Largent80
New member
I started 2 threads on the defense, which was embarrassed routinely last year.
Maelstrom787":1zm9cfw6 said:It's just the times, man. Passing is exciting to some. Games like the 54-51 Rams-Chiefs game have become what fans crave to see their own team engage in. They don't just equate passing with success, but with fun.
Personally, I'm all for defense this year. An infusion of defensive talent needs to be the focus, with a couple of value offense additions like a WR and draft tackle.
What you fail to understand is the strategy of the game. We try several kinds of plays to see what the tendencies of the defense are, and then we analyse the results and exploit what we find later in the game. Playing to win in the first quarter looks differently than it does in the 4th quarter, because in order to maximise 4th quarter effectiveness, we need to spend time in the earlier quarters seeing what works best.John63":1oxpap3b said:Maelstrom787":1oxpap3b said:It's just the times, man. Passing is exciting to some. Games like the 54-51 Rams-Chiefs game have become what fans crave to see their own team engage in. They don't just equate passing with success, but with fun.
Personally, I'm all for defense this year. An infusion of defensive talent needs to be the focus, with a couple of value offense additions like a WR and draft tackle.
For me it is not about excciting or not, it is about getting the most of our team on both sides and we are not. On defense we need bodies good to great bodies. On offense we need a change in scheme. For me it is about playign to win for 4 qtrs not just the 4th qtr. Its about not having such a small magin for error adn allowing us to breath. Its about being the best we can be. If that best means we win 10-7 great if that best means we win 50-10 great.
John63":3ky8qks5 said:Actually you have a point I am completley forgetting all the drives that stall out. According to football outsiders the legue avg per game was 10.8, so you were close, alot closer than me. That said we avg 11.25 this is not a good thing that means we have more failed drives than leagu avg. In fact in pretty much all the dirve categories, out side of INt per drive were we rank 3 in fewest Int per drive and were we start our drive were we are 4th we are middle of the pack imagine if we were just a little higher. But Despite your attacking reply thanks for showing my mistake.
As to the rest of your post, the fact you cant just argue the point and have to ridicule someone who made an honest mistake shows your true collors and as such will now be foed. I dont have time for people who cant have a decent conversation without ridicule.
That said for future referecne let me show you how is shoudl hav ebeen done.
I think you may have made a mistake with your clain of 6 drives. The info I have from (put in your site ) shows this. I woudld have replide well like I did.
that said to the foe you go.
KiwiHawk":3kqjkqhk said:What you fail to understand is the strategy of the game. We try several kinds of plays to see what the tendencies of the defense are, and then we analyse the results and exploit what we find later in the game. Playing to win in the first quarter looks differently than it does in the 4th quarter, because in order to maximise 4th quarter effectiveness, we need to spend time in the earlier quarters seeing what works best.John63":3kqjkqhk said:Maelstrom787":3kqjkqhk said:It's just the times, man. Passing is exciting to some. Games like the 54-51 Rams-Chiefs game have become what fans crave to see their own team engage in. They don't just equate passing with success, but with fun.
Personally, I'm all for defense this year. An infusion of defensive talent needs to be the focus, with a couple of value offense additions like a WR and draft tackle.
For me it is not about excciting or not, it is about getting the most of our team on both sides and we are not. On defense we need bodies good to great bodies. On offense we need a change in scheme. For me it is about playign to win for 4 qtrs not just the 4th qtr. Its about not having such a small magin for error adn allowing us to breath. Its about being the best we can be. If that best means we win 10-7 great if that best means we win 50-10 great.
Maybe somewhere in statistics-only-football there exists a theoretical team that plays defense exactly the same every game and every quarter of every game. That team, and that team only, you can make a plan to beat that works in all four quarters. This is like the friction-less inclined plane in Physics 101 that doesn't really exist.
In the real world where the games are actually played, you are up against defensive coordinators and coaches who change what they do specifically to avoid being predictable. They disguise schemes, rush different blitzers from similar looks, etc. to try to get an advantage. One week they get torched for 450 passing yards, the next week they come back and hold a team under 200 because they fixed whatever went wrong the previous game.
So in this actual non-static universe where we actually play, part of the game plan HAS TO BE finding out about the opposing team, which is how we play early in games. That's what it looks like to win in every quarter.
As far as bodies go, there just isn't money to sign stars at every position, so you have to pick and choose where you will be strong and where you will be weak. In some cases this makes a team open to injuries, and repeated injuries at the same position (running back, for instance, or the previous year linebackers and DBs) can leave you exposed. That's why winning the NFC Championship takes players, coaches, and at least a little luck.
thegameq":20g0pk7o said:KiwiHawk":20g0pk7o said:What you fail to understand is the strategy of the game. We try several kinds of plays to see what the tendencies of the defense are, and then we analyse the results and exploit what we find later in the game. Playing to win in the first quarter looks differently than it does in the 4th quarter, because in order to maximise 4th quarter effectiveness, we need to spend time in the earlier quarters seeing what works best.John63":20g0pk7o said:Maelstrom787":20g0pk7o said:It's just the times, man. Passing is exciting to some. Games like the 54-51 Rams-Chiefs game have become what fans crave to see their own team engage in. They don't just equate passing with success, but with fun.
