Will people stop saying our defense played bad last night?

[bestfightstory]

This "debate" will go on for as long as we have Carroll as our coach. His philosophy is to err on the side of conceding yards in order to reduce the chance of big plays that lead to easy points, especially when we have the lead. Occasionally it will not work out and everybody will blame the defense for the loss. Bradley got the blame the last two years whenever it didn't work out, but it has always been Carroll's MO and it works out most of the time. The other team makes a mistake at some point and our bend but not break defense forces a field goal, punt or turnover.

BINGO. They marched right down the field only to stall at they goal line yesterday. Shades of Gus Bradley for a moment, there. No. Shades of Pete Carroll & his philosophy and his staff.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

This "debate" will go on for as long as we have Carroll as our coach. His philosophy is to err on the side of conceding yards in order to reduce the chance of big plays that lead to easy points, especially when we have the lead. Occasionally it will not work out and everybody will blame the defense for the loss. Bradley got the blame the last two years whenever it didn't work out, but it has always been Carroll's MO and it works out most of the time. The other team makes a mistake at some point and our bend but not break defense forces a field goal, punt or turnover.

I don't think it's just Carroll, most coaches employ some sort of two deep zone/prevent defense with a lead in the 4th quarter.

The problem I have is no other coach has the LOB, who save for one brainfart against T.Y. Hilton have not given up a long TD pass. For Carroll to continue to put his defense in zone coverage when they don't even like it, nor play well in it is confusing to me.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Small sample size means irrelevant. Go chart the last three full seasons and let's see what it's at. (2010, 2011, 2012) Plus, compare it to something more meaningful like turnover differential.

 

[Hawken-Dazs]

Why were you listening to Elise?

 

[Sarlacc83]

This "debate" will go on for as long as we have Carroll as our coach. His philosophy is to err on the side of conceding yards in order to reduce the chance of big plays that lead to easy points, especially when we have the lead. Occasionally it will not work out and everybody will blame the defense for the loss. Bradley got the blame the last two years whenever it didn't work out, but it has always been Carroll's MO and it works out most of the time. The other team makes a mistake at some point and our bend but not break defense forces a field goal, punt or turnover.

I don't think it's just Carroll, most coaches employ some sort of two deep zone/prevent defense with a lead in the 4th quarter.

The problem I have is no other coach has the LOB, who save for one brainfart against T.Y. Hilton have not given up a long TD pass. For Carroll to continue to put his defense in zone coverage when they don't even like it, nor play well in it is confusing to me.

It's been covered before, but you can't run man to man all the time. You have to mix up looks in order to confuse the QB.

And that worked OK for us last night, since one of the interceptions came in zone.

 

[dontbelikethat]

I laugh so hard when people put up stats about yards. When was the last time a team won because they had more yards vs how many points were scored?

I'm waiting.

Never?

Thought so.

Yards aren't obviously the most important stat in a game, but it's still important, and stats don't mean anything alone, but only in context. Do I think we will dominate every game? No, that's just not realistic, but this game got way to close for comfort. The Run D was gashed early and often which helped open up their play action which then helped their passing game. They were running down our throats. The defense deserves credit for stepping up when they needed to and getting stops when the offense obviously wasn't doing its best, but it's not like they didn't have problems because they did. Again, I don't agree with saying our defense was not bad and they did fine, because they were bad in certain aspects especially against the run, but they came up with the plays when they needed it most, but that only excuses them if they win (obviously). It's kind of hard to explain, but what I'm trying to say is like, the defense played a bad game, but to their credit, they finished which is good. I understand you can only win in the 4th quarter and finishing the game with good defensive play is good, but it doesn't excuse how poorly you've played through out the game (in certain aspects) which in due part put you in that position(albeit the offense had more to do with the close game, but the defense still had some problems).

 

[Cartire]

Small sample size means irrelevant. Go chart the last three full seasons and let's see what it's at. (2010, 2011, 2012) Plus, compare it to something more meaningful like turnover differential.

Hawkeyes charted 2011 and 2012. Came to the same conclusion. Sean Payton has said TOP is a massive part of the game. You know, the Super Bowl winning coach.

We're not getting into this again. You don't like facts. No stat is 100% conclusive in telling a victory besides the score. TOP has a pretty high success rate though. Accept that. And I never said turnover differential is not also a good stat. It's ok to have multiple stats that tell a story.

 

[Basis4day]

Run defense was bad. Zac Stacy got 134 yards on 26 carries, rams got 200 total.

Yes, they ran the ball better than they probably should have, but when a team gives up zero touchdowns and only 9 total points with an offensive performance that was SO ABYSMAL, you have to give them props. Our defense couldn't have been blamed had they given up that final score. Our offense blew chunks yesterday and the defense stepped up and made the plays we had to have.

What is it that makes certain observers focus so much on yards given up rather than points allowed? Sure, it puts them in more opportunities for points, but that's it, an opportunity. The offense still needs to score on you

Pete really wants to do the following with his D.

