I will keep part 3 brief. Actually, Aaron Schatz in his excellent game preview on FoxSports.com (scroll way down) beat me to the punch on much of what I had to offer about special teams in this game. The numbers seem to indicate that the teams are about even overall though each has a distinct advantage in a particular area (punt returns for Pittsburgh and kickoff coverage for Seattle).
I would add one other area that potentially favors Pittsburgh on special teams. Bill Cowher historically has been far more willing than Mike Holmgren to try to gameplan a big play on special teams. In fact, that is probably the one area where Holmgren is the more conservative coach. [Ooo; that just sent a slight shudder.] In a game I expect to be close throughout, a well-timed trick play on special teams could tip field position or lead directly to a score. The Steelers seem far more likely to attempt such a play than the Seahawks.
As for predictions, I have stated earlier that both teams have what it takes to score in this game. Beyond the obvious game-altering keys like turnovers and third down conversions, the two "hidden" determinents of the outcome will be number of offensive plays (NOT time of possession) and red zone success.
To paraphrase something I once heard from Tony Dungy, "No defense has more than about 60-65 snaps in it." After that point, no matter how how exotic the scheme or how masculine the outside linebacker, the defense will start to lose some of its... ahem... potency. The first offense to reach this number of plays usually controls the game. I see Pittsburgh's offense as more one dimensional--though that one dimension is playing out of its (fat)head(.com) right now--than Seattle's. So the Seahawks are the safer bet to reach the 60-65 play benchmark first. Still I suspect the offenses will run neck-and-neck throughout the game (obviously save turnovers/big special teams plays). Thus the second determinant is the return each offense gets on its drives. (If you put together a nice drive do you score touchdowns or kick field goals?) That is mostly a function of red zone success. You have to like Seattle's chances to convert red zone position into touchdowns, especially late in the game.
Prediction: Seahawks 28, Pittsburgh 20
Forgot to tell you what a great job breaking down the game you did...you and monkey did a great job
ReplyDeleteI also feel I do a great job, (not to mention im 95% right all the time)...but ive been trying to refrain from going all out.
Part of it is to be lazy. Part of it because i want to enjoy this game. Part of it because I dont feel like repeating the same stuff I went over in the other games.
But ill make it short and sweet...we're the better team. The better team needs to just play its style, and it will win.
28-20 is a more realistic prediction, as I dont think this game will be decided by a touchdown or less...but again, great job Dave...and dunno if I've said so yet or not, but welcome to our site!
Great Post DC and I like your choice of accompanying graphic! We've been waiting all year for our Special Teams to be ... well... Special and this is just the game and the stage to do so.
ReplyDeleteLast game they stepped up with great field position on punts, and heads up play and sure-handedness on punt returns.
This week I'm looking for some GREAT kick-off run backs (Josh Scobey - SB MVP...has a nice ring to it!)
and continued success on punts and punt coverages.
Posted by alba
Man Dave, an overt Football Outsiders and a subliminal fathead.com plug, are you being paid by these guys? Must purchase fathead, must purchase now! Actually they only have the helmet for Seattle, because, you know, all their players suck. So I don't believe I'll be spending the $125 or whatever for a fricking poster.
ReplyDeleteRegarding your observations, that plays per game is an interesting indicator, but it is obviously tied very closely to TOP. I mean really, the first offense to reach 60-65 plays would also have the TOP advantage, wouldn't it?
And as far as red zone, I also like Seattles chances of holding the Squealers to FGs, if they even make it to the redzone with any consistency.
Posted by JoSCh
Check my awesome superbowl preview
ReplyDeletehttp://poewing.com/superbowlxl.pdf
Posted by po ewing
Just playing Devil's advocate here JoSCh, but if the team that ran 60 plays ran mostly PASS PLAYS, and the other team ran mostly RUN plays, then it's possible to run more plays yet lag in TOP.
ReplyDeleteObviously, DC has an axe to grind with Football Outsiders, but I liken it to my constant pimping of this blog on other forums. As long as he keeps providing good content, I'm okay with the shameless plugs. The fathead one was mainly in jest though.
Posted by alba
What is awesome about it? It looks like it was fun for you to write. Is this a school project or something?
ReplyDeleteBTW, the way you misspelled the Seahawks' QB's name in big bold letters is awesome.
Posted by Bluefoot
I would also have been awesome had he known how to make a clickable link in the comment section!
ReplyDeletehttp://poewing.com/superbowlxl.pdf
Posted by alba
Great analysis but Randal El don't scare me infact i think P-Dub is a better punt returner.
ReplyDeleteDo u know why me and alba's boy 12:30 hasn't scored a TD yet its because he's been savin it for the big game.
Final Score 81-3 Seahawks in your face Skip Bayless
Posted by meezy
Meeze - if our boy Scooby breaks one for a TD in the big game, I'll have to get a #39 tatoo or a clock striking 12:30 or something. I'd be out of my mind!
ReplyDeletePosted by alba
Finally, ill break down the game a bit with some overlooked points:
ReplyDeleteSeahawks (no score prediction) SHOULD win.
Simple Points people overlook...WATCH THESE TWO TEAMS PLAY...
