Lofa: "You're Not Outcoached, You're Outplayed"

[knownone]

It's ironic that some applauded Pete Carroll for the job he did with the roster he had and now those same people are lambasting the current staff with almost identical results and stating the roster isn't the issue. I don't get it.

It's not ironic. Pete's defenders spent years hearing that his antiquated schemes, meddling, and philosophy were holding this team back. It was mostly the Let-Russ-Cook crowd, who've been wrong about damn near everything and are still pivoting from one bad take to another, trying to rationalize things by framing all criticism of MM in hyperbolic terms while using Pete as a shield.

But don't worry! I've developed a system for identifying these individuals. Just search their username and a combination of Pete and Russ and look for the derogatory framing of Pete. For example, here's you in 2021 before Wilson was traded.

The rest of the league realizes what the deal is. They can see that Russ isnt the real issue. Its apparent he can longer prop up Pete in the corner with his antiquated philosophy and schemes. If Wilson is foolishly dealt by the FO in the off season, other franchises will still be lining up for him.

It is an obvious thing. Wilson was good enough for 9 to 10 wins regardless of who the coach was. Heck he proved that playing under Carroll with his poor game planning and antiquated schemes and philosophy. The reason Russ wanted out was because he saw they weren’t going to get rid of Pete and nothing was going to change. Your going to see how well Pete does without Russ now. It isn’t going to be pretty.

 

[LeveeBreak]

What you are essentially saying is that our coaching staff is as good as any.

Give this team to Andy Ried and his staff and things would be different. Give it to Demeco Ryans and it would be different.
Give it to kyle Shanahan it would be different.

I would say Dan Quinn, but i wont.

It doesnt take super human powers to know that teams who dont play together (as a unit) who fight eachother, who have constant mental lapses... those are the hallmarks of badly coached teams at some level. This team does enough dumb stuff to beat itself every week.

I guess i'd ask you - you dont think the fact that our coaching staff is chock full of coaches who are doing their respective jobs in the NFL for the first time has no affect on the product you are seeing on the field? You are honestly looking past the o line coach, d line coach, o coordinator, d coordinator, special teams coach who all have a grand total of 8 weeks doing this, and saying its likely not them... its talent?

Players can smell weakness. They know when a motivational speech falls flat or when a message is off, over inflated or is wrong. The players who have been pkaying this gane longer than the coaches having been coaching it (at this level) know when the playcall is BS or when the correct adjustments arent being made. They know when the guy keading them is lost or unsure. And when those kinds of things happen again and again, trust is lost and chaos begins to reign. Players start to slowly check out and give up.

Do you think DK Metcalf would have ever gotten on a headset with Mike Holmgren and say ' can we call an Fing route that's deeper than the sticks '. The fact that DK is a hot head doesnt matter. He sees his OC and feels as though he can speak to him that way.

The inexperience of this staff in its totality is a huge part of this team's problems.

Mike may be a bonafide defensive genius... running HIS system. But how good is he at adapting that system to the players on this roster? It took him to this week to admit that the D wasnt able to get everything he wabted to do. Is that the players not being smart enough? Or is it a coach assuming that just because his approach worked in one place thats its going to work elsewhere.

Good coaching is adaptable. Sure, these players need to learn the system and how to play it. But if the staff just calls sh+ thats destined to fail because you dont have Roquan Smith in the middle calling things and cant modify their approach... arent they part of the problem?

I dont see a future where we dismantle the D piece by piece to fit an inflexible system as a bright one. Could it work? Maybe. It coukd also result in perennial frustration and defection among players. GOOD players who dont want to deal with a losing system - and Mike and his entire staff being shown the door before they ever sniff success. D

Hoping Mac can right size what he wants to do or tweak it to find success without 100% of the guys he wants to run it. Because i think we havr enough to be much better than we are.

I have a hard time seeing a defense that cant stop the run with a d line of Reed, Williams, Murphy, Nwosu and Mafe as being worth the squeeze. We just added one of the better ILB in the league and have talent in the secondary that is obvious. Pete was blasted for the belief that his system required elite talent to run it. Is that what Mac needs? Or maybe he can figure out you cant have splits along the dline as wide as he used to (splits that effectuvely neutralize the Edge player before the ballis even snapped) earlier than 5 weeks into a season.

Or, maybe the 11 guys on defense are just idiots and cant tell a 3-4 from a 10-4.

