Pete, culture, and quarterbacks

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
8,273
Reaction score
392
If Shanahan had Wilson I bet you wouldnt be asking that question.
You mean IF Shanahan had A YOUNGER, FASTER, MORE ELUSIVE Wilson, probably not.
BUTTTTT, Wilson is UNLIKE any >SYSTEM< Quarterback that Shannahan has EVER Coached up, and without a shred of doubt, would HAVE TO reshape his offensive philosophy to fit Wilson's style of play...Just as Pete & all his Offensive Minded Coaching staff has had to do.
POINT IS, y'all have made the argument that Shanahan is a Quarterback GURU & With Jimmy G. SHOULD have been able to formulate strategies to overcome Pete's so-so Defense over the last 4 seasons, yes? no? ---YES
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
5,502
Reaction score
743
Location
SoCal Desert
Beating the Eagles in the wild card and then losing to the Packers isn’t post season failure?
Losing our two RBs and running with Marshawn at 1 yard something per carry led to missing by-week. We literally were handicapped and yet we almost made it to NFC championship, missed by a few points.
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
8,273
Reaction score
392
Beating the Eagles in the wild card and then losing to the Packers isn’t post season failure?
You mean like Failing against Aaron Rodgers & the Packers like Holmgren did with Hasselbeck?
The Packers LOSING after playing against the Seattle Wilson's, was their "Post Season Failure" eh?
 

Spin Doctor

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,117
Reaction score
162
You mean IF Shanahan had A YOUNGER, FASTER, MORE ELUSIVE Wilson, probably not.
BUTTTTT, Wilson is UNLIKE any >SYSTEM< Quarterback that Shannahan has EVER Coached up, and without a shred of doubt, would HAVE TO reshape his offensive philosophy to fit Wilson's style of play...Just as Pete & all his Offensive Minded Coaching staff has had to do.
POINT IS, y'all have made the argument that Shanahan is a Quarterback GURU & With Jimmy G. SHOULD have been able to formulate strategies to overcome Pete's so-so Defense over the last 4 seasons, yes? no? ---YES
Shanahan did that with RG3 back in the day... He brought the read option into the NFL as well as various spread concepts from the collegiate level that highlighted RG3's mobility during his rookie season. He was responsible for that trend. The Seahawks even borrowed many of his concepts during our Super Bowl run.

What you're not getting about Shanahan is that he structures his offenses based off his passers strengths and weaknesses. We're not known for doing that here with our players on offense.

Here is the deal with Shanahan on the Niners -- he hasn't had a good QB his whole time there. What part of this do you not understand? There is a reason why the 49ers spent copious amounts of money on Lance in the draft. Jimmy G hasn't been able to stay healthy and when he has the Niners have gone to the NFC Championship game -- in many respects in spite of Jimmy G.

Shanahan has set many of the NFL trends on offense just as Carroll set them on defense back in 2012-2016/17. I don't get what you're trying to defend. All people are saying is that it's going to be hard to replicate that same success that he had with a mediocre QB like Jimmy G here. Nobody is saying one is better than the other. We're saying that expecting the same results as Shanahan under Pete Carroll's offense is probably not going to happen with mediocre QB play. This is to be expected as offense is Shanahan's wheelhouse and he is without a doubt one of the best offensive minds in football at this moment.

The TL;DR version of this is if you gave Carroll Jimmy G, Jimmy G wouldn't likely have the same success that he had under Shanahan as a passer.
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
8,273
Reaction score
392
TRUTH IS, RG3 was NEVER as good as Russel Wilson, sounds like you're suggesting that Shanahan couldn't maximize his potential, else, he'd have gone a lot further under Shanahan's Coaching than he did.
AND, you're grasping at straws, as you "Likely" don't know for a FACT how successful Jimmy G. would be under Pete Carroll & Carl Smith.
 
OP
OP
sc85sis

sc85sis

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
7,543
Reaction score
163
Location
Houston Suburbs
Pete and Shanahan have completely different philosophies, especially on offense. I don't think they're comparable in the least as coaches. Shanahan's offense is like it is because of the limitations of his QB. He knows Jimmy G's strengths and weaknesses and has adjusted his offense accordingly to fit those limitations. In Atlanta his offense looked very different with a competent QB under center.

