Jump to content

Week 13 GDT - Seattle Seahawks vs San Francisco 49ers


J-ALL-DAY

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I've been trying to tell folks….. 

They don't really scare me. They don't create turnovers, they are on the field too much and gas. 

Impressive against the run though, I'll give them that. 

The impressive piece of that is the green Bay game, but wasn't Rodgers just really bad in that one? Missing receivers and whatnot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Forge said:

They don't really scare me. They don't create turnovers, they are on the field too much and gas. 

Impressive against the run though, I'll give them that. 

The impressive piece of that is the green Bay game, but wasn't Rodgers just really bad in that one? Missing receivers and whatnot?

I mean we have like a 8 game sample size...They simply don't allow many points. Week in and week out their defense holds in the RZ. You can move the ball on them, but they won't give you the big play and will likely hold you to a FG when you get in the RZ.

They will definitely allow yards thought and you can get long drives on them. But we have to finish with TDs since you just know regardless of how bad the Seahawks offense has been as of late, Wilson will make his fair share of plays against us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, is there any breakdown of quarters 1st-3rd vs 4th on the defensive rush yardage per carry?  The reason I ask is that a lot games I've been watching, the opposing team is just milking the clock with runs in the 4th quarter.  Seattle's giving up a ton of yards per game, but late in the game, they're expecting the run because of the clock and getting a lot of stuffs.  Then, Seattle scores late to make the game appear closer than it was.  Maybe the eye test I'm using is off, but I think the stats are being disguised by context.  Kind of like large passing numbers for teams who are always trailing in games.  I could be wrong.  Wouldn't be the first time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I mean we have like a 8 game sample size...They simply don't allow many points. Week in and week out their defense holds in the RZ. You can move the ball on them, but they won't give you the big play and will likely hold you to a FG when you get in the RZ.

They will definitely allow yards thought and you can get long drives on them. But we have to finish with TDs since you just know regardless of how bad the Seahawks offense has been as of late, Wilson will make his fair share of plays against us. 

There's a reason why even with that they are bottom third of the league in dvoa and weighted dvoa (which emphasizes the most recent games). The schedule has been kind. 

Out of that 8 game stretch, they got ripped apart by Jimmy until he got hurt then got a rookie in his first real game action. 

After that they faced a lot of the worst offenses in the league. Pitt, New Orleans and Jax are some of the worst of the worst offenses in the league, and washington gives them 4 offenses faced in that stretch that are in the bottom third in yards per play. New Orleans is excellent in the red zone, but unless their defense sets them up well, they struggle to get their (bottom of the league in yards per drive). 

Arizona had Colt and James Connor, who despite their game against us, aren't world beaters (Connor averaging 3.8 yards per carry this year). 

The other two games are the Rams, who were actually very effective offensively. They ripped off over 7 yards per play, were dead on with their red zone percengates...they were good against Seattle...except on third down (and that's a lot of credit to the Seahawks defense). Then you have the Packers game which as far as I can tell was pretty impressive (though the packers did average what they normally do on a per play basis). 

I think maybe its an okay defense, but I don't think it's much more than that. 

The biggest problem for us is that we need Jimmy to be able to throw it around a little bit maybe. I wasn't aware of the work they had done against the run, which so far as I can tell, is pretty impressive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Ataal said:

I mean, is there any breakdown of quarters 1st-3rd vs 4th on the defensive rush yardage per carry?  The reason I ask is that a lot games I've been watching, the opposing team is just milking the clock with runs in the 4th quarter.  Seattle's giving up a ton of yards per game, but late in the game, they're expecting the run because of the clock and getting a lot of stuffs.  Then, Seattle scores late to make the game appear closer than it was.  Maybe the eye test I'm using is off, but I think the stats are being disguised by context.  Kind of like large passing numbers for teams who are always trailing in games.  I could be wrong.  Wouldn't be the first time.  

The 4th quarter is actually their worst against the rush and it's not particularly close. Probably because the defense is completely gassed. They are dead last in plays per game and it's not really all that close. The second lowest team has almost run an entire game's worth of Seattle's average game play lol

They give up about 4.6 in the 4th quarter against the rush while the first two quarters are 3.6 and 3.3. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Forge said:

There's a reason why even with that they are bottom third of the league in dvoa and weighted dvoa (which emphasizes the most recent games). The schedule has been kind. 

Out of that 8 game stretch, they got ripped apart by Jimmy until he got hurt then got a rookie in his first real game action. 

After that they faced a lot of the worst offenses in the league. Pitt, New Orleans and Jax are some of the worst of the worst offenses in the league, and washington gives them 4 offenses faced in that stretch that are in the bottom third in yards per play. New Orleans is excellent in the red zone, but unless their defense sets them up well, they struggle to get their (bottom of the league in yards per drive). 

Arizona had Colt and James Connor, who despite their game against us, aren't world beaters (Connor averaging 3.8 yards per carry this year). 

The other two games are the Rams, who were actually very effective offensively. They ripped off over 7 yards per play, were dead on with their red zone percengates...they were good against Seattle...except on third down (and that's a lot of credit to the Seahawks defense). Then you have the Packers game which as far as I can tell was pretty impressive (though the packers did average what they normally do on a per play basis). 

I think maybe its an okay defense, but I don't think it's much more than that. 

The biggest problem for us is that we need Jimmy to be able to throw it around a little bit maybe. I wasn't aware of the work they had done against the run, which so far as I can tell, is pretty impressive. 

I mean Jimmy only had one good drive...I'm not going to say they got ripped apart when he literally did it for only one drive and then played like crap lol. Obviously he got hurt but not much to take for that game. 

They only played the Rams once and despite the Rams having the type of success they had, they only scored 23 points until a late Geno INT that led to a FG to close the game. 

The Packers had almost 400 yards yet only scored their first TD in the 4th quarter and were held to 17 points. 

The Cards had over 400 yards and only put up 23 points.

You can say they played bad offenses and they have, but they have also held well against good offenses. They haven't had ONE terrible performance where they just got picked apart and allowed over 30 points. That's hard to do regardless of who you play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Forge said:

The 4th quarter is actually their worst against the rush and it's not particularly close. Probably because the defense is completely gassed. They are dead last in plays per game and it's not really all that close. The second lowest team has almost run an entire game's worth of Seattle's average game lol

They give up about 4.6 in the 4th quarter against the rush while the first two quarters are 3.6 and 3.3. 

Gotcha.  That's actually pretty impressive, then.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Forge said:

The 4th quarter is actually their worst against the rush and it's not particularly close. Probably because the defense is completely gassed. They are dead last in plays per game and it's not really all that close. The second lowest team has almost run an entire game's worth of Seattle's average game play lol

They give up about 4.6 in the 4th quarter against the rush while the first two quarters are 3.6 and 3.3. 

That bodes well as long as we can protect the ball and keep the game close, preferably have a lead heading into the 4th quarter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

That bodes well as long as we can protect the ball and keep the game close, preferably have a lead heading into the 4th quarter. 

I'm just concerned about stopping their offense. Our corners match up so poorly against DK and we always struggle to knock Russ off his game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, N4L said:

We arent getting swept by this version of the seahawks. It was a total fluke that we even lost to them last time

I would be more worried about our lack of LBs if they had a decent run game

Would be our luck AP has big game after looking awful with the Titans. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...