Seattle's performance with Pete Carroll on the road in the East Coast (some reasons to feel good about this game!)

[mezcal14]

With all of the talk about how Seattle is a different team at home than away, I wanted to ameliorate my owns fears just a little bit with the playoff game looming Sunday. Everyone points to their 3-5 record in away games this year, and it's a good talking point, but I wanted to look a little deeper. Specifically, I was curious to see how they've performed on East coast away games since Pete Carroll took over in 2010.

Here's what I found:

2012:

@ CAR W 16-12

@ DET L 24-28

@ MIA L 21-24

"@ BUF" W 50-17

Record: 1-2 (or 2-2, depending how you feel about the Toronto game)

Avg 20.33 PF, 21.33 PA

2011:

@PIT L 0-24

@NYG W 36-25

@CLE L 3-6

Record: 1-2

Avg 13 PF, 18.33 PA

2010:

@NO L 19-34

@TB L 15-35

Record: 0-2

Avg 17 PF, 34.5 PA

Total record for this sample, 2010-2012: 2-6 (or 3-6)

Total average, 2010-2012: 16.75 PF, 23.5 PA

Because this is a homer thread, I'm going to conveniently ignore the points that they were able to put up in the Toronto Buffalo game (full disclosure, 3 year total averages including that game are 20.44 PF, 22.78 PA, but for all intents and purposes from here on out we're going to ignore that one). Like it or not, there's something to be said for playing in a hostile environment, and Toronto is a place where casual Canadian fans can enjoy a game, and only a few real die-hards from either side would really end up cheering. Does this cheapen my analysis somewhat? You be the judge.

Now, let's compare this to the rest of the games outside of this specific sample set that they've played during those three years:

2012: 9-3, 25.08 PF, 12.58 PA

2011: 6-7, 21.92 PF, 20 PA

2010: 7-7, 21.79 PF, 23.93 PA

Total record in this sample, 2010-2012: 22-17

Total average, 2010-2012: 22.85 PF, 18.55 PA

Conclusions:

The difference here is astounding. The difference in win percentage goes from 0.564 to 0.25 (or 0.33). The difference in points scored drops 6.1 - almost an entire touchdown and PAT. The difference in points allowed is 4.95. And this, of course, is the cumulative difference over a three year period. One could reasonably make the argument that the Seahawks are an entirely different team with Russell Wilson at the helm, versus Tavaris Jackson or Matt Hasselbeck. And I would agree with you.

Yet, if we look only at the 2012 campaign, the difference is 4.75 points on offense, yet far, far more drastic on defense. The Seattle defense gives up 8.75 more points on average per true away game on the East coast than all of their other games, including home games.

In either case, whether looking at 2010-2012 or just 2012 alone, it seems to me that with SEA getting 3 points on the road in Washington, taking the home dog may just be a fantastic play. I think that Seattle is overrated given the circumstances, and that Washington is underrated similarly. Here's to an exciting game with no injuries and a fat Redskins W. :helmet:

---------- Post added January-3rd-2013 at 04:52 PM ----------

As an addendum, the teams that they played in 2012 on East coast were not world beaters by any means; I don't think anyone here thinks that 4 non-playoff teams are particularly frightening (our own loss to CAR notwithstanding, naturally!).

The fact that they were able to generate so many more points against the SEA defense should bode well for our OROY QB and #1 rushing attack in the NFL!

[DC9]

2011

@CLE L 3-6

This game set football back 80 years apparently....

Good post and thanks for the work!

Regardless of any trends or anything... this game is going to be a slobberknocker.

The dice have no memory and it's going to take the Redskins very best effort and a couple of breaks to beat Seattle. Both teams are beatable but there is a reason that both are in the playoffs, because they are two of the best eight teams in the NFC.

[moondog]

This game set football back 80 years apparently....

Good post and thanks for the work!

Regardless of any trends or anything... this game is going to be a slobbernocker.

The dice have no memory and it's going to take the Redskins very best effort and a couple of breaks to beat Seattle. Both teams are beatable but there is a reason that both are in the playoffs, because they are two of the best eight teams in the NFC.

I agree and kudos for using the word slobber(k?)nocker.

Good analysis but honestly I doubt it matters whether Carroll has been there or not. My lazy (not going to look it up) guess is that even before he got there things were pretty much the same. They've been a good home team and a poorer road team. I think it has only amplified since they've added some more physical pieces such as Lynch and defensive players with some size and tenacity to them. Even in their best years with Hasselbeck and Alexander I don't think they received the love from the media or the respect that they get now and yet we still don't. I hope we beat them handily this weekend so we can hear all next week how many excuses the media can come up with about why the Seahawks lost rather than why we won.