1. Prevent TD's
2. Prevent the big play
3. Eat the clock
4. Force turnovers.
5. Prevent penalties.

You can only be so angry at a defensive effort when they're limited to 3 field goals. Clean up the penalties and the D is in good shape.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

This "debate" will go on for as long as we have Carroll as our coach. His philosophy is to err on the side of conceding yards in order to reduce the chance of big plays that lead to easy points, especially when we have the lead. Occasionally it will not work out and everybody will blame the defense for the loss. Bradley got the blame the last two years whenever it didn't work out, but it has always been Carroll's MO and it works out most of the time. The other team makes a mistake at some point and our bend but not break defense forces a field goal, punt or turnover.

I don't think it's just Carroll, most coaches employ some sort of two deep zone/prevent defense with a lead in the 4th quarter.

The problem I have is no other coach has the LOB, who save for one brainfart against T.Y. Hilton have not given up a long TD pass. For Carroll to continue to put his defense in zone coverage when they don't even like it, nor play well in it is confusing to me.

It's been covered before, but you can't run man to man all the time. You have to mix up looks in order to confuse the QB.

And that worked OK for us last night, since one of the interceptions came in zone.

Only because the Ram receiver fell down, he was wide open and the ball was gift wrapped to Sherm. I get that you have to confuse defenses, but our defense struggles in zone, big time.........as that last drive showed that. When did Carroll let his D go back to man to man? The goal line when it mattered.

Not saying there's not a time or place for some zone, but when we're trying to close out games is not that time IMO. Last night proved that, and the playoff game against the Falcons proved it. Receivers and QB's are just too good at finding the soft spots now. We've got the best DB's in the league, I'll take my chances.

 

[BamKam]

I just wish the D would stop playing zone. We're getting killed out there in zone.

In man-to-man we are lights-out.

I just don't get why they play zone so much now.

Against the 49ers we played almost exclusively man-to-man. Look how that game turned out.

If we played man to man that entire game then our defense on that last drive would have been lying down dead on the football field from being so tired.

 

[dontbelikethat]

When did Carroll let his D go back to man to man? The goal line when it mattered.

To be fair, that's one of the only places where it's not as dangerous to play man and it's basically 50/50. Either you get beat for a TD, or you stop them and they don't get a TD. There's only two things that can happen. The odds are different when there's an entire field for the offense to work with.

 

[AgentDib]

Not saying there's not a time or place for some zone, but when we're trying to close out games is not that time IMO. Last night proved that, and the playoff game against the Falcons proved it. Receivers and QB's are just too good at finding the soft spots now. We've got the best DB's in the league, I'll take my chances.

The purpose of zone is partly about helping your DB's, but more about making sure that you have a player in the neighborhood to prevent a huge play and mixing up the coverages. For example, consider that short crossing routes and slants can be very effective against man coverage, but also result in an interception if the QB missed that for this snap it was zone and your MLB was sitting on the route.

I haven't decided whether you would want to mix your looks up more or less against a backup QB than you would against a starter.

 

[MLOhawks]

Listning to KJR Elise gave our defense a 5/6 out of 10 last night. I think for the most part this board has been pretty good about criticizing their effort but holy hell the media like ESPN and even local like KJR keep shredding our defense last night. It wasn't our best effort by any means but we held them out of the end zone the entire game and without that last drive they racked up 260 yards or so.

You have to remember our offense couldn't stay on the field last night so our defense was probably gassed in that last possession and rightfully so. Kellen Clemons didn't do anything. The run defense was concerncing without a doubt and needs to be adressed but you are going to get some of those weeks, I am sure it isn't the last week this will happen.

Our D won us the game last night, if it wasn't for Shermans interception putting us in scoring territory we might only get 7 points or if they get in the end zone once on ANY of their drives then we lose as well.

PFT, please. Our defense sucked most of the night. A competent QB would have ripped out guts out and fed it to us. We could not stop the run to save our lives and even an average QB would have handed us our asses. The defense did make a couple good stops, but the Rams were idiots. We got lucky as hell, all the rams had to do was run Stacy 4 times and at least one of them would of scored for the win.

 

[HawkFan72]

I just wish the D would stop playing zone. We're getting killed out there in zone.

In man-to-man we are lights-out.

I just don't get why they play zone so much now.

Against the 49ers we played almost exclusively man-to-man. Look how that game turned out.

If we played man to man that entire game then our defense on that last drive would have been lying down dead on the football field from being so tired.

The D wants to play man to man every play. Sherman talks all the time about how that is the D they prefer. The commentators mentioned that the players specifically asked Dan Quinn to play more man to man this year because they hate zone.

We rotate players in and out all the time. We have the best secondary in football that can cover anyone.

Sure give them a few plays off in zone throughout the game. But don't go into zone for entire drives.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Small sample size means irrelevant. Go chart the last three full seasons and let's see what it's at. (2010, 2011, 2012) Plus, compare it to something more meaningful like turnover differential.