Personally, I'm all for defense this year. An infusion of defensive talent needs to be the focus, with a couple of value offense additions like a WR and draft tackle.
For me it is not about excciting or not, it is about getting the most of our team on both sides and we are not. On defense we need bodies good to great bodies. On offense we need a change in scheme. For me it is about playign to win for 4 qtrs not just the 4th qtr. Its about not having such a small magin for error adn allowing us to breath. Its about being the best we can be. If that best means we win 10-7 great if that best means we win 50-10 great.
Maybe somewhere in statistics-only-football there exists a theoretical team that plays defense exactly the same every game and every quarter of every game. That team, and that team only, you can make a plan to beat that works in all four quarters. This is like the friction-less inclined plane in Physics 101 that doesn't really exist.
In the real world where the games are actually played, you are up against defensive coordinators and coaches who change what they do specifically to avoid being predictable. They disguise schemes, rush different blitzers from similar looks, etc. to try to get an advantage. One week they get torched for 450 passing yards, the next week they come back and hold a team under 200 because they fixed whatever went wrong the previous game.
So in this actual non-static universe where we actually play, part of the game plan HAS TO BE finding out about the opposing team, which is how we play early in games. That's what it looks like to win in every quarter.
As far as bodies go, there just isn't money to sign stars at every position, so you have to pick and choose where you will be strong and where you will be weak. In some cases this makes a team open to injuries, and repeated injuries at the same position (running back, for instance, or the previous year linebackers and DBs) can leave you exposed. That's why winning the NFC Championship takes players, coaches, and at least a little luck.
But Kiwi, they need a whole half of football to test the defense or see tendencies? I thought that's what watching film was for. I don't discount strategy, but this team looks outright lost on offense for 2 to 3 quarters. How can New England have a game plan to attack defenses from the start--pick them apart, through the air and on the ground--yet it takes the Seahawks 2 to 3 quarters to figure out what to do? Come on man. Something is wrong and needs to change.
Oh, I don't know,, A wild stab here.. maybe because everyone believes that the Seahawks has one of the greatest Quarterbacks to ever play the game, & that they SHOULD play to his strengths?....No reason they can't walk & chew bubblegum at the same time.....Shore up the ATTACK, & bolster the Defense TOO.BASF":2gwmcuxq said:As we get deeper and deeper into the offseason and as so many are bored from being at home, there are more and more posters who are banging their drum to improve the offense. Why is it that the team was ninth in points scored and eighth in yards gained, but that isn't enough? I decided I needed to dig little deeper to figure out why so many seem to think our offense isn't good enough.
On a team that had the tenth lowest attempts, they ranked fourteenth in passing yards and fourth in passing touchdowns. It is almost like we have a seriously good passing attack and if we had more attempts, we would probably ranked in the top ten in yards and number one in touchdowns. All that success seems to indicate quite a bit of talent in the passing game. I wonder if it means that these people are looking to gain more yards through passing, but I found it interesting that only three of the top ten teams in passing yards made the playoffs. I also found it interesting that of the top half of the league in attempts, only four of the sixteen teams made the playoffs. Only two playoff teams were in the top ten of attempts. So, what is the obsession with improving our passing game?
In regards to rushing attack, we have some serious questions regarding the health of our running backs, but our success was obvious until the injuries. Even after the injuries, the Seahawks finished third in attempts and fourth in yards. They finished a perplexing fifteenth in rushing touchdowns, but there were obviously more opportunities for play action when we made the red zone as our coaches intelligently took advantage of our propensity to run. I found it interesting that eight of the top ten teams in rushing attempts made the playoffs. So, our running game is honestly our biggest question mark on offense, yet I keep seeing people posting about needing to improve the passing game. I would like to know why.
All of that is ignoring the most obvious glaring weakness on the Seahawks which has been discussed to death and needs to be addressed far more than anything offensively. Twenty-sixth in yards allowed overall, and with having faced only the seventh lowest amount of rushing attempts, it was obvious the teams we faced did not respect our passing defense at all. Why would they? For a team to have faced the sixth most pass attempts to finish thirty-first in sacks is horrendously bad. While they did finish fifth in interceptions, that was pretty much in line with everyone else who faced a lot of pass attempts.
Maelstrom787":29cfqg7f said:It's just the times, man. Passing is exciting to some. Games like the 54-51 Rams-Chiefs game have become what fans crave to see their own team engage in. They don't just equate passing with success, but with fun.
Personally, I'm all for defense this year. An infusion of defensive talent needs to be the focus, with a couple of value offense additions like a WR and draft tackle.