The massively underappreciated Brian Schottenheimer

[John63]

You can't be that naive, can you? Did it get us the the SB? Did it get us out of the first round? NO.

FYI guess what let me help you

his stats last year
3448 yards, 8.2 ypa, 65.6 compt%, 35 tds, 7 ints, 110.9 QB rating and 376 rushing o tds.

Now another year
4024 yards,8.3 ypa, 68.1 complt%, 34 tds, 8 int, 110.1 Qb rating, 553 yards rushing, and 4 tds

Sorry to tell you, you can make a case season 2 2015 was his best. More yards, higher complt %, more rushing yards more total tds, virtual identical Qb ratings.


The difference more passing attempts, and we made it to the 2nd round of the playoffs, and we ran a more pass friendly offense while still maintaining a top 3 run game and having a top 5 offense. Would have gone farther if we did not revert to our run at all cost offense.

ONCE again the FACTS will set you free, well maybe not you but anyone else.

One fact nobody wants to incorporate is was the offense balanced, was a lot of those yards in prevent defense coming from behind versus playing with a lead, was his receivers healthy or were they using bench players it can go on, why stats are not the catch all in everything.

Perhaps but they are a lot better than an obviously biased stance by someone who also makes stats up. Not to mention the stats above were to show he was once again wrong about the best season. One thing I do know people trying to make you ignore, over look or minimize facts and stats know the facts are not on their side.

It is harder to rate a QB when they don't have some relative consistency, such as the same OC, WR, O Line, and RB or coach. They say QB but really it's about everyone around him and how he performs with that group.

Now take him out of that constant aspect and can he adapt and make a lesser or different group function better then the last guy no matter his stats.

Kurt Warner is a good example of a QB that made a offense work in LA, could not in New York but did again in Arizona.

Its very simple to rate them, the things you bring up allow for those ratings to be questioned. An example If I rate QBs based on Qb rating its open and shot. Now if you want to bring up mitigating things that might have elevated or decreased a QBs rating that is another thing, but does not change the fact his QB rating was what it was.

Example Wilson Career QB rating is over 100. You can however argue it could be higher if he had more talent at WR, or you could argue it would be less if he threw more. Neither changes the facts he has a career QB rating over 100 though. That fact or Stat is open-and-shut. How much that stats means to you is a different story and is a matter of opinion, but not a matter you can argue the fact is his career QB rating is over 100.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

You act like it’s a binary situation. Either you pass or run exclusively. Nobody has suggested that. Our offense is easily scoutable and basically doesn’t even try to be creative and score in the first half. The Wilson heroics you mention earlier have more to do with a failure to score early. The team acts like it’s a boxing match feeling out the opponent in the early rounds instead of knocking them on their tails early. Why don’t we try that for a change? Let’s not let poor teams like the Cardinals hang around and gain confidence and hope. Let’s take that away early so they go through the motions down 2-3 scores in the second half instead of us playing from behind. This is an offense issue that is far from fixed.

exactly we went run, run, pass more than any team in the league, between 65-75%. That is to predictable, especially when you have a QB the caliber of Wilson.

Why is that too predictable? You don't like success? You don't like Russell having the most efficient season of his career?

You can't be that naive, can you? Did it get us the the SB?

That is quite possibly the dumbest way to evaluate a QB's season.

 

[chris98251]

One fact nobody wants to incorporate is was the offense balanced, was a lot of those yards in prevent defense coming from behind versus playing with a lead, was his receivers healthy or were they using bench players it can go on, why stats are not the catch all in everything.

Perhaps but they are a lot better than an obviously biased stance by someone who also makes stats up. Not to mention the stats above were to show he was once again wrong about the best season. One thing I do know people trying to make you ignore, over look or minimize facts and stats know the facts are not on their side.

It is harder to rate a QB when they don't have some relative consistency, such as the same OC, WR, O Line, and RB or coach. They say QB but really it's about everyone around him and how he performs with that group.

Now take him out of that constant aspect and can he adapt and make a lesser or different group function better then the last guy no matter his stats.

Kurt Warner is a good example of a QB that made a offense work in LA, could not in New York but did again in Arizona.

Its very simple to rate them, the things you bring up allow for those ratings to be questioned. An example If I rate QBs based on Qb rating its open and shot. Now if you want to bring up mitigating things that might have elevated or decreased a QBs rating that is another thing, but does not change the fact his QB rating was what it was.