[jp03]

With all of the talk about how Seattle is a different team at home than away, I wanted to ameliorate my owns fears just a little bit with the playoff game looming Sunday. Everyone points to their 3-5 record in away games this year, and it's a good talking point, but I wanted to look a little deeper. Specifically, I was curious to see how they've performed on East coast away games since Pete Carroll took over in 2010.

!

I would not be surprised if you guys roll Seattle. Such a mediocre road team. Sure at the end they whooped up on a Buffalo team that quit and a Bear team that was overacheiving all year. Frankly I don't get the 3 point dog status ... It almost seems like a sucker bet to those of us who are nuetral.

[MassSkinsFan]

Since when is Pittsburgh, Detroit or Cleveland on the East Coast? I thought they were Midwest cities. Huh...

Nice work putting this together though, and I hope your'e right!

[Ghost of]

I would not be surprised if you guys roll Seattle. Such a mediocre road team. Sure at the end they whooped up on a Buffalo team that quit and a Bear team that was overacheiving all year. Frankly I don't get the 3 point dog status ... It almost seems like a sucker bet to those of us who are nuetral.

take the long quote out of your post, my man. Forum rules

[Dark Acre]

"@ DET L 24-28"

Detroit's on the *East* coast?

[jp03]

take the long quote out of your post, my man. Forum rules

? ya lost me...oh wait you mean take the original quote out. Ok..thanks

[Ghost of]

yeah, its ok to have short quotes just not the long block quotes.

[DButz65]

I think I heard on the radio today that seattle has not won a road playoff game since 1983?

[DC9]

I agree and kudos for using the word slobber(k?)nocker.

Ah! Thanks, you were correct!

[Bang]

Seattle on an east coast trip for a 1PM start is historically as close to a lock to lose as there is.

I think if you look at most of those east coast losses (and going back thru Seahawk history), you'll find most started at 1 EST.

Seattle is the furthest trip in the NFL. It's a grind to play there or for them to play out here because of the long travel and the lag it causes.

Unfortunately, the NFL scheduled us for the last game of the weekend and the Seahawks should arrive in plenty of time to get the lag off.

I expect it to not be any factor.

~Bang

[Commander -JB-]

This is a 4:30 game. Were all their east coast road games this year 1pm games?

[rdskn4eva]

The Buffalo game was not a road game. It was a neutral site.

[NikoBellic]

Seattle on an east coast trip for a 1PM start is historically as close to a lock to lose as there is.

I think if you look at most of those east coast losses (and going back thru Seahawk history), you'll find most started at 1 EST.

Seattle is the furthest trip in the NFL. It's a grind to play there or for them to play out here because of the long travel and the lag it causes.

Unfortunately, the NFL scheduled us for the last game of the weekend and the Seahawks should arrive in plenty of time to get the lag off.

I expect it to not be any factor.

~Bang

Thanks for providing at least some justification for why this statistic would be remotely meaningful. Before I read your post, I was about to say this idea that Seattle has done a little bit poorly against East Coast teams is as significant as finding out that Seattle has done poorly against teams with the color green in their jerseys... In other words, completely trivial.

But sadly, it is meaningful in this way (i.e. jet lag, circadian rhythm) to the benefit of Seattle!!! Basically, Seattle players will have been awake for a shorter period of time before the game (and will therefore be fresher). See below.

http://deadspin.com/5934440/the-circadian-advantage-how-sleep-patterns-benefit-certain-nfl-teams

But this doesn't worry me. Our team has already had a few night games so I think their bodies will know what to do and we'll be okay. Also, adrenaline DESTROYS sleepiness IMO and our players should be pretty amped.

--------EDIT--------

Actually, I just realized that the game is at 4:30pm so it isn't going to be that late for us!

1pm DC = 10am Seattle (too early for seahawks)

4:30pm DC = 1:30pm Seattle (in a good range for both teams?)

8:30pm DC = 5:30pm Seattle (too late for skins)

[mbws]

The Buffalo game was not a road game. It was a neutral site.

Semi-Neutral, as it was just across the river from the Buffalo area.

[mezcal14]

But sadly, it is meaningful in this way (i.e. jet lag, circadian rhythm) to the benefit of Seattle!!! Basically, Seattle players will have been awake for a shorter period of time before the game (and will therefore be fresher). See below.

http://deadspin.com/5934440/the-circadian-advantage-how-sleep-patterns-benefit-certain-nfl-teams

But this doesn't worry me. Our team has already had a few night games so I think their bodies will know what to do and we'll be okay. Also, adrenaline DESTROYS sleepiness IMO and our players should be pretty amped.