Shanahan's offense morphs with each QB that is under center. He specifically designs and caters his offensive philosophy based on his signal callers strengths and weaknesses. His first stint with Washington showed him pulling out collegiate concepts with the read option and spread concepts, specifically catering to RG3's athleticism and lack of refinement as a passer. The offense completely changed to a more traditional WCO style when Kirk Cousins came in.

In ATL his offense looked completely different yet again with Matt Ryan under center. This is where we saw the unraveling of the Cover 3 system that Carroll had crafted that dominated the NFL since 2011. This is the same style of attack that Sean McVay uses as he is a Shanahan disciple. Shanahan originally wrote this playbook and it spread like wildfire throughout the NFL. The Fangio style of defense was the answer to this new attack around the NFL.

Carroll is more of a keep it simple sort of guy. He likes his playbooks and his defenses to be simple. He doesn't believe much in subterfuge or hiding what he's doing. He is a firm believer in the air coryell style of attack. Using the run to set up play action and attacking the sidelines with deep passes once defenses cheat up. His style of offense is all about limiting the toxic differential. Our offensive strategy looked very similar with Hasselbeck and Tarvaris Jackson under center despite having different OCs and QB's with vastly different skillsets. I'm not exactly a fan of Carroll's offensive strategies because it often feels like we're ramming a square peg into a round hole. Shanahan's approach on offense is more fluid and subject to change based on his personal and passer he has under center. Very different approaches to the game and a different management style from these two.
I can't fully agree with the belief that Pete doesn't know Xs and Os. He's been lauded in the past for his acumen, particularly on defense. I remember a story about when he was on Lou Holtz's staff at Arkansas as a grad assistant and he was apparently asking questions NO ONE else on the staff came up with.

Pete has talked about how much he had to simplify things when he got to USC because college students just didn't have the time to learn the complicated concepts that full-time NFL players can learn. I think he's adopted keeping it simpler as long as that works - and since his Hawks teams have had a lot of younger guys, it's been a pretty good way to go until the last few years. But they've been trying different stuff on D even before the scheme changed this offseason. We've seen them trending away from the cover 3 zone, for one thing.

Pete may not be Belichick, but he's not some dumb guy the way some folks here like to portray him either.
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
5,502
Reaction score
743
Location
SoCal Desert
Interesting when it comes to the QB / Culture comment. Check out Doug Baldwin responding to Michael-Shawn Duger's tweet.


Ain't nothing wrong with defense, run game, culture and an extreme vote of confidence. Angry agreed and who am I to challenge that? All Pete wants is a take care of the ball game manager, I think both Geno and Lock could benefit from that approach, these two are not ready to carry the team on their back and throw 5 TDs a game.
 

HawkRiderFan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
43
I don't think any of us think that either of our QBs can carry a team, which is why no matter what we need to be in the mix to draft the next guy / free agency or whatever next off-season. I think our QB. ceiling is have everything else around work and then hope for Tannehill / Goff etc on their good days
I think I prefer Lock to get the shot cause even though Geno hasn't started much he's been around a lot Lock has more potential to improve / higher ceiling.
 

Spin Doctor

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,117
Reaction score
162
I can't fully agree with the belief that Pete doesn't know Xs and Os. He's been lauded in the past for his acumen, particularly on defense. I remember a story about when he was on Lou Holtz's staff at Arkansas as a grad assistant and he was apparently asking questions NO ONE else on the staff came up with.

Pete has talked about how much he had to simplify things when he got to USC because college students just didn't have the time to learn the complicated concepts that full-time NFL players can learn. I think he's adopted keeping it simpler as long as that works - and since his Hawks teams have had a lot of younger guys, it's been a pretty good way to go until the last few years. But they've been trying different stuff on D even before the scheme changed this offseason. We've seen them trending away from the cover 3 zone, for one thing.

Pete may not be Belichick, but he's not some dumb guy the way some folks here like to portray him either.
I’m not talking about Carroll’s defense here. Im talking strictly about offense and offensive strategy. Carroll, at least in 2010-2017 was a trend setter on defense. Everyone was racing to emulate his flavor of cover 3 zone defense.

Much like Carroll was a trend setter in the 2010s, I’m saying Shanahan has been the offensive equivalent from a schematic standpoint.

I don’t see what’s controversial about the statement of Shanahan being a better offensive mind than Carroll or his coordinators, it’s Shanahan’s speciality.. much like we wouldn’t say Shanahan is a better DC than Carroll. See what I’m saying here?