Big respect for you K and agree on 90%+ of your points...but I have a different perspective on a few of those here. I know a lot has been made of the Reed/Hall dust up, while not recommended, it's happened on good teams before(Manning/Saturday first that comes to mind). I'm not ready to say this is a poorly run team. Maybe it is, but I don't think we know for sure yet.

I know, this was more physical that the Manning incident, but the play was blatent and inexcusable. I like Reed's passion b/c they shut the Bills O down and Reed knew the impact of that play, at that time. The vet lashed the 2nd year guy and Hall likely won't continue with those mistakes. Followed by the team saying all the right things, moving on.

We have alot of talent on D across all positions...and it's been acknowledged the D needs time to learn the comms to make it effective. And we've tinkered since week 2 due to injuries, young potential, and new blood through trades. The jury is still out for me...still reason to have hope even if short term expectations aren't world-beaters.

The O has talent in all skill positions...but its difficult to take advantage of those weapons when the O-line is about the worst in the league. Fix the O-line, fix the O, supports the D, team plays better. Not saying they will fix the O-line, but it is the achilles heel. IMO, Reid and other top coaches probably struggle with these guys as well. Maybe they could have obtained better talent...not sure. You can't say JS hasn't tried to fix the OL, but you can say he's not succeeded.

Just my $.02. Appreciate the thought out points and posts.

Cheers!

 

[pittpnthrs]

It's not ironic. Pete's defenders spent years hearing that his antiquated schemes, meddling, and philosophy were holding this team back. It was mostly the Let-Russ-Cook crowd, who've been wrong about damn near everything and are still pivoting from one bad take to another, trying to rationalize things by framing all criticism of MM in hyperbolic terms while using Pete as a shield.

But don't worry! I've developed a system for identifying these individuals. Just search their username and a combination of Pete and Russ and look for the derogatory framing of Pete. For example, here's you in 2021 before Wilson was traded.

It's not ironic. Pete's defenders spent years hearing that his antiquated schemes, meddling, and philosophy were holding this team back. It was mostly the Let-Russ-Cook crowd, who've been wrong about damn near everything and are still pivoting from one bad take to another, trying to rationalize things by framing all criticism of MM in hyperbolic terms while using Pete as a shield.

But don't worry! I've developed a system for identifying these individuals. Just search their username and a combination of Pete and Russ and look for the derogatory framing of Pete. For example, here's you in 2021 before Wilson was traded.

So your applauding Pete for the mediocre job he did the past couple years because your butthurt over thoughts and opinions (which were correct) of him and the situation during Wilson’s time here?

Lol. Not sure what to even say.

 

[knownone]

So your applauding Pete for the mediocre job he did the past couple years because your butthurt over thoughts and opinions (which were correct) of him and the situation during Wilson’s time here?

Lol. Not sure what to even say.

You might want to re-read your comments. Your thoughts and opinions about Pete were wrong and have been wrong to a comical degree.

I don't recall applauding Pete, but that's neither here nor there.

What's funny is that you were one of the most ardent Pete detracters, and you are currently using Pete's recent past as evidence to defend Macdonald—a past you vehemently attacked at the time.

 

[pittpnthrs]

You might want to re-read your comments. Your thoughts and opinions about Pete were wrong and have been wrong to a comical degree.

I don't recall applauding Pete, but that's neither here nor there.

What's funny is that you were one of the most ardent Pete detracters, and you are currently using Pete's recent past as evidence to defend Macdonald—a past you vehemently attacked at the time.

I just reread my comments and still stand behind them. The FO made a mistake. Wilson was tired of getting killed behind a garbage Oline and went public with it. He wanted more attention spent on the Oline and he also knew the team wasn't going to go anywhere ever again under Pete Carroll. So what happened? Although Wilson was cited as the cause for the Olines issues, Geno Smith stepped in and got sacked 44 times himself. Tied for 3rd in the league. That and two more consecutive seasons of mediocre ball under Pete until the FO and ownership finally woke up and realized it was past due time to get rid of him.

Now we have a rookie head coach and staff that's getting the same results and all of a sudden he's evil and people want him canned after only 8 games. It's a joke. Pete lovers applauded and praised him for getting a mediocre record out of a mediocre roster, but yet are crucifying MM for doing the same. Makes no sense.