Example Wilson Career QB rating is over 100. You can however argue it could be higher if he had more talent at WR, or you could argue it would be less if he threw more. Neither changes the facts he has a career QB rating over 100 though. That fact or Stat is open-and-shut. How much that stats means to you is a different story and is a matter of opinion, but not a matter you can argue the fact is his career QB rating is over 100.

Your saying that the Rating is absolute, I don't I don't like Kurt Warner the person he's an arrogant asshole now, but didn't use to be. He was a QB that adapted and excelled in two systems that worked with his tools and supported him, Giants didn't really do that.

Wilson is a chameleon and has been able to adapt to what ever they have thrown at him. Dave Krieg was another QB that is way under rated for his adaptability here, Kansas City, and then Detroit under a whole bunch of different OC's and players supporting him. He just won and was able to lift the team around him to higher performance levels but never really getting credit for how good he was.

Those are the type of QB's who by QB ratings get pushed down lists but win and win a lot yet may never get the recognition because they don't have the flash of either big name guys or guys in big markets.

 

[John63]

exactly we went run, run, pass more than any team in the league, between 65-75%. That is to predictable, especially when you have a QB the caliber of Wilson.

Why is that too predictable? You don't like success? You don't like Russell having the most efficient season of his career?

You can't be that naive, can you? Did it get us the the SB?

That is quite possibly the dumbest way to evaluate a QB's season.

My point was and had you read the whole series of replies, was 1 it was not his most efficient season ever and 2 great so as long as he has the supposed most efficient season ever we are good. Does not matter if we win, loose or get to the SB. Lets just keep doing what we are doing because it is working, well only if you goal is not to get to the SB.

 

[John63]

Perhaps but they are a lot better than an obviously biased stance by someone who also makes stats up. Not to mention the stats above were to show he was once again wrong about the best season. One thing I do know people trying to make you ignore, over look or minimize facts and stats know the facts are not on their side.

It is harder to rate a QB when they don't have some relative consistency, such as the same OC, WR, O Line, and RB or coach. They say QB but really it's about everyone around him and how he performs with that group.

Now take him out of that constant aspect and can he adapt and make a lesser or different group function better then the last guy no matter his stats.

Kurt Warner is a good example of a QB that made a offense work in LA, could not in New York but did again in Arizona.

Its very simple to rate them, the things you bring up allow for those ratings to be questioned. An example If I rate QBs based on Qb rating its open and shot. Now if you want to bring up mitigating things that might have elevated or decreased a QBs rating that is another thing, but does not change the fact his QB rating was what it was.

Example Wilson Career QB rating is over 100. You can however argue it could be higher if he had more talent at WR, or you could argue it would be less if he threw more. Neither changes the facts he has a career QB rating over 100 though. That fact or Stat is open-and-shut. How much that stats means to you is a different story and is a matter of opinion, but not a matter you can argue the fact is his career QB rating is over 100.

Your saying that the Rating is absolute, I don't I don't like Kurt Warner the person he's an arrogant asshole now, but didn't use to be. He was a QB that adapted and excelled in two systems that worked with his tools and supported him, Giants didn't really do that.

Wilson is a chameleon and has been able to adapt to what ever they have thrown at him. Dave Krieg was another QB that is way under rated for his adaptability here, Kansas City, and then Detroit under a whole bunch of different OC's and players supporting him. He just won and was able to lift the team around him to higher performance levels but never really getting credit for how good he was.

Those are the type of QB's who by QB ratings get pushed down lists but win and win a lot yet may never get the recognition because they don't have the flash of either big name guys or guys in big markets.

NO I am saying the stat or fact of say rating is absolute, however there are mitigating things that lead to the fact or stat. You seem to want us to ignore or put little value in the stats and facts which is incorrect. In the end Wilson has a QB rating over 100 that is a fact and stat that can not be argued. Now if you want to argue the importance, or mitigating factors, or you opinion on value of the stat or fact that is fine, But the stat or fact still remains.

 

[chris98251]

It is harder to rate a QB when they don't have some relative consistency, such as the same OC, WR, O Line, and RB or coach. They say QB but really it's about everyone around him and how he performs with that group.

Now take him out of that constant aspect and can he adapt and make a lesser or different group function better then the last guy no matter his stats.

Kurt Warner is a good example of a QB that made a offense work in LA, could not in New York but did again in Arizona.

Its very simple to rate them, the things you bring up allow for those ratings to be questioned. An example If I rate QBs based on Qb rating its open and shot. Now if you want to bring up mitigating things that might have elevated or decreased a QBs rating that is another thing, but does not change the fact his QB rating was what it was.

