Intelligent-ish writeup of our Offense -

[Maelstrom787]

Since this same exact trend happens with every offensive coordinator we have had through the Pete Carroll era, I don't think the string of OCs are really the heart of the problem.

I think it's a severe oversimplification to say this "exact trend happens" with every OC. They've all got very clear philosophical differences, and the fact that it shows in the on-field product hints at a fair amount of autonomy being granted.

Waldron's problems seem fairly unique to him, in terms of Seahawks OCs. Quick-trigger run abandonment hasn't exactly been a staple here.

Schottenheimer's offenses specifically were actually pretty strong and clear in terms of identity, no?

There's a lot of nuance we're glossing over. We're probably conflating this with fan dissatisfaction, which has been a constant at some points of every year.

 

[Ozzy]

The most glaring problem in our offense is the offensive line, particularly RT. In games with limited pressure, we're one of the most efficient passing and rushing offenses. Against teams with elite front 7s, we've been near the bottom of the league. What's concerning is it's not clear how the coaching staff can fix these issues without getting Lucas back or the guys we have playing significantly better.

Waldron's offense is all about volume. He needs to establish specific looks to create explosive plays down the field. It's similar to a technician in boxing, using jabs and feints to create an opening in the opponent's defense, distract them, or get them to move in ways that make them vulnerable to counters. That's the same underlying philosophy with McVay and Shanahan's offenses. It's all about starting fast and giving defenses multiple variations of the same look while using motion to create openings. Consequently, if Waldron can't dip into his bag, the offense is not going anywhere.

That's not an identity issue. The Seahawks know precisely who they want to be. They just aren't capable of being that consistently against elite defenses.

This is a good post. I still differ in that I think Geno should be able to overcome some of this stuff with pre-snap reads, calls, adjustments etc and he just isn't but regardless when the line holds up he makes some spectacular throws. Getting the line right would help a ton for the offense. I know we have a couple of guys injured so hopefully once they return it improves.

 

[scutterhawk]

I was JUST THINKING OF THAT overnight.

I was like Bevell, Schotty, Waldron.......... hmmmmm..... Didn't they all eventually meet the same-ish fates on the playcalling road?

It's an unavoidable point. Especially considering that Waldron DIDN'T START BROKEN He started pretty amazingly.

And then Defenses got the Game Tapes, reviewed them, adjusted and VOILA!
Really successful OC's need to stay mentally fluid in their play-calls & stay the hell out of the predictable Play-Call Groove.
Same goes for the DC's,
It's lazy assumptions without proof that folks need to get away from.
I've said before that both Bevell and Schottenheimer have gone elsewhere and met with the same successes & failures, as they went back to the same well and dipped out some of the same bad habits.

 

[CalgaryFan05]

And then Defenses got the Game Tapes, reviewed them, adjusted and VOILA!
Really successful OC's need to stay mentally fluid in their play-calls & stay the hell out of the predictable Play-Call Groove.

THAT is an excellent point. Excellent point.

Takes my blinders off a bit on the "Just go back to some 3TE sets and - hey presto! Offense fixed."

Reminds me that the playcalling needs to be creative, constantly changing, and not predictable.

Thanks for making that point. There's not a magical formation - there's a process. Got it.

 

[scutterhawk]

Uh, have you consistently watched most/all of our games since Pete Carroll has been our head coach? My statement is really not speculation.

Yes it absolutely is ^...Read my other post prior to this one....When you don't know what you don't know for a FACT, it can and often does lead to misconceptions, and then on to "Speculations"

 

[Maelstrom787]

Uh, have you consistently watched most/all of our games since Pete Carroll has been our head coach? My statement is really not speculation.

They've run the gamut on offense from run-heavy to pass-heavy, and have found success with both. They've switched blocking schemes, personnel preferences, and most things in between over the years.

Your statement may not be speculation, but it certainly does gloss over a significant amount of actual happenings to arrive at an easy, oversimplified conclusion.

I know you've consistently watched these games. You wouldn't condescend to others about it otherwise.

Did Seattle not stick with their successful, league best rushing attack in 2018? Did Seattle not do the same in 2019? Did Seattle not stick for almost a decade to a 4-3 under cover 3 defensive scheme that flooded the league in the early 2010s? Did Seattle not stick to (originally non-traditional) defensive line player archetypes to facilitate great run defense for over a decade?

Just as often as the criticism has been "they went away from what worked," the criticism has been that they stuck to what worked for too long, and didn't change preemptively enough.