 

[keasley45]

I just reread my comments and still stand behind them. The FO made a mistake. Wilson was tired of getting killed behind a garbage Oline and went public with it. He wanted more attention spent on the Oline and he also knew the team wasn't going to go anywhere ever again under Pete Carroll. So what happened? Although Wilson was cited as the cause for the Olines issues, Geno Smith stepped in and got sacked 44 times himself. Tied for 3rd in the league. That and two more consecutive seasons of mediocre ball under Pete until the FO and ownership finally woke up and realized it was past due time to get rid of him.

Now we have a rookie head coach and staff that's getting the same results and all of a sudden he's evil and people want him canned after only 8 games. It's a joke. Pete lovers applauded and praised him for getting a mediocre record out of a mediocre roster, but yet are crucifying MM for doing the same. Makes no sense.

Pete never meddled in the offense.

Pete was never the cause of our offensive ineptitude.

All of the calls for a new OC were misplaced, as Russ has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the offensive system he sought, he could never run.

Everywhere Russ goes, sacks will follow him.

Our O lines were, until post Russ, capable of producing running games that were perennially in the top 10 or 5 in YPC, while poor pass blocking o lines will always be something Russ has to live with.

You cant say that Pete was the reason the D was awful before and now say that its the players, when we have the same players Pete had.

 

[Appyhawk]

No matter how they get them, coaches with a roster of highly talented players tend to be considered great coaches.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Pete never meddled in the offense.

Pete was never the cause of our offensive ineptitude.

All of the calls for a new OC were misplaced, as Russ has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the offensive system he sought, he could never run.

Everywhere Russ goes, sacks will follow him.

Our O lines were, until post Russ, capable of producing running games that were perennially in the top 10 or 5 in YPC, while poor pass blocking o lines will always be something Russ has to live with.

You cant say that Pete was the reason the D was awful before and now say that its the players, when we have the same players Pete had.

Oh for cripes sake. There's examples for both sides and you either believe it or you don't. That horse has been beaten to death and i'm not going to revisit it.

I'll agree with you in that new coordinators were misplaced because even with change, nothing changed. OC's would come in with their visions, but they always had to fit in the constructs of Pete's plan. For years and years we saw seasons where gameplans wouldn't work just to be chucked in the 4th quarter and the load thrown on Wilson's shoulders to go and make something happens. He did so many, many times until he couldn't anymore because his legs left him.

The Olines that were capable of producing running games with Russ were able to do so because Russ himself was a threat to run and was a threat enough that they had to pay attention to him also. When he left, no run game. Shocking.

Lolol. The defense is bad now too. Are you seriously at the point where Pete gets no blame at all for the atrocious defense? If that's the case, you are more of a lost cause than I thought you were. I mean, he assembled these players and tried band-aid fixes with high priced FA signings and rent a players to no avail. MM will fix this. Just give him time.

 

[Ozzy]

I just reread my comments and still stand behind them. The FO made a mistake. Wilson was tired of getting killed behind a garbage Oline and went public with it. He wanted more attention spent on the Oline and he also knew the team wasn't going to go anywhere ever again under Pete Carroll. So what happened? Although Wilson was cited as the cause for the Olines issues, Geno Smith stepped in and got sacked 44 times himself. Tied for 3rd in the league. That and two more consecutive seasons of mediocre ball under Pete until the FO and ownership finally woke up and realized it was past due time to get rid of him.

Now we have a rookie head coach and staff that's getting the same results and all of a sudden he's evil and people want him canned after only 8 games. It's a joke. Pete lovers applauded and praised him for getting a mediocre record out of a mediocre roster, but yet are crucifying MM for doing the same. Makes no sense.

Pete never meddled in the offense.

Pete was never the cause of our offensive ineptitude.

All of the calls for a new OC were misplaced, as Russ has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the offensive system he sought, he could never run.

Everywhere Russ goes, sacks will follow him.

Our O lines were, until post Russ, capable of producing running games that were perennially in the top 10 or 5 in YPC, while poor pass blocking o lines will always be something Russ has to live with.

You cant say that Pete was the reason the D was awful before and now say that its the players, when we have the same players Pete had.

I think there is a place for an argument that Pete was bad because his scheme got stale and Macdonald by most accounts has a better scheme but not the players to execute it. I don’t think by default that both can’t be true. I’ve seen more than a few watch tape from the last couple of Pete years and say it was boring and predictable and those same people say this new scheme is much more advanced and creative. They’re not mutually exclusive. Now that doesn’t mean you’re wrong by default either and you may be right. Maybe it wasn’t Pete’s fsult(although he did pour resources and was involved in roster construction) and we just need better players.