Not only that, Shanahan is particularly good at scheming around his personnel’s on offenses strengths compared to most OCs. That has not been the case in Seattle under Carroll’s offenses.

Essentially, we wouldn’t get as much mileage out of a Jimmy G character on Carroll’s offenses.
 

pittpnthrs

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
3,453
Reaction score
114
You mean IF Shanahan had A YOUNGER, FASTER, MORE ELUSIVE Wilson, probably not.
BUTTTTT, Wilson is UNLIKE any >SYSTEM< Quarterback that Shannahan has EVER Coached up, and without a shred of doubt, would HAVE TO reshape his offensive philosophy to fit Wilson's style of play...Just as Pete & all his Offensive Minded Coaching staff has had to do.
POINT IS, y'all have made the argument that Shanahan is a Quarterback GURU & With Jimmy G. SHOULD have been able to formulate strategies to overcome Pete's so-so Defense over the last 4 seasons, yes? no? ---YES

What is wrong with reshaping the offense around the strengths of your QB? I dont think Carroll did a good enough job with it hence the labeling of "Pete Ball".

The Seahawks are just a bad matchup for the 49ers for some reason. It cant be explained. Seattle beats them all the time but cant beat the Rams. The 49ers beat the Rams all the time. *shrugs*
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
8,273
Reaction score
392
What is wrong with reshaping the offense around the strengths of your QB? I dont think Carroll did a good enough job with it hence the labeling of "Pete Ball".

The Seahawks are just a bad matchup for the 49ers for some reason. It cant be explained. Seattle beats them all the time but cant beat the Rams. The 49ers beat the Rams all the time. *shrugs*
Each & EVERY HC shapes/calibrates their QB's Play to their Offense, the problem arises when you LIMIT your playbook (simplify) to accommodate for a 'Pass Happy' system.
"Peteball" doesn't DETRACT, it actually ADDS to the Offensive weaponry....Like if you KNOW that I'm only throwing overhand Rights, & haymakers, (Deep Balls) you will savvy up your Defenses (Rams - 2 high) to counter, BUT, if I'm throwing in a few unexpected body shots (running the ball) ALONG WITH the Haymakers, your Defenses will have to ADJUST to that....Not as easy peasy to defend, eh?
The notion that it's easy to surround a scrambling Quarterback like Wilson with a Top-Notch O-Line is hilarious....Wilson Ball is Unique, so is the Pass-Pro is a LOT MORE difficult to achieve.
 

pittpnthrs

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
3,453
Reaction score
114
Each & EVERY HC shapes/calibrates their QB's Play to their Offense, the problem arises when you LIMIT your playbook (simplify) to accommodate for a 'Pass Happy' system.
"Peteball" doesn't DETRACT, it actually ADDS to the Offensive weaponry....Like if you KNOW that I'm only throwing overhand Rights, & haymakers, (Deep Balls) you will savvy up your Defenses (Rams - 2 high) to counter, BUT, if I'm throwing in a few unexpected body shots (running the ball) ALONG WITH the Haymakers, your Defenses will have to ADJUST to that....Not as easy peasy to defend, eh?
The notion that it's easy to surround a scrambling Quarterback like Wilson with a Top-Notch O-Line is hilarious....Wilson Ball is Unique, so is the Pass-Pro is a LOT MORE difficult to achieve.

The problem with Pete is that he would continue to throw the overhand rights and haymakers, convinced that it would be affective eventually, until it was to late and not being able to overcome the damage at that point. Was it last season he ran the ball 8 or 9 times in a row right into a stacked box? That didnt fool anybody.

As for the Oline, have you ever asked yourself why Wilson had to scramble so much?
 

Maelstrom787

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
6,961
Reaction score
599
Location
Delaware
Ain't nothing wrong with defense, run game, culture and an extreme vote of confidence. Angry agreed and who am I to challenge that? All Pete wants is a take care of the ball game manager, I think both Geno and Lock could benefit from that approach, these two are not ready to carry the team on their back and throw 5 TDs a game.
Angry? Who cares about him, when you could listen to the sour grapes of noted scrubs and Seahawks busts Greg Olsen and Brandon Marshall?

😏
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
8,273
Reaction score
392
The problem with Pete is that he would continue to throw the overhand rights and haymakers, convinced that it would be affective eventually, until it was to late and not being able to overcome the damage at that point. Was it last season he ran the ball 8 or 9 times in a row right into a stacked box? That didnt fool anybody.