It's easy to color 14 years of football with broad strokes and say that it all follows the same trend, but it doesn't. Not consistently. I know that you know it's significantly more nuanced and complex than that.

 

[knownone]

This is a good post. I still differ in that I think Geno should be able to overcome some of this stuff with pre-snap reads, calls, adjustments etc and he just isn't but regardless when the line holds up he makes some spectacular throws. Getting the line right would help a ton for the offense. I know we have a couple of guys injured so hopefully once they return it improves.

We don't differ there. I agree; Geno could play significantly better. And if we're going to win under these conditions, he has to.

My defense of Geno comes from my expectations for what he can do. As I mentioned in another thread: "Our offense has gone from Geno, the complementary piece, to Geno, the centerpiece. And Geno's not that guy. If we're relying on him to carry the offense when our RBs are averaging under 2 yards per carry and he's getting pressured on 60% of his dropbacks, we're screwed. There's no way around it."

In the last few weeks, Seattle has asked Geno to do what Allen, Burrow, and Mahomes do—create while under pressure when nothing else works. I can't imagine they came into this season expecting to rely on Geno to be that guy or that they'd rank 30th in pass protection and 26th in pressures allowed.

Geno's numbers are pretty straightforward. He's a top 5 QB with a clean pocket and bottom 25 without one. So there are two solutions: A) Geno starts playing like an elite QB, or B) the offensive line improves enough that Geno doesn't have to be that guy regularly.

 

[Ozzy]

We don't differ there. I agree; Geno could play significantly better. And if we're going to win under these conditions, he has to.

My defense of Geno comes from my expectations for what he can do. As I mentioned in another thread: "Our offense has gone from Geno, the complementary piece, to Geno, the centerpiece. And Geno's not that guy. If we're relying on him to carry the offense when our RBs are averaging under 2 yards per carry and he's getting pressured on 60% of his dropbacks, we're screwed. There's no way around it."

In the last few weeks, Seattle has asked Geno to do what Allen, Burrow, and Mahomes do—create while under pressure when nothing else works. I can't imagine they came into this season expecting to rely on Geno to be that guy or that they'd rank 30th in pass protection and 26th in pressures allowed.

Geno's numbers are pretty straightforward. He's a top 5 QB with a clean pocket and bottom 25 without one. So there are two solutions: A) Geno starts playing like an elite QB, or B) the offensive line improves enough that Geno doesn't have to be that guy regularly.

Well said. I dont think we differ as much as we originally thought and that's probably true for many on here, everyone just gets bored and likes to debate lol

 

[ivotuk]

Pete Carroll had an issue with last year's offense. "We need to be able to run the ball when people know we are going to run it."

 

[Titus Pullo]

Waldron isn't the one holding on the ball too long, fumbling, or throwing interceptions.

 

[MORGULON]

The most glaring problem in our offense is the offensive line, particularly RT. In games with limited pressure, we're one of the most efficient passing and rushing offenses. Against teams with elite front 7s, we've been near the bottom of the league. What's concerning is it's not clear how the coaching staff can fix these issues without getting Lucas back or the guys we have playing significantly better.

Waldron's offense is all about volume. He needs to establish specific looks to create explosive plays down the field. It's similar to a technician in boxing, using jabs and feints to create an opening in the opponent's defense, distract them, or get them to move in ways that make them vulnerable to counters. That's the same underlying philosophy with McVay and Shanahan's offenses. It's all about starting fast and giving defenses multiple variations of the same look while using motion to create openings. Consequently, if Waldron can't dip into his bag, the offense is not going anywhere.

That's not an identity issue. The Seahawks know precisely who they want to be. They just aren't capable of being that consistently against elite defenses.

100%

It starts with the line like Knownone said.
Seattle is unable to dictate what they're wanting to do. Figuring this out and adjusting isn't part of the plan I guess.
Did anyone else notice the difference in size between Baltimore's defensive line and Seattle's offensive line? It looked like men slapping around handicapped munchkins.

 

[RolandDeschain]

They've run the gamut on offense from run-heavy to pass-heavy, and have found success with both. They've switched blocking schemes, personnel preferences, and most things in between over the years.

Your statement may not be speculation, but it certainly does gloss over a significant amount of actual happenings to arrive at an easy, oversimplified conclusion.

I know you've consistently watched these games. You wouldn't condescend to others about it otherwise.