I think ultimately we’re all guessing and who knows maybe we all have a piece of the truth here? I don’t think this stuff is always as binary as we think it is

 

[Ozzy]

Oh for cripes sake. There's examples for both sides and you either believe it or you don't. That horse has been beaten to death and i'm not going to revisit it.

I'll agree with you in that new coordinators were misplaced because even with change, nothing changed. OC's would come in with their visions, but they always had to fit in the constructs of Pete's plan. For years and years we saw seasons where gameplans wouldn't work just to be chucked in the 4th quarter and the load thrown on Wilson's shoulders to go and make something happens. He did so many, many times until he couldn't anymore because his legs left him.

The Olines that were capable of producing running games with Russ were able to do so because Russ himself was a threat to run and was a threat enough that they had to pay attention to him also. When he left, no run game. Shocking.

Lolol. The defense is bad now too. Are you seriously at the point where Pete gets no blame at all for the atrocious defense? If that's the case, you are more of a lost cause than I thought you were. I mean, he assembled these players and tried band-aid fixes with high priced FA signings and rent a players to no avail. MM will fix this. Just give him time.

And if he doesn’t they will get someone else who will hopefully. Again it just feels like some people want Macdonald to fail because it confirms priors about Pete.

And yes maybe I’m in the other have and I want Macdonald to succeed because it confirms priors for me as well? Who knows lol

 

[pittpnthrs]

And if he doesn’t they will get someone else who will hopefully. Again it just feels like some people want Macdonald to fail because it confirms priors about Pete.

And yes maybe I’m in the other have and I want Macdonald to succeed because it confirms priors for me as well? Who knows lol

Macdonald very well might fail, but I don't care. Something had to be done as Pete was obviously not the answer.

 

[AgentDib]

There's a bias among many fans to blame coaching because it makes us feel smart, we don't wear coaches' jerseys, and it's easier to swap coaches then rebuild a whole new roster of players. Ivan Lewis still gets random hate here from time to time with absolutely no supporting evidence other than his name and a few UW fans that really liked scapegoats.

The main repeatable benefit that a good head coach provides is strong leadership. We hired a young guy to learn on the job here and it's going to take some time for that.

I strongly agree with Lofa's take when it comes to overall schemes. You can simply follow how people think about coaches over time as they change rosters, and the causation nearly always goes from talented roster to positive perception. Just look at Pete's career if you're a Seahawks fan. Schemes are copied quickly and well understood by all NFL teams. Advantages are eroded over the course of a single season.

Play calling can make an enormous difference, but the problem is there is a lot of randomness mixed in. It's basically a complicated game of rock-paper-scissors, where if you guess better than your opposite number then you can overcome a huge disparity in talent. I'm just not sold that it is reliable or even particularly skill based. In my view, there's a lot of gambling fallacy baked in where we tend to view lucky guesses as good skill and unlucky outcomes as poor skill.

 

[Ozzy]

Macdonald very well might fail, but I don't care. Something had to be done as Pete was obviously not the answer.

Agreed

 

[GemCity]

There's a bias among many fans to blame coaching because it makes us feel smart, we don't wear coaches' jerseys, and it's easier to swap coaches then rebuild a whole new roster of players. Ivan Lewis still gets random hate here from time to time with absolutely no supporting evidence other than his name and a few UW fans that really liked scapegoats.

The main repeatable benefit that a good head coach provides is strong leadership. We hired a young guy to learn on the job here and it's going to take some time for that.

I strongly agree with Lofa's take when it comes to overall schemes. You can simply follow how people think about coaches over time as they change rosters, and the causation nearly always goes from talented roster to positive perception. Just look at Pete's career if you're a Seahawks fan. Schemes are copied quickly and well understood by all NFL teams. Advantages are eroded over the course of a single season.

Play calling can make an enormous difference, but the problem is there is a lot of randomness mixed in. It's basically a complicated game of rock-paper-scissors, where if you guess better than your opposite number then you can overcome a huge disparity in talent. I'm just not sold that it is reliable or even particularly skill based. In my view, there's a lot of gambling fallacy baked in where we tend to view lucky guesses as good skill and unlucky outcomes as poor skill.

Definitely a mix. We as fans often try to break it down to a single factor.

It’s more complicated than the AC going out at your house. Yes, the capacitor may have seen its service life…and that’s the fix.

Football though? I tend to think that most people in this thread are partially right in their analysis.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Definitely a mix. We as fans often try to break it down to a single factor.