Actually, if you read the article that you provided, you've provided ammunition for defeating your own stance. Look:

Without any help from coffee, most of us tend to perk up around nine o'clock in the morning and stay that way until around two in the afternoon, which is when we start thinking about a nap. Around six in the evening, the body gets another shot of energy that keeps us going until about ten at night.

Right? They then talk about the start of Monday night football games, where the kickoff is 8:30 EST and the west coast team will be starting the game 30 mins before their 6 pm energy boost, and that the east coast team will be playing up close to midnight. Our game starts at 4:30 EST...30 minutes before Seattle is scheduled to hit a circadian rhythm-induced wall. Our team, on the other hand, will be on its way towards its second wind.

I mean, did you read the article? It's absolutely applicable to MNF games with their late kickoffs, but completely supports the argument that Seattle would be disadvantaged playing in eastern standard time for the start of our specific playoff game.

Furthermore, I agree with you in regards to adrenaline perhaps taking care of some of it, but the prevailing wisdom in sleep medicine is that it takes at least one day per time zone traveled to recover from eastbound traveling. There's simply no way that it's an even playing field in this regard.

Is this going to be what determines the outcome of the game? Absolutely not. But in an otherwise tight playoff game with two teams that are incredibly similar on paper, could it be useful? Be a difference maker in some way? Definitely.

---------- Post added January-3rd-2013 at 08:33 PM ----------

Whoops, I see that you've gone through and reread it. Cheers!

And yes, smart asses in the first few posts, PIT/DET/CLE are not east coast cities, and I meant "cities within the eastern timezone", and I think you knew that

[Bang]

They did win in Miami this year, and that I do believe is the longest flight in the NFL.

At the time Miami looked a little better than they turned out to be, and Seattle had not yet become the beast they were down the stretch.

I played the odds and picked them to lose.. but not that time.

~Bang

[TD_washingtonredskins]

They lost to Miami.

[skinsfan07]

They did win in Miami this year, and that I do believe is the longest flight in the NFL.

At the time Miami looked a little better than they turned out to be, and Seattle had not yet become the beast they were down the stretch.

I played the odds and picked them to lose.. but not that time.

~Bang

Yea Miami beat them and exposed that cover 1 safety stuff they do with misdirection and boots that left their aggressive secondary's heads spinning.

[btfoom]

While all these results aren't 'East Coast', I believe this thread is the best to show how over-rated the 'hawks are this season, especially recently.

They have 'big' wins vs NE (week 6 at home), vs GB (week 3 at home, the game that literally forced the end to the use of 'replacement refs'), vs Minn (week 9 at home), and vs SF (week 16 at home). The rest are vs teams that failed to make the playoffs. The big push late, where they scored so many points were vs ARI (58 @ home week 14), vs Buf (50 @ Buf week 16), vs SF (42 @SEA). In the season finale, they only scored 20 vs STL @ home in week 17. Along the way, they lost to Miami, Ari, and Det on the road.

They are clearly a home based team that feasted on very weak competition (NFC West, AFC East). Last week Rams exposed their OL with consistent pressure, leading to 4 sacks and the Hawks winning at home only when they intercepted Bradford at the goal-line in the last minute.

Personally, I'd like to see the Hawks start with the ball on Sunday. I don't think they will do much and then RG3 and the rest of the offense can get a deep breath and relax when they get ball.

I can't wait to see all the 'experts' who predict a Hawks win eat their words on Sunday night.

[washingtonWALKER]

Man I'm excited for this game.. Can't wait to shut up all the sport analysis.. Just wish I don't have to work right when the game starts.. Meh not watching has kinda been good luck I guess.. HTTR

[MustangSteve]

I can't wait to see all the 'experts' who predict a Hawks win eat their words on Sunday night.

You and me both! Seattle has only played 1 team on the road that made the playoffs, the 49ers. And Seattle only scored 6 points! Seattle is getting their asses whipped at FedEX this Sunday, that's for damn sure!!!

[moondog]

Ah! Thanks, you were correct!

lol it just seemed like grammatically the second word should be "knocker." I wanted to make sure such an important word in the football dictonary was spelled correctly! Also, thank you for the picture, it was quite priceless.

[timitim]

I can't wait to see all the 'experts' who predict a Hawks win eat their words on Sunday night.

If I recall the "experts" called Dallas the division champs before our last game. There are 4 from momory that flat said Dallas was going to edge us in DC.

After the game was played however and we won it was all about how banged up they were and Romo sits to pee not being clutch after the holidays (which btw is a statistical fact prior to our beating them this season).

I suspect it will be the same against Seattle. Some in a previous post said they like it better this way. No love for the redskins proud nation. We play the under dog well and proving people wrong is what we have done all season long. This game will be no different.

HAIL