Hawkeyes charted 2011 and 2012. Came to the same conclusion. Sean Payton has said TOP is a massive part of the game. You know, the Super Bowl winning coach.

We're not getting into this again. You don't like facts. No stat is 100% conclusive in telling a victory besides the score. TOP has a pretty high success rate though. Accept that. And I never said turnover differential is not also a good stat. It's ok to have multiple stats that tell a story.

Uh, at the time in that thread, he charted just into this season. Link where he charted 2011 and 2012, please.

Also, I love facts. You are confusing the fact that you want to have your offense driving down the field controlling the ball as much as possible with your defense getting 3-and-outs every time with the ToP stat meaning something.

Every coach will say having your offense holding the ball more than the other team is a big goal. That is not the same thing as the postmortem ToP stat. Not at all. A significant percentage of the time, you can DOMINATE a game and the ToP does not reflect that. You think coaches write down ToP numbers to show players on Monday mornings following games? Get real.

 

[12thMan1]

Listning to KJR Elise gave our defense a 5/6 out of 10 last night. I think for the most part this board has been pretty good about criticizing their effort but holy hell the media like ESPN and even local like KJR keep shredding our defense last night. It wasn't our best effort by any means but we held them out of the end zone the entire game and without that last drive they racked up 260 yards or so.

You have to remember our offense couldn't stay on the field last night so our defense was probably gassed in that last possession and rightfully so. Kellen Clemons didn't do anything. The run defense was concerncing without a doubt and needs to be adressed but you are going to get some of those weeks, I am sure it isn't the last week this will happen.

Our D won us the game last night, if it wasn't for Shermans interception putting us in scoring territory we might only get 7 points or if they get in the end zone once on ANY of their drives then we lose as well.

Although they made some plays when it counted, our D did not win the game last night for us IMO. Poor play calling by the Rams OC lost them the game. If I was a Rams fan, I'd be asking, "A one on one fade with those DBs?! Really?!!!"

 

[Cartire]

Small sample size means irrelevant. Go chart the last three full seasons and let's see what it's at. (2010, 2011, 2012) Plus, compare it to something more meaningful like turnover differential.

Hawkeyes charted 2011 and 2012. Came to the same conclusion. Sean Payton has said TOP is a massive part of the game. You know, the Super Bowl winning coach.

We're not getting into this again. You don't like facts. No stat is 100% conclusive in telling a victory besides the score. TOP has a pretty high success rate though. Accept that. And I never said turnover differential is not also a good stat. It's ok to have multiple stats that tell a story.

Uh, at the time in that thread, he charted just into this season. Link where he charted 2011 and 2012, please.

Also, I love facts. You are confusing the fact that you want to have your offense driving down the field controlling the ball as much as possible with your defense getting 3-and-outs every time with the ToP stat meaning something.

Every coach will say having your offense holding the ball more than the other team is a big goal. That is not the same thing as the postmortem ToP stat. Not at all. A significant percentage of the time, you can DOMINATE a game and the ToP does not reflect that. You think coaches write down ToP numbers to show players on Monday mornings following games? Get real.

Just stop making stuff up. Show me this "significant percentage of the time". You can't, so stop it. And you won't try, because you know you are wrong. A significant percentage of the time, the team with the higher TOP wins. Bottom line. Get over it. Your wrong. And you can't prove otherwise.

And before you throw out single games, stop. A higher percentage means the majority, not EVERY GAME. So either come in with facts or just accept that more times then not, the team with a higher TOP wins. It's proven, it's fact, it's not debatable. It's a quantifiable stat. It's not an opinion.

This isnt about turnover differential. This isn't about last nights game. This is nothing but a constant, factual trend. The team with a higher TOP wins more time then the the teams that win with less. Fact. Period.

 

[Cartire]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=76635&start=260

And sorry. Wasn't hawk eyes, it was hansgruber.

The page before is a nice interview with Sean Payton about TOP.

 

[Laloosh]

I laugh so hard when people put up stats about yards. When was the last time a team won because they had more yards vs how many points were scored?

I'm waiting.

Never?

Thought so.

You don't think anybody in the organization looks at stats when evaluating how we performed in any phase of the game? They probably just say "Hey, we got the W so we don't need to do anything differently".

You're being argumentative, just to be argumentative.

 

[formido]

This "debate" will go on for as long as we have Carroll as our coach. His philosophy is to err on the side of conceding yards in order to reduce the chance of big plays that lead to easy points, especially when we have the lead. Occasionally it will not work out and everybody will blame the defense for the loss. Bradley got the blame the last two years whenever it didn't work out, but it has always been Carroll's MO and it works out most of the time. The other team makes a mistake at some point and our bend but not break defense forces a field goal, punt or turnover.

BINGO. They marched right down the field only to stall at they goal line yesterday. Shades of Gus Bradley for a moment, there. No. Shades of Pete Carroll & his philosophy and his staff.

Players were quoted as being excited at the man coverage Quinn called at the end. That dog won't hunt.

[Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/Seahawks/commen ... dney_rice/ ]