*Big Ben is overrated, and his passer rating doesn't tell the story. Stats aren't everything, and should you watch the Steelers' games...Big Ben has gotten away with a TON of dropped interceptions...not the typical 1-2 per game...im talking a TON
*the Dallas game is the most overrated point ever. Three reasons.
a) Dallas has more physical-cover corners...Pittsburgh doesn't really have either...
b) We didn't have our two stud receivers for that game against Dallas
c) 2 years ago, the Seahawks played the vaunted Ravens defense, which was in its prime at the time, and it was a 3-4 defense...Seattle gained 426 yards, adding to FIVE TD PASSES in a loss to the NFL Referees
*Hasselbeck is not Plummer. Not Kitna. Even more overlooked...hes not Manning...dont get me wrong, Manning is the better QB...BUT hes the least mobile QB in the NFL...Hass can run when in trouble...Manning cant...not to mention Hass is by FAR the best QB at throwing off balance/on the run (might even be the most accurate QB in the NFL)
*Seahawks don't have the 'glad we're just here' attitude going...theyre confident and enjoying themselves...meanwhile Pittsburgh seems uptight and edgy. If Joey Porter needs to 'PMS' (or seeing problems that arent there) over a nonthreatening comment just to get ready...then there is something wrong
*Finally...we're the better team. Yes everyone says we had the easy road, but this team put themselves into that position in the playoffs. Pittsburgh gets overlooked...Carson Palmer went down on the first play...Colts had the tragedy and rust to deal with...and the Plummer's Crack showed up...we ran into 2 of the 3 hottest teams in football...and dominated them both...I say Pittsburgh had the easier road, IN THE PLAYOFFS...besides, we were sposed to lose those games, weren't we? Really, I dont like excuses, but if people make excuses about us, I can do the same to the opponent...weak schedule or not...what can we do about it? Lose? Win by 100? Come on now.
Seattle is too balanced, and Pittsburgh's various blitzes will become a weak spot. The reasons? First, if they watched enough tape, they should respect our various weapons and not go overboard with those blitzes. Otherwise, our MILLIONS (heh) of weapons will burn them...2 safeties, 3 corners, and a backer cant possibly cover 4 WRs, 2 RBs, and a TE...not to mention keeping Hass from being mobile...not to mention our oline should hold up well against most blitzes.
Im only worried about Polamalu, Randel El, and Cedric Wilson (yes you read that right)
"4 WRs, 2 RBs, and a TE"
ReplyDeleteThat's seven players. Are there only going to be three blockers for Hasselbeck?
Posted by Grilled Cheese Sandwich
ughhh...i didnt say at the same time
ReplyDeleteim saying how many good players the Pittsburgh defense will have to deal with the whole game
Posted by adp
****NEWS ALERT****
ReplyDeleteRemedial fan above know how to count to seven, possibly eleven. Said delegate also knows how to make a grilled cheese sandwich.
Dude, what are you doing in here, when you have such a bright future as a bowling alley cook?
Posted by Bluefoot
ADP (and the rest of the gang), thanks for the welcome to the site. It's been a hoot.
ReplyDeleteSome random points:
* The fathead.com thing was a feeble attempt at humor. I actually have never even been to the site.
* The use of stats from FO is really about the fact that no one else provides adjusted stats. Especially for this game DVOA takes a lot of that, "Seattle didn't play anybody," stuff and throws it right out the window.
* I did some looking around yesterday at the two teams' common opponents (the AFC South), focusing solely on points scored and points allowed. If my math is correct both teams had a point differential of about +8 against the AFC south teams--and that's throwing out Seattle's win over Indy's backups then averaging the two Pitt/Indy game scores.
These two teams are about evenly matched. I think it's far more accurate to say that had Pittsburgh played in the AFC they may have gone 13-3 than it is to say Seattle would have been worse than Pittsburgh playing in the AFC North. To me, it'll come down to game day coaching; adjustments on the fly. I think we better equipped than them to make them. That's why we win.
Posted by dave crockett
JoSCh-
ReplyDeleteon # of plays vs TOP: it's the classic issue where two things are correlated but not the same thing.
alba hit a key point, that passes typically take less time off the clock than runs.
but let me expand on that just a bit. i may write a post on this at some point. because this is really about pace.
what wears a defense down is having to run and make plays. when an offense runs plays the defense must respond. when both units are equally tired the advantage swings to the offense. running more plays than your opponent ensures that this happens. an offense can accomplish this goal by simply picking up its pace (i.e., running plays early in the play clock). the no-huddle is the most exaggerated form of this but we see the seahawks play a quick pace from a conventional set up. (of course, in order to continue running plays an offense must be successful in converting first downs; that's a given.)
on the other hand, a team can boost time of possession without running a lot of plays. as alba points out running plays tend to take more time off the clock. but beyond that, many teams run plays late in the clock. they simply run a slower pace (a la marty schottenheimer). they may bleed the clock but often they keep a defense fresh, even though they don't realize it.
the concept of offensive pace is second nature in baskeball strategy but seems to be something that only a handful of nfl teams get. fortunately seattle is one of that handful (as is new england).
last year's afc title game was a perfect example of how to use pace to handle a heavy blitz team. pittsburgh uses its blitz to slow the pace of the game. they want the offense to be deliberate; to take fewer shots at them. new england began the game in 4 and 5 wides throwing lots of short passes. they picked up the pace--and you know what? pittsburgh backed off.
teams that are blitz heavy, far more than teams who play bend-don't-break, favor a deliberate offensive pace. a briskly paced game ensures that an offense gets more shots at it. they know they're going to make some plays with that blitz and give up some plays. so they want the total number of plays their defense sees to be low.
belichick recognized this and controlled the pace from the outset. go back and look at the drive stats for new england. they looked like the phoenix suns.
Posted by dave crockett