As for the Oline, have you ever asked yourself why Wilson had to scramble so much?
They ran the shit out of the ball because Russ wasn't getting it done in the air.
I'll ask you the same thing, 'Why has Wilson been continuing to abandon CLEAN POCKETS for the LAST TEN SEASONS when it was OBVIOUS that HE DIDN'T HAVE TO?
Probably because he felt the need to BUY MORE TIME for his guys to get down field, God AND the Rams Defense knows he wasn't going to take any layups that they WERE GIVING HIM, and one of the MAIN reasons the Rams have beaten the Russhawks more than any other team in our Division.
 
OP
OP
sc85sis

sc85sis

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
7,543
Reaction score
163
Location
Houston Suburbs
I’m not talking about Carroll’s defense here. Im talking strictly about offense and offensive strategy. Carroll, at least in 2010-2017 was a trend setter on defense. Everyone was racing to emulate his flavor of cover 3 zone defense.

Much like Carroll was a trend setter in the 2010s, I’m saying Shanahan has been the offensive equivalent from a schematic standpoint.

I don’t see what’s controversial about the statement of Shanahan being a better offensive mind than Carroll or his coordinators, it’s Shanahan’s speciality.. much like we wouldn’t say Shanahan is a better DC than Carroll. See what I’m saying here?

Not only that, Shanahan is particularly good at scheming around his personnel’s on offenses strengths compared to most OCs. That has not been the case in Seattle under Carroll’s offenses.

Essentially, we wouldn’t get as much mileage out of a Jimmy G character on Carroll’s offenses.
I’m speaking more to those who claim Pete is just a motivator and doesn’t know his Xs and Os. I find that laughable. And while he’s definitely not Kyle Shanahan, much of what he’s doing offensively is based on both the Shanahans (especially run game from Mike), Gruden, and now adding in the Rams stuff via Waldron. He also was the one who saw what they were doing with RG3 and had Bevell add read-option in for Russ. So no, he’s n’t an innovator on O, but he watches and adjusts as needed.
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
8,273
Reaction score
392
I can't fully agree with the belief that Pete doesn't know Xs and Os. He's been lauded in the past for his acumen, particularly on defense. I remember a story about when he was on Lou Holtz's staff at Arkansas as a grad assistant and he was apparently asking questions NO ONE else on the staff came up with.

Pete has talked about how much he had to simplify things when he got to USC because college students just didn't have the time to learn the complicated concepts that full-time NFL players can learn. I think he's adopted keeping it simpler as long as that works - and since his Hawks teams have had a lot of younger guys, it's been a pretty good way to go until the last few years. But they've been trying different stuff on D even before the scheme changed this offseason. We've seen them trending away from the cover 3 zone, for one thing.

Pete may not be Belichick, but he's not some dumb guy the way some folks here like to portray him either.
To add, Being "Defensive Minded" doesn't mean you don't understand 'Offensive Concepts', AND HOW TO best use your DEFENSE to >COUNTER<.
One of the reasons Pete insists on Pumping his Running game, & went out and hired Tom Cable, is because Tom had a way of using a multi-faceted Offense that gave Defenses a tough go of it.
 

pittpnthrs

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
3,453
Reaction score
114
They ran the shit out of the ball because Russ wasn't getting it done in the air.
I'll ask you the same thing, 'Why has Wilson been continuing to abandon CLEAN POCKETS for the LAST TEN SEASONS when it was OBVIOUS that HE DIDN'T HAVE TO?
Probably because he felt the need to BUY MORE TIME for his guys to get down field, God AND the Rams Defense knows he wasn't going to take any layups that they WERE GIVING HIM, and one of the MAIN reasons the Rams have beaten the Russhawks more than any other team in our Division.

Wilson has "Carr Syndrome" because the Oline has been so awful for so long.

The main reason the Rams beat the Seahawks so often is because McVay is a much better coach. Its as simple as that.
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
19,856
Reaction score
308
Location
Sammamish, WA
You can't convince me that if a QB spends his entire career running for his life, that he doesn't have a clock in his head, just waiting to get blasted. He carried Pete for years, period.
Clean Pockets? Yeah, not really that much at all. And for the record, it absolutely drove me crazy when he wouldn't take the underneath stuff. He clearly had stuff in front of him, but just didn't take it. One of the things about his playing that I couldn't stand. But he also got results. There's nothing wrong with being checkdown charlie, it worked quite well for a guy like Montana.
 
Top