Example Wilson Career QB rating is over 100. You can however argue it could be higher if he had more talent at WR, or you could argue it would be less if he threw more. Neither changes the facts he has a career QB rating over 100 though. That fact or Stat is open-and-shut. How much that stats means to you is a different story and is a matter of opinion, but not a matter you can argue the fact is his career QB rating is over 100.

Your saying that the Rating is absolute, I don't I don't like Kurt Warner the person he's an arrogant asshole now, but didn't use to be. He was a QB that adapted and excelled in two systems that worked with his tools and supported him, Giants didn't really do that.

Wilson is a chameleon and has been able to adapt to what ever they have thrown at him. Dave Krieg was another QB that is way under rated for his adaptability here, Kansas City, and then Detroit under a whole bunch of different OC's and players supporting him. He just won and was able to lift the team around him to higher performance levels but never really getting credit for how good he was.

Those are the type of QB's who by QB ratings get pushed down lists but win and win a lot yet may never get the recognition because they don't have the flash of either big name guys or guys in big markets.

NO I am saying the stat or fact of say rating is absolute, however there are mitigating things that lead to the fact or stat. You seem to want us to ignore or put little value in the stats and facts which is incorrect. In the end Wilson has a QB rating over 100 that is a fact and stat that can not be argued. Now if you want to argue the importance, or mitigating factors, or you opinion on value of the stat or fact that is fine, But the stat or fact still remains.

Only to those that want things in a box is the whole point, call it a intangible if you want. You can see it when a guy has it and it is really hard to measure. Guys like Wilson, Montana, Unitis, Tarkington, Fouts had it.

 

[GoGGell]

Hi there,

in my opinion this discussion is going in cycles, with no ending. For me the last playoff game against the Cows was a disaster in Terms of not changing any gameplan, after realising the Run Run throw sceme is not working on this day.
This was really hard to believe that BS was so blind, selfish, ignorant or whatever to believe this style will work out at the end. And it was really disappointing to see how such a unexpected season ends, having in.mind that at the beginning nobody in the League was betting for.the Hawks to reach the playoffs.

For me, who I have to tell you is not a Pro in NFL, but I am learning every season more and more and I have to tell you I love and enjoying more and more this Sport and you the 12th, the best community in Nfl. I am Coming from a soccer country, and maybe I am seeing the points a bit different.

For me there are some points we have to change, not to do the same misstakes again.
1. As many said BS has to unterstand that you will not win a SB with playing almost the same time Run Run throw. This was maybe working with Beast Mode but this time is over and I don't think Carson will be Beast Mode II. Linch was able to gut another 1st down, never mind if He had to make 4/7/or even more yards. He was amazing but Carson, the much I like him, can t do that.
2. If you have one of the Best Qb in the League you have to use him. I think this is what PC has understood now after the season, making him the highest paid Qb and giving him more weapons in the draft to have a big WR s Corp. I trust in PC making BS clear to make changes and adaptions in the offense.
I will compare it with soccer. It makes no sense to play over the middle all the time when you realize the defenders are adapted to this Plan. Than you have to play from the wings, creating holes, unexpected situations and 1vs1 situations (like WR have with Cb) to make the defense of the opponent stuggle. This unpredigtable situation the Cows never had in the playoffs, what Made it very easy for the to handle. This was a present from us, I hope we will never Do again.
3. The defense has to make another step to Support the offense, because I think this was our big advantage in the past. We always could count on the defense to make those extra big plays that we need to win games. For sure this will be the biggest challenge because they are all young and I think they need one more year to be at this Level.

Finally in PC I trust. I hope He saw the Adaption his staff has to do to use our strengt better. And with RW we have one of the biggest weapons in the League. But if we dont use hin permanent, the opponent are not stoppong loughing at US, because they do know how dangerous RW can be.
I am creating my fingers for MetCalf, Moore and Lockett, to become the BEST WR Corp this season. Because if this happens all have learned from this season and we will have a bright Future.

Over and out!

 

[Sports Hernia]

IMHO it’s was injuries, especially OL (which they knew about going into the game)
and bad/stubborn coaching (see Schotty/Pete) on offense that cost the Hawks in the *allas game.

They got out coached by Red Garrett....... Red Freakin’ Garrett! ......let that sink in!

