come into play in any NFL game makes me truly question your motivations here.

I'm aware that Fitzpatrick didn't look like an all-star. But that would matter a lot less to people had we lost. Our home-field advantage is supposed to be a massive field-tilter. Our pass rush is supposed to be a lot more interesting than two sacks,e especially against guys like Fitzpatrick. Our secondary is the Legion of Boom. Our offense is known for consecutive fiftyburgers against teams like Tennessee. Thanks to a variety of individual mistakes, most notably the Maragos bumble, it all came close to not mattering. That's football. You cannot tell me that suddenly losing all our division ground to San Fran over two games because of dumb mistakes and lack of focus wouldn't have people questioning. And I think you're capable of envisioning that, John. Things are merely optimistic because we won. Because Lynch's fumble-for-six didn't quite become so.

First, we didn't lose. Gonna slow that one down and do it again for you. We. Didn't. Lose. Your homework is to repeat that multiple times until it sinks in. And B, I can only imagine that there's some emotional kneejerk reaction going on here. Our offense is "known" for posting 50 points? Suddenly THAT'S the expectation?! Do you even know how many times a team scored 50 ALL of 2012? Eight. In the entire league. Seven of those eight happened after the beginning of November, once teams were either getting worn down or were getting warmed up. Do you know how many of them happened against a team with a winning record? One, the Pats over the Colts, and that one involved the Pats returning TWO picks for TDs. I'm sorry, but EXPECTING a 50 point explosion is just stupid. That kind of result RARELY happens. So far this season it has happened twice, both by the Broncos who are an offensive juggernaut. Now, we DIDN'T lose all of our division ground to San Francisco, and we wouldn't have even had we lost to the Titans (which, it bears repeating, we DIDN'T). Even so, it's one thing to question the mistakes like the Maragos fumble, the Lynch fumble-turned-Wilson-recovery, etc. and ask why the team was so sloppy there and a completely different thing to suggest that Ryan Fitzpatrick "almost" beat us. One is a valid concern; the other is a flat out LIE.

Chalk this up to "Super Bowl paranoia" if you want, that phenomenon where fans graduate from "Just get this team to challenge for the division" to "OK, now mitigate every possible weakness because in the playoffs it's one loss and done". I know every Super Bowl team has bad games. So do a lot of failed Super Bowl teams who lose that one game for the same reason. Sunday was NOT a situation we ever should have faced. The last two weeks have been a bizarre step back, intensified by injury and the fact that the league has figured our offense out. It's a time of adaptation and injury-weathering, and with HFA on the line, every play counts.

So spare me your "troll" labels, John. If I merely wanted attention, I'd still be running my blog. I am genuinely furious. Worst win of the Carroll era.

The league has figured out offense out? I'm not even sure if BEVELL has figured our offense out. But you know what? We still rolled up 400+ yards on a tough D, and if we hadn't had some stupid turnovers, the game would have been a damn blowout. We've put up 400+ yards on 3 opponents - including the last two that fall under your "step back". We can GAIN yards and MOVE the ball. The key now is to improve 3rd down success and avoid costly turnovers. Those are things the team CAN work on.

Now, I didn't call you a troll, and I'm not suggesting that you want attention. I am, however, suggesting that you're hyperventilating like a Victorian-era socialite whose corset is a cinch too tight and has just heard a risque joke. Genuinely furious? WORST win? Please. :34853_doh:

 

[Blaze]

:snack:

 

[jamsomatic]

:snack:

:thirishdrinkers:

I wish there was video of Pete Carroll saying that. I would laugh.

 

[sutz]

I think I'm still trying to understand the concept of "worst win."

:229031_shrug:

 

[Subzero717]

Doug Baldwin has a sound bite on KJR that all the shows are using. It's an interview with Danny O'neil and he asks Doug what he thinks of the offense if he were to give it a grade and he say, " We are playing like $#%!. " He excludes Marshawn in the assessment of the offense and praises D.

Mike Holmgren has commented on the predictiblity of our offense. Danny Kelly has written an article about it too. I will not discredit Kelly but I understand he doesn't have the same stature of the others.

I will say that the pass game is a work in progress and quite frankly has looked lost at times. Third down is an issue as is red zone. Improvement needs to be made.

 

[Ozzy]

I just posted in another thread on this topic but I'm not sure what the problem is. I think all the injuries on the offensive line limit what Bevell and Wilson can do and what they call. I do think a large chunk of the blame is on the fact that we don't have a real dominant receiver....yet. I might be in the minority but I really think a healthy Harvin changes the dynamic of our offense more than people realize. I don't think this will be realized in actual stats for Harvin but in what it does for everyone else. The offense is ready to take off....

 

[MontanaHawk05]

You're just using an inflammatory soundbyte for effect, and it's a load of crap.

Genuinely furious? WORST win? Please. :34853_doh:

Nit-picking all day. The Titans came a Zach Brown fumble away from beating us, and this board in much worse shape if it had. It's that simple.

How many wins have we experienced where we won the yardage battle, won the TOP battle, won the stats battle in general, and it ended up not mattering because we couldn't get out of our own way when it mattered? 2010-2011 featured too many of those. I don't like being reminded of them. So winning the stats battle is small comfort.

Uhhh...I'm kinda aware of the fact that we won, thanks. I think you know what I'm getting at. It has to do with the future viability of this team in the playoffs, as related by the difficulty of our win on Sunday. Until yesterday, I was convinced we were a fortress at home even against elite QB's, and able to gut out tough wins on the road against almost anyone. Then we played sloppy football at home against a thoroughly mediocre QB bolstered by a good defense (that sentence is the basis of my comparison to Arizona, and in a simplistic sense it's true). It does not bode well for our ability to get through the playoffs. I would like to consider it a fluke, but we looked determined to give things away against Indy as well.

And please, do not give me this "Oh don't worry, Russell Wilson will scramble his ass off again and we'll win". I am getting tired of him having to do that. It does not benefit this team for Wilson to be risking concussions every set of downs this way. It's extremely uncomfortable to watch and I fear he's going to get his clock cleaned. Our offense's tendencies have been deciphered by the offense and we're in the midst of a transition period to see if we can expand our capabilities on offense. Again, that's a big part of why we've looked so uncertain on offense (60% of it is, of course, our injuries).

Yes, I'm furious that we had to struggle to beat an unbalanced team at home this much. Fine, it wasn't Ryan Fitzpatrick that beat us. But it doesn't change much.

 

[volsunghawk]

"A Zach Brown fumble away from beating us"

And a Chris Maragos hold away from losing by three scores.

The sloppy play is a concern. But it's nowhere near as dire as you're trying to make it out to be. The rest of it is just your own expectations getting in your way.

 

[Dtowers]

Had Brown held on to that ball that wasn't the end of the game stop trying to make it seem like the Hawks barely pulled that out. MontanaHawk you are maybe one of the most dramatic and over the top Hawks fans I have ever read.

 

[Laloosh]

In summary...

1) :240039:
2) :smilie=angry016.gif:
3) :argue:
4) :34853_doh:

 

[razgriz737]

5) :moon.:

 

[Cartire]

6) :jd: