The Hits Against PC/Schotty Keep Coming

[mrt144]

The latest salvo:

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2019/1/14/18 ... ete-carrol

In particular this



Despite whatever good our rushing game did in season for the whole of the team, it certainly did not deliver in terms of 3rd and manageable, nor did it convert above league average in 3rd and 1, the most manageable.

As more and more post mortem analysis piles up, the seeming reality that passing, and especially a dedicated, creative, and robust passing game delivers so much more value than even the best rushing game comes more into focus. It's not a coincidence that the 4 teams left all have some level of passing sophistication and talent to support that vision, far far far surpasses ours.

I know it isn't what Pete wants, what many of you want, but I think it boils down to the question of whether you think RW could be the key cog in a passing offense that makes it a point of emphasis to make it dangerous, efficient and risk adverse and then consistently use it in that way.

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

This seems to be intractable as far as I'm concerned - I am not simply asking for the Hawks to pass more. Simply passing more with Schotty's route concepts and combos, RB utilization, OL talent is insufficient. I'm talking a full on revolution in how the team approaches passing as a concept. And thus intractable.

 

[John63]

The latest salvo:

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2019/1/14/18 ... ete-carrol

In particular this



Despite whatever good our rushing game did in season for the whole of the team, it certainly did not deliver in terms of 3rd and manageable, nor did it convert above league average in 3rd and 1, the most manageable.

As more and more post mortem analysis piles up, the seeming reality that passing, and especially a dedicated, creative, and robust passing game delivers so much more value than even the best rushing game comes more into focus. It's not a coincidence that the 4 teams left all have some level of passing sophistication and talent to support that vision, far far far surpasses ours.

I know it isn't what Pete wants, what many of you want, but I think it boils down to the question of whether you think RW could be the key cog in a passing offense that makes it a point of emphasis to make it dangerous, efficient and risk adverse and then consistently use it in that way.

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

This seems to be intractable as far as I'm concerned - I am not simply asking for the Hawks to pass more. Simply passing more with Schotty's route concepts and combos, RB utilization, OL talent is insufficient. I'm talking a full on revolution in how the team approaches passing as a concept. And thus intractable.

all true.

 

[GeekHawk]

Maybe we could get Mora back to institute your vision.

 

[nwHawk]

So, you're saying get rid of Russell Wilson...

 

[DomeHawk]

I couldn't care less how much we run or pass. My concerns are based upon what is going to work in each situation.

That's what a capable/innovative OC brings to the table.

 

[mrt144]

Maybe we could get Mora back to institute your vision.

Nope.

First, I identify this situation as intractable barring a quasi religious revelation to PC. PC signed an extension, he is the Hawks coach for the foreseeable future.

Second, if anything, the quasi religious awakening would result PC falling in love with some younger OC in college and then trying to mentor them into another NFL OC position or even his HC replacement. Schotty is a means to Petes end and is not the future of the franchise in any capacity. Well in my opinion at least.

Third, I like Pete enough to root for him to grow even as a Septagenerian who has nothing left to prove as a coach.

 

[AgentDib]

Our offensive line had a significant amount of holding and false start penalties on passing plays. How many of those third down and long situations were either caused by those penalties or simply missed execution on first/second down passing plays? There is nothing here to indicate that the running game itself is the problem, and it's possible/probable that we should have run even more if the primary goal is to "keep third down manageable".

The better argument to pass more is that the goal is to score points, and you increase the chance of avoiding third downs in the first place by throwing more often. If you watch KC's drive chart this season you'll see plenty of drives where they score a TD and are 1/1 or 0/0 on third downs. This is why Pete talks about "explosive" plays in the passing game but execution of those depends on your personnel and scheme. If you tip too far towards passing then you end up with the Mike Martz mad bomber offense where the QB throws for 100 TDs but also gets sacked 100 times and throws for 100 INTs.

 

[mrt144]

Our offensive line had a significant amount of holding and false start penalties on passing plays. How many of those third down and long situations were either caused by those penalties or simply missed execution on first/second down passing plays? There is nothing here to indicate that the running game itself is the problem, and it's possible/probable that we should have run even more if the primary goal is to "keep third down manageable".

The better argument to pass more is that the goal is to score points, and you increase the chance of avoiding third downs in the first place by throwing more often. If you watch KC's drive chart this season you'll see plenty of drives where they score a TD and are 1/1 or 0/0 on third downs. This is why Pete talks about "explosive" plays in the passing game but execution of those depends on your personnel and scheme. If you tip too far towards passing then you end up with the Mike Martz mad bomber offense where the QB throws for 100 TDs but also gets sacked 100 times and throws for 100 INTs.

The running game is a problem insomuch that no matter how good it is it is still inferior to a good passing game that has the full buy in of the org and isn't some insipid huck it chuck footbaw stuff.