 

[Ad Hawk]

Hi there,

in my opinion this discussion is going in cycles, with no ending. For me the last playoff game against the Cows was a disaster in Terms of not changing any gameplan, after realising the Run Run throw sceme is not working on this day.
This was really hard to believe that BS was so blind, selfish, ignorant or whatever to believe this style will work out at the end. And it was really disappointing to see how such a unexpected season ends, having in.mind that at the beginning nobody in the League was betting for.the Hawks to reach the playoffs.

For me, who I have to tell you is not a Pro in NFL, but I am learning every season more and more and I have to tell you I love and enjoying more and more this Sport and you the 12th, the best community in Nfl. I am Coming from a soccer country, and maybe I am seeing the points a bit different.

For me there are some points we have to change, not to do the same misstakes again.
1. As many said BS has to unterstand that you will not win a SB with playing almost the same time Run Run throw. This was maybe working with Beast Mode but this time is over and I don't think Carson will be Beast Mode II. Linch was able to gut another 1st down, never mind if He had to make 4/7/or even more yards. He was amazing but Carson, the much I like him, can t do that.
2. If you have one of the Best Qb in the League you have to use him. I think this is what PC has understood now after the season, making him the highest paid Qb and giving him more weapons in the draft to have a big WR s Corp. I trust in PC making BS clear to make changes and adaptions in the offense.
I will compare it with soccer. It makes no sense to play over the middle all the time when you realize the defenders are adapted to this Plan. Than you have to play from the wings, creating holes, unexpected situations and 1vs1 situations (like WR have with Cb) to make the defense of the opponent stuggle. This unpredigtable situation the Cows never had in the playoffs, what Made it very easy for the to handle. This was a present from us, I hope we will never Do again.
3. The defense has to make another step to Support the offense, because I think this was our big advantage in the past. We always could count on the defense to make those extra big plays that we need to win games. For sure this will be the biggest challenge because they are all young and I think they need one more year to be at this Level.

Finally in PC I trust. I hope He saw the Adaption his staff has to do to use our strengt better. And with RW we have one of the biggest weapons in the League. But if we dont use hin permanent, the opponent are not stoppong loughing at US, because they do know how dangerous RW can be.
I am creating my fingers for MetCalf, Moore and Lockett, to become the BEST WR Corp this season. Because if this happens all have learned from this season and we will have a bright Future.

Over and out!

:greetingsearthling:

Welcome and thanks for adding your thoughts.

I would like to see more unpredictability, too. After several seasons of heavy doses of run-plays, 2nd-down play action should leave many open holes on the field.

 

[John63]

Its very simple to rate them, the things you bring up allow for those ratings to be questioned. An example If I rate QBs based on Qb rating its open and shot. Now if you want to bring up mitigating things that might have elevated or decreased a QBs rating that is another thing, but does not change the fact his QB rating was what it was.

Example Wilson Career QB rating is over 100. You can however argue it could be higher if he had more talent at WR, or you could argue it would be less if he threw more. Neither changes the facts he has a career QB rating over 100 though. That fact or Stat is open-and-shut. How much that stats means to you is a different story and is a matter of opinion, but not a matter you can argue the fact is his career QB rating is over 100.

Your saying that the Rating is absolute, I don't I don't like Kurt Warner the person he's an arrogant asshole now, but didn't use to be. He was a QB that adapted and excelled in two systems that worked with his tools and supported him, Giants didn't really do that.

Wilson is a chameleon and has been able to adapt to what ever they have thrown at him. Dave Krieg was another QB that is way under rated for his adaptability here, Kansas City, and then Detroit under a whole bunch of different OC's and players supporting him. He just won and was able to lift the team around him to higher performance levels but never really getting credit for how good he was.

Those are the type of QB's who by QB ratings get pushed down lists but win and win a lot yet may never get the recognition because they don't have the flash of either big name guys or guys in big markets.

NO I am saying the stat or fact of say rating is absolute, however there are mitigating things that lead to the fact or stat. You seem to want us to ignore or put little value in the stats and facts which is incorrect. In the end Wilson has a QB rating over 100 that is a fact and stat that can not be argued. Now if you want to argue the importance, or mitigating factors, or you opinion on value of the stat or fact that is fine, But the stat or fact still remains.

Only to those that want things in a box is the whole point, call it a intangible if you want. You can see it when a guy has it and it is really hard to measure. Guys like Wilson, Montana, Unitis, Tarkington, Fouts had it.

I agree you can see when someone has IT but that does not change their QB rating, it is what it is.