Did Seattle not stick with their successful, league best rushing attack in 2018? Did Seattle not do the same in 2019? Did Seattle not stick for almost a decade to a 4-3 under cover 3 defensive scheme that flooded the league in the early 2010s? Did Seattle not stick to (originally non-traditional) defensive line player archetypes to facilitate great run defense for over a decade?

Just as often as the criticism has been "they went away from what worked," the criticism has been that they stuck to what worked for too long, and didn't change preemptively enough.

It's easy to color 14 years of football with broad strokes and say that it all follows the same trend, but it doesn't. Not consistently. I know that you know it's significantly more nuanced and complex than that.

I'll put it in simple terms. No matter our scheme, no matter our coordinators, no matter our personnel, no matter anything else, the vast majority of offensive snaps under Pete Carroll have involved SIMPLISTIC AND UNIMAGINATIVE PLAY CALLING as well as a stubborn refusal to make significant changes when getting their asses handed to them by a great defense. It's maybe not as noticeable as it would have been for most other teams because Russell's ability to spin out of a collapsing pocket, run around to the Benny Hill theme, then throw a bomb for a first down helped cover it up; but seriously, you cannot dispute that we've been boring and predictable as hell throughout the Pete Carroll era on offense. A little guy you may remember by the name of Marshawn also helped cover up the fact that we just ran up the damn middle all the time, and without Marshawn's prodigious skill (he deserves the Hall of Fame, more so than Shaun Alexander), our record would have been a hell of a lot worse than it was.

 

[BigMeach]

The most glaring problem in our offense is the offensive line, particularly RT. In games with limited pressure, we're one of the most efficient passing and rushing offenses. Against teams with elite front 7s, we've been near the bottom of the league. What's concerning is it's not clear how the coaching staff can fix these issues without getting Lucas back or the guys we have playing significantly better.

Waldron's offense is all about volume. He needs to establish specific looks to create explosive plays down the field. It's similar to a technician in boxing, using jabs and feints to create an opening in the opponent's defense, distract them, or get them to move in ways that make them vulnerable to counters. That's the same underlying philosophy with McVay and Shanahan's offenses. It's all about starting fast and giving defenses multiple variations of the same look while using motion to create openings. Consequently, if Waldron can't dip into his bag, the offense is not going anywhere.

That's not an identity issue. The Seahawks know precisely who they want to be. They just aren't capable of being that consistently against elite defenses.

He's supposed to be returning to practice soon. Couldn't come fast enough.

I think this has been a glaring issue ever since he went down. He's so good. I hope he has a long career here.

 

[cymatica]

Waldron isn't the one holding on the ball too long, fumbling, or throwing interceptions.

No, but he is the one calling the games when the offense constantly goes 3 and out and doesn't adjust. He's the one responsible for inexplicably going pass happy WR heavy formations against Baltimore when we needed heavy TE sets and ground n pound. He's the one responsible for calling run plays up the gut then giving up when they don't produce, yet any idiot armchair coach understands you should not run up the gut against Baltimore.

He set Geno and the offense up for failure with a questionable gameplan and zero feel for the game as it unfolds. He's not an OC. He shouldn't be calling plays. He should be an assistant.

 

[Maelstrom787]

I'll put it in simple terms. No matter our scheme, no matter our coordinators, no matter our personnel, no matter anything else, the vast majority of offensive snaps under Pete Carroll have involved SIMPLISTIC AND UNIMAGINATIVE PLAY CALLING as well as a stubborn refusal to make significant changes when getting their asses handed to them by a great defense. It's maybe not as noticeable as it would have been for most other teams because Russell's ability to spin out of a collapsing pocket, run around to the Benny Hill theme, then throw a bomb for a first down helped cover it up; but seriously, you cannot dispute that we've been boring and predictable as hell throughout the Pete Carroll era on offense. A little guy you may remember by the name of Marshawn also helped cover up the fact that we just ran up the damn middle all the time, and without Marshawn's prodigious skill (he deserves the Hall of Fame, more so than Shaun Alexander), our record would have been a hell of a lot worse than it was.

Thank you for putting it in simple terms. I really appreciate it. This is much easier to read than your previous treatises on the subject, which I had to study for hours to transcribe them into digestible bullet points. I will never forget the grace you've shown me.

I can (and will) dispute that they've always been boring and unimaginative. If you want true boring and unimaginative offense, throw on random.org and set the roll from 20 to 32. Run it, and then pull up the yardage rankings for any given year. You'll probably find an actual boring and unimaginative offense.