Also the highlighted is false. We have 4 offenses currently in the playoffs that have ostensibly not fallen in the Mike Martz trap by forming fully cogent gameplans that revolve around passing as a means towards getting first downs and setting up better series odds, full stop. Alluding to a potential outcome of peril from pursuing something while ignoring the testaments right in front our faces about how it can be done properly and well...cmon.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

Or maybe they reached two Super Bowls with a run-first approach when all the same talking heads were predicting Manning to win for the exact same reason.

Remember how we lost 49 by passing instead of running?

 

[mrt144]

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

Or maybe they reached two Super Bowls with a run-first approach when all the same talking heads were predicting Manning to win for the exact same reason.

Remember how we lost 49 by passing instead of running?

Dynamic systems are dynamic. If you think things havent changed since 2013 and 2014 seasons across the league, well, no further need to talk about the future with you.

 

[Ozzy]

NE this weekend is a prime example of a team adjusting to the weaknesses of the other team. SD was beat up at linebacker and played a lot of dime and 7 db looks so what does NE do? They let James White catch 15 balls out of the backfield and attacked their weakness over and over. There is zero chance of the Seahawks doing that in the same situation and would rather grind out a close nail biter. Its absolutely bizarre. And don't get the wrong idea, Pete is an outstanding coach and his success can't be denied. It's just an area that I would consider his weakness.

I also hate that just because I think they should have adjusted earlier and utilized Wilson and locket more efficiently that I'm anti-run because I'm not. I'm fine with Pete's approach but with a little tweaking I think we probably win that game and do a little more all year long as well. Huard, Salk, Clayton keep painting the argument as if we wanted them to throw 50+ times a game and its intellectually dishonest.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

There is zero chance of the Seahawks doing that in the same situation

There's zero chance of any team doing that in the same situation. Nobody adjusts as quickly as Belicheat. That's why he's got five rings and is about to have a sixth.

 

[mrt144]

NE this weekend is a prime example of a team adjusting to the weaknesses of the other team. SD was beat up at linebacker and played a lot of dime and 7 db looks so what does NE do? They let James White catch 15 balls out of the backfield and attacked their weakness over and over. There is zero chance of the Seahawks doing that in the same situation and would rather grind out a close nail biter. Its absolutely bizarre. And don't get the wrong idea, Pete is an outstanding coach and his success can't be denied. It's just an area that I would consider his weakness.

I also hate that just because I think they should have adjusted earlier and utilized Wilson and locket more efficiently that I'm anti-run because I'm not. I'm fine with Pete's approach but with a little tweaking I think we probably win that game and do a little more all year long as well. Huard, Salk, Clayton keep painting the argument as if we wanted them to throw 50+ times a game and its intellectually dishonest.

Seriously, I want the quality of what we do to be higher and at the standard of the front runners of the league no matter what it is we choose to do. Be excellent at rushing. Be excellent at passing. Be excellent at 3rd downs and situational football. There is nothing that says we have to be substandard in any of this to achieve other things on the team.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

Or maybe they reached two Super Bowls with a run-first approach when all the same talking heads were predicting Manning to win for the exact same reason.

Remember how we lost 49 by passing instead of running?

Dynamic systems are dynamic. If you think things havent changed since 2013 and 2014 seasons across the league, well, no further need to talk about the future with you.

"It's a passing league" arguments have been going on since the mid-2000s. I know, because I've been here, and we've been having them. The NFL rules favoring quarterbacks were implemented before Pete arrived in Seattle and the trend existed before then.

 

[AgentDib]

If you tip too far towards passing...

Also the highlighted is false... Alluding to a potential outcome...cmon.

Adjusted your highlighting slightly in case you misread my post. Of the four teams remaining in the playoffs I would say only the Chiefs have ever really gotten too far from the run and that has been in perhaps only two games this season.

Do we agree that an optimal balance between runs and passes exists, with at least some of each, and that balance is different for each team based on their personnel and the opposing team? For some reason the discussion around this is being phrased in black and white (run vs. pass) when the reality is we are really discussing the merits of 55% run/pass vs. 50% run/pass vs 45% run/pass, etc.

From any arbitrary point towards the middle of the continuum, the benefit to increasing the pass percentage is increasing your expected point total. The drawback is that your opponent will also increase their expected point total in return. Do you agree with that?

 

[mrt144]

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

Or maybe they reached two Super Bowls with a run-first approach when all the same talking heads were predicting Manning to win for the exact same reason.

Remember how we lost 49 by passing instead of running?

Dynamic systems are dynamic. If you think things havent changed since 2013 and 2014 seasons across the league, well, no further need to talk about the future with you.

"It's a passing league" arguments have been going on since the mid-2000s. I know, because I've been here, and we've been having them. The NFL rules favoring quarterbacks were implemented before Pete arrived in Seattle and the trend existed before then.