 

[chris98251]

Your saying that the Rating is absolute, I don't I don't like Kurt Warner the person he's an arrogant asshole now, but didn't use to be. He was a QB that adapted and excelled in two systems that worked with his tools and supported him, Giants didn't really do that.

Wilson is a chameleon and has been able to adapt to what ever they have thrown at him. Dave Krieg was another QB that is way under rated for his adaptability here, Kansas City, and then Detroit under a whole bunch of different OC's and players supporting him. He just won and was able to lift the team around him to higher performance levels but never really getting credit for how good he was.

Those are the type of QB's who by QB ratings get pushed down lists but win and win a lot yet may never get the recognition because they don't have the flash of either big name guys or guys in big markets.

NO I am saying the stat or fact of say rating is absolute, however there are mitigating things that lead to the fact or stat. You seem to want us to ignore or put little value in the stats and facts which is incorrect. In the end Wilson has a QB rating over 100 that is a fact and stat that can not be argued. Now if you want to argue the importance, or mitigating factors, or you opinion on value of the stat or fact that is fine, But the stat or fact still remains.

Only to those that want things in a box is the whole point, call it a intangible if you want. You can see it when a guy has it and it is really hard to measure. Guys like Wilson, Montana, Unitis, Tarkington, Fouts had it.

I agree you can see when someone has IT but that does not change their QB rating, it is what it is.

That's what I disagree with most, the culture of trying to fit everyone in a type box, every time they seem to want to do that someone comes along and breaks down the walls and it's oh shit we have to label a new box or they say that person is a aberration.

 

[scutterhawk]

^ Yup, If Pete, had even a little healthier Offensive line, & receivers that could have gotten open just a little more, he probably would have had Schots open up the playbook a little bit sooner, but just a few too many Injuries, and you find yourself limited, & have to dial it back.
Not a lot of folks in here seem to want to concede to the Injury aspect, it was injurieS that cost us the SB game with the Pats.

 

[chris98251]

^ Yup, If Pete, had even a little healthier Offensive line, & receivers that could have gotten open just a little more, he probably would have had Schots open up the playbook a little bit sooner, but just a few too many Injuries, and you find yourself limited, & have to dial it back.
Not a lot of folks in here seem to want to concede to the Injury aspect, it was injurieS that cost us the SB game with the Pats.

Just as Holmgren would have been in another Super Bowl if we had a Healthy team playing against Chicago that year in the Division Championship.

 

[John63]

^ Yup, If Pete, had even a little healthier Offensive line, & receivers that could have gotten open just a little more, he probably would have had Schots open up the playbook a little bit sooner, but just a few too many Injuries, and you find yourself limited, & have to dial it back.
Not a lot of folks in here seem to want to concede to the Injury aspect, it was injurieS that cost us the SB game with the Pats.

Interesting since he said he should have open it up sooner, and made no meniton of the injuries or WR. Just he should have thrown more. IF only we could just except him a this word instead of coming up with excuses.

 

[McGruff]

I wouldn't matter what we did in the Cowboys game.

We weren't winning.

Too many injuries. On the road. And their defense, which was good coming in, played out of its mind.

Some games you are just destined to lose.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

You don't know that. They were moving the ball VERY fast once they started slinging it.

 

[McGruff]

You don't know that. They were moving the ball VERY fast once they started slinging it.

We punted 4 out of 6 possessions in the 2nd half, including 2 of our final 3.

On the first of our 2nd half TD drives we ran 8 out of 9 plays PM a drive that took up over 5 minutes.

The next possession we went 3 and out after two consecutive incompletions.

The next possession we went 3 and out after 4 throws, including a first down penalty.

The final possession was when we were behind by 2 scores against prevent. That was our ONLY successful drive throwing the whole game.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Nah, they were moving the ball well in the later part of the game when they actually started throwing it. Agree to disagree. Way too conservative in the 1st half of the game. They need to adjust better.

 

[McGruff]

That's the facts. But dont let them get in the way.

Fans are guilty of recency bias big time.

Because the last drive against a soft prevent went well, they think it would've worked the whole game. Qe before that drive we passed 6 out of the previous 7 plays and got zero first downs.

Because we lost the last game while trying to run, we need to ignore the previous 14 games where the run was what got us where we were.

 

[McGruff]

Nah, they were moving the ball well in the later part of the game when they actually started throwing it. Agree to disagree. Way too conservative in the 1st half of the game. They need to adjust better.

I dont disagree that on a global sense they need to be less predictable.

But it didnt matter that game.