We Were Wrong: Seahawks Reverse Rout Packers

Setting the stage. Sunday morning. Gameday. GAME-day!

“This is great ! A Hawks / Packers game in the snow in Green Bay !

I freakin’ woke up in football heaven today !!! All I want for Christmas is a functional offensive line .”

Posted by Richard fg7 on Dec 11, 2016 | 11:51 AM reply rec (1) flag

Football heaven, apparently, is the worst heaven, with the worst entertainment. It also lies about its weather. Sounds like the opposite of heaven.

“Black Santa steals a zamboni and rides it around the field to celebrate.”

Posted by goatweed on Dec 9, 2016 | 6:46 AM reply unrec (24)

Goat’s comment doesn’t apply, but it was the best one of last week’s column, and therefore warrants re-printing.

“Injuries to Green Bay would allow Seattle to rely on the ground game”

The Packers were injured at LB1, LB2, LB3, and whatever a Clay Matthews is.

So frequent running should have worked — many had foreseen it!

“Rawls shows CMike how its really done. 32-19 Seattle.”

Posted by qrtqrt on Dec 9, 2016 | 6:56 AM reply rec (6) flag

We were wrong. Oh, for sure, Seattle ran the ball enough times: 26. Got enough yards to march up and down the field: 136. And Green Bay couldn’t stop it consistently: 5.4 yards per attempt.

But the Hawks themselves stopped their own running game quite easily by getting off the field quickly, via interceptions.

Darrell Bevell and the offensive braintrust tried to run the ball. They tried.

Drive 1: P, R, R, R, P, R, P, R, P, R, R, R, FG yay

Drive 2: P, R, P, terrible punt

Drive 3: R, interception here we go

Drive 4: R, P, sack, terrible punt

Drive 5: P, R, P, P, R, P, P, terrible punt

Drive 6,: R, P, P, P, interception again

After halftime,

Drive 7: P, P, R, R, P, R, P, interception again again

Drive 8: R, R, interception for fun

Through eight drives it’s extremely balanced-looking. 24 pass plays, 20 runs. You can argue that the game plan should’ve been weighted more heavily toward the ground game but four of the 24 pass plays ended drives, so there’s no telling how things would’ve played out with a few more snaps. And Green Bay’s pass defense was supposed to be suspect. Wilson was supposed to take advantage of a mediocre secondary, and the play calls reflect a plan along those lines.

Which leads us to...

Russell is back!

No.

The Panthers game suggested he is. The history of him in December would suggest he is. Some of us suggested he is.

“I think our offense carries over from last game

and we outscore them big time. 39 – 13. Rawls is going to have a good game, but Wilson just goes OFF.”

Posted by fargomonkey on Dec 9, 2016 | 6:19 PM reply rec (1) flag

The Seahawks themselves suggested exactly the same thing on their internet website location:

“In 19 December starts, Wilson has thrown 35 touchdowns and just nine interceptions, giving him a 106.2 passer rating that is the best in the league since the 1970 merger for a quarterback with five or more December starts.”

That was before Sunday. While a TD/INT of 36-14 is still pretty, some of the holiday shine is off the RW3000. Now his December passer rating is 100.9. Which is good — but also right in line with his career mark of 99.0.

Before Sunday, you could have fashioned a trend with his passer rating numbers:

Sept: 91.6

Oct: 95.0

Nov: 106.9

Dec/Jan: 107.1

Now November alone stands out as the... standout month.

“If you’re a Seahawk, you protect the ball. It’s what you do.”

“No fumbles and no INTs from Russ and Co.”

Posted by SeahawkShock on Dec 11, 2016 | 12:31 PM reply rec flag

Pete Carroll, who used to coach the Hawks before bolting for his “hometown” Rams next month, places value on ball security. (Did you know?) You just have to find one of the many, many articles that dives into the Win Forever mantra, start reading, and it won’t be long before “PROTECT THE BALL” shows up, with the words in that order. In caps lock, too, if Pete had his way.

If on Sunday, the wolf-grey-clad men had been their usual ballhawks, selfish with the rock instead of generous, they would have moved the ball nicely. But ball protection hasn’t been the Hawks’ forte this year.

In six games, they’ve won the turnover battle. Five times, they’ve lost it. Twice it’s been a draw. As a result, in 2016, Seattle sits at an exactly even turnover differential. Last year, they were +7 overall.

Add the two years together and the Hawks have forced more turnovers on 14 occasions, which is nice, but also have committed more on 10 occasions.

Their ball security just isn’t great any more. Maybe it’s good. You like the plus-7 enough, but as a cumulative number for the last 29 games, it’s extremely pedestrian, and not in the Doug Baldwin kind of way.

Turnovers are down for a variety of reasons, sure, including the approach of their opponents. Which is probably fine as long as Russell doesn’t make a habit of throwing interceptions. Which he doesn’t, in general.

Multi-pick games by RW

2012: two

2013: one

2014: one

2015: one

2016: two

So he’s careful, in general. We knew that. It’s just that it’s hard to see the “in general” picture when you’re in the middle of a specifically stinky stretch. A lot of the Hawks’ perceived issues with ball protection, when looked at in the larger context of the RW era, can be laid at the feet of the last three games. Eight interceptions since Tampa Bay. Eight!

Are the giveaways a trend, or a blip? Sample size suggests blip. History suggests blip. Drops by receivers on Sunday, bad bounces off helmets — those suggest blip as well.

Well then let’s see who’s coming up on the schedule, maybe this week the blip disappears and... oh.

Last thought, shot at stats-obsessed self

Box scores contain a ton of valuable information. But look how misleading this one was, if all you do is skim it or look for one stat to tell the story.

First downs: Sea 22, GB 18

Total yards: Sea 354, GB 330

Rushing: Sea 26-136-0, GB 30-93-2

Third-down conversions: Sea 50 percent (6-12), GB 36 percent (4-11)

TOP: Sea 31:50, GB 28:10

In almost all the traditional metrics, the ones we like to cite as keys to the game, the game appears close, or even to the advantage of the Seahawks.

Maybe they should protect the ball better then.

Rams

Rams. Go nuts.