Except the numbers are validating that premise in full now. You are hanging on to people's perception of heralding in a new era before it was really in full effect over the heads of people pointing to the statistical evidence that the league really has changed distinctly now.

The MEDIAN completion percentage among NFL Qbs is 67%. Palmer LED the league in 2005 with that number. Come on buddy.

 

[mistaowen]

NE this weekend is a prime example of a team adjusting to the weaknesses of the other team. SD was beat up at linebacker and played a lot of dime and 7 db looks so what does NE do? They let James White catch 15 balls out of the backfield and attacked their weakness over and over. There is zero chance of the Seahawks doing that in the same situation and would rather grind out a close nail biter. Its absolutely bizarre. And don't get the wrong idea, Pete is an outstanding coach and his success can't be denied. It's just an area that I would consider his weakness.

I also hate that just because I think they should have adjusted earlier and utilized Wilson and locket more efficiently that I'm anti-run because I'm not. I'm fine with Pete's approach but with a little tweaking I think we probably win that game and do a little more all year long as well. Huard, Salk, Clayton keep painting the argument as if we wanted them to throw 50+ times a game and its intellectually dishonest.

The Pats essentially replaced the run game early on with short passing to attack a weakness which therein opened up the run game and their rookie tallies probably his best game of the year against a STOUT run D. Having the capabilities to essentially morph into any style to attack a weakness instead of 'run your game' is what the Pats do better than anyone. Completely neglecting the short/intermediate middle of the field on passing plays is something I've wished would go away for years.

The other thing I was thinking during the game is when it hit 21-7 with 6ish? minutes before half, Pats got the ball back and put 2 more TD's on the board while almost getting at least another FG. They called a timeout with 2 minutes left WINNING 35-7 when they sacked Rivers on first down to try and get another score. That is something you'd do to your friend in Madden. I can just see Pete getting the ball back and looking to grind out the half and head to half time 21-7 rather than step on their throats and put the game away before the 3rd quarter.

I get it I get it, shorten the field, limit turnovers, control the clock, trust your D, and I don't want anyone else but Pete. It has worked immensely well. It's just funny seeing complete opposite sides of the spectrum.

 

[mrt144]

If you tip too far towards passing...

Also the highlighted is false... Alluding to a potential outcome...cmon.

Adjusted your highlighting slightly in case you misread my post. Of the four teams remaining in the playoffs I would say only the Chiefs have ever really gotten too far from the run and that has been in perhaps only two games this season.

Do we agree that an optimal balance between runs and passes exists, with at least some of each, and that balance is different for each team based on their personnel and the opposing team? For some reason the discussion around this is being phrased in black and white (run vs. pass) when the reality is we are really discussing the merits of 55% run/pass vs. 50% run/pass vs 45% run/pass, etc.

From any arbitrary point towards the middle of the continuum, the benefit to increasing the pass percentage is increasing your expected point total. The drawback is that your opponent will also increase their expected point total in return. Do you agree with that?

It isn't just increasing your expected point total - it's playing super efficient offensive football that reasonably should increase point total if not field position as well as dynamically change the objectives of the opposing offense to force them into similarly hyper efficient football. And I'm not discussing the relative merits of balance. I'm talking about the quality of the sausage that PC and Schotty choose to make, regardless of it's balance between Hot Link and Polish.

The thing that sunk our chances on offense were three and out predicated on a rushing game that was ailing and there being an insufficient adjustment or plan to lean on.

 

[JimmyG]

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

Or maybe they reached two Super Bowls with a run-first approach when all the same talking heads were predicting Manning to win for the exact same reason.

Remember how we lost 49 by passing instead of running?

Even this year alone. Seattle hit their grove when we turned into a running juggernaut.

 

[mrt144]

The fundamental error in my opinion from Pete and Schotty is refusing to acknowledge that the climate of the NFL has changed and passing simply is that much better if you devote sufficient cognitive and personnel resources to it. Maybe the investment in tailoring the team towards that is too difficult a task for PC and Schotty to manage.

Or maybe they reached two Super Bowls with a run-first approach when all the same talking heads were predicting Manning to win for the exact same reason.

Remember how we lost 49 by passing instead of running?

Even this year alone. Seattle hit their grove when we turned into a running juggernaut.

Yes, when they turned to the thing they really seem to care about and dedicate thought to, it worked better than elevating something neither the HC nor the OC is particularly adept at or seemingly interested in (I'm sure we can all think of things where our interest and enthusiasm yields better results for a task than grudgingly doing something out of necessity) . But it didn't work so well to avoid losing to good teams nor did it provide a starting basis for alternative approach if it wasn't working.

Defeating the Hawks shouldn't boil down to "stack the box and let PC and Schotty make their bed with it"