It’s more complicated than the AC going out at your house. Yes, the capacitor may have seen its service life…and that’s the fix.

Football though? I tend to think that most people in this thread are partially right in their analysis.

You're right Gem. It's the combination of everything. We as fans though, try to pick out the highest contributors. It's always going to be split at some point.

 

[Shane Falco]

^^^ I wholeheartedly agree. Problems are compounding other problems. Whether it's coaching, schemes, lack of talent, players not doing their jobs.... we got it all going on right now imo. It's a mess. It really feels exactly like last season all over again.

 

[keasley45]

I think there is a place for an argument that Pete was bad because his scheme got stale and Macdonald by most accounts has a better scheme but not the players to execute it. I don’t think by default that both can’t be true. I’ve seen more than a few watch tape from the last couple of Pete years and say it was boring and predictable and those same people say this new scheme is much more advanced and creative. They’re not mutually exclusive. Now that doesn’t mean you’re wrong by default either and you may be right. Maybe it wasn’t Pete’s fsult(although he did pour resources and was involved in roster construction) and we just need better players.

I think ultimately we’re all guessing and who knows maybe we all have a piece of the truth here? I don’t think this stuff is always as binary as we think it is

Sure. But how many times have you also heard, by Mcdonald himself, that there isnt anything 'new' about his scheme. There isnt a new innivation. Just a difference in the way he presents coverages and the types of pressures he brings.

Lets not get into this curcular argument again about needing 'super-human' players to get the scheme to work.

John wouldnt have ousted Pete if he wasnt sure we were wasting the talent we had on a broken system. We woukd still be stockpiling players to see if Pete could turn it around.

To say the coaching is a major part of the problem right now isnt some statement of failure or an indictment of Mike. Its just an acknowledgement of the fact that no one on the staff has experience in their cirrent positions. How one can make the leap to the team having no talent, or .500 talent, when we are running with a rookie coaching staff trying replace a HOF coach... it seems worth consideration since the coaching staff had no record or ever having produced a winner. Nobody thinks that players who were under Pete and KNOW what experienced leadership feels like might be looking at the cast of characters assembled alongside Mike andnon occassion even including him and think ' do these guys knoe what they are doing ' ?

Just seems to me that inexperienced coaching looks to be the far more rational explanation for the self inflicted errors, procedural errors, lack of discilpline errors, than lack of talent.

The best teams in the league ususally dont have rosters full of talent across the board because they are likely paying a superstar top dollar somewhere... a qb, a TE, LT, dl, a LB or a combination of the above. You dont see the role players on those teams making game losing mistakes week in and week out. In Seattle, its the role players, AND the stars.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Sure. But how many times have you also heard, by Mcdonald himself, that there isnt anything 'new' about his scheme. There isnt a new innivation. Just a difference in the way he presents coverages and the types of pressures he brings.

Lets not get into this curcular argument again about needing 'super-human' players to get the scheme to work.

John wouldnt have ousted Pete if he wasnt sure we were wasting the talent we had on a broken system. We woukd still be stockpiling players to see if Pete could turn it around.

To say the coaching is a major part of the problem right now isnt some statement of failure or an indictment of Mike. Its just an acknowledgement of the fact that no one on the staff has experience in their cirrent positions. How one can make the leap to the team having no talent, or .500 talent, when we are running with a rookie coaching staff trying replace a HOF coach... it seems worth consideration since the coaching staff had no record or ever having produced a winner. Nobody thinks that players who were under Pete and KNOW what experienced leadership feels like might be looking at the cast of characters assembled alongside Mike andnon occassion even including him and think ' do these guys knoe what they are doing ' ?

Just seems to me that inexperienced coaching looks to be the far more rational explanation for the self inflicted errors, procedural errors, lack of discilpline errors, than lack of talent.

The best teams in the league ususally dont have rosters full of talent across the board because they are likely paying a superstar top dollar somewhere... a qb, a TE, LT, dl, a LB or a combination of the above. You dont see the role players on those teams making game losing mistakes week in and week out. In Seattle, its the role players, AND the stars.

This is a good post Keasely. I'll give you that, but please take into consideration that the .500 roster looks very, very similiar to the last two previous seasons in execution and results. Sure, i'll admit that there's coaching issues with the inexperienced staff we have, but I still feel the majority of the blame lies on the talent level of the roster. They just arent that good. You have the experienced veterans calling out other players for missed assignments and so forth. It's going to take a couple of seasons to go through this roster with changes being made.