These offenses have had far, far too much success over the years to make the first two sentences of your post true here. Period. As Nathanial Hackett showed you, Russ kinda requires some scheming, so that in and of itself indicates some well-thought-out structure. 2022 was not a boring offense. 2018, 2019, most of 2020, not boring. 2012, not boring, even a little bit. 2015? You wanna call 2015 boring?

You may think I have no claim to dispute this, but logic would dictate that an offense that's been mostly above average for a decade and a half with 4 separate coordinators and a fully turned over set of assistant coaches can't be that unimaginative. Perhaps they were just "sticking with what worked," hmm?

 

[Maelstrom787]

Also, another point:

If one agrees with the criticism that Seattle too often gets away from what they're successful running... would that not make them too imaginative for their own good? "Getting cute" too often?

Got it all twisted, man.

 

[knownone]

If anything, I think Waldron's offense is a little too imaginative. And when you can't block, everything looks simplistic.

 

[seahawks08]

I feel there are some philosophies around offense and defense that I feel conflicts with the hires around offense and defense.
I we want a Sean McVay kind of offense, then you need to adjust and have intermediate routes along with Runs mixed up. If you want to be aggressive in your defense, you have to move away from the bend not break and let no one beat us over the top philosophy. It’s all about taking risks and maybe rush 6 instead of 5.
Bottom line, give me playbook that has concepts in there if my QB only has 3 seconds to react and similarly on defense, give me schemes where I can confuse the looks for a QB, generate pass rush and make the opposing QB react under 3 secs. Ofcourse these can’t be done consistently and you have to adjust to the game flow. When you invest in WRs and TEs along with Running backs, your Oline doesn’t always have to hold the line with the rotation snd players playing banged up. And given we have invested heavily on Safeties, they should be tackling well. I feel some of it is fixable, but I really feel Pete love’s explosive plays that requires solid pass protection. On defense when you consistently worry about getting beat over the corners or Safeties, you can’t blitz or confuse offenses by disguising different looks.

 

[keasley45]

Dugar: The Seahawks don't know who they are offensively. They need an answer, and fast

Seattle's offense followed the same script for weeks, and it all fell apart Sunday. The unit must find its identity before it's too late.

theathletic.com

Been saying it since week 4. The problem isn't Geno. It's that the OC and scheme are tired and rather than actually adapting what they are doing, they are trying to disguise the same bunch of plays in variations of formations and presnap motion. When they haven't done this, they've been effective.

Geno is something more than a game manager. Something less than elite. But if you guve the guy protection and plays that help to put pressure on a defense, he can do some really great things. If the playcalling is solid, he won't be the week link.

I've also been saying for weeks that he's squeezed about as much juice out of the tired plays we run as he can. As the film recap of the Raven game in another thread showed, he needs to be just about perfect on passes just to get completions. That's how well defenses know our plays. And it's not just the Ravens.

Against Cleveland, outside of the open scripted plays and the last drive, they knew what was coming.

I'd love to think they are just trying to get by on a limited script to keep the prized ammo on reserve for later in the season, because they've done that before, but that's just wishful thinking. They need to get their crap together and stop pushing out the same, barely disguised crap.

 

[themunn]

I'm always off the belief that a lot of the time early season - and particularly against non-conference opponents - what Pete Carroll teams do in the first half and early third quarter is put plays out to be put on tape as much as it is to win the game. That's not to say we aren't trying to win the game, but ultimately you want to save your best plays for when they matter and that's either when the game is close in the 4th quarter, or when you're up against a divisional opponent or high-ranking conference opponent.

A 4 game stretch where we play 3 AFC North Teams and the bottom-ranked Cardinals isn't the time to whip out your cleverest plays. Sure it would have been nice to go 3-1 or 4-0 during that period, but as it was we went 2-2, and were pretty close to beating the Bengals. I'm also not ignoring the fact that we simply haven't played well offensively during that span bar the Cardinals game. Geno has been making poor decisions and off-throws and our offensive line has struggled massively, all of which is going to contribute to a poor showing on top of a more simplistic playbook.

But as it stands, now you have another 2 winnable games where you shouldn't need to dig too deep if everybody can play above average, meanwhile your closest rivals have got to travel to the other side of the country for a 10am game against one of the league's hottest teams. So 2 weeks from now you could very well be sitting at 7-3 vs a 6-4 divisional opponent, with a 4 game stretch that gives you the opportunity to open up a huge lead. That's when you want your 10 weeks of putting loads of stuff on tape to give you your edge.