Anyone think we threw the ball a little too much?

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
846
Location
Kansas City, MO
theincrediblesok":fngfpdg5 said:
66 total plays

29 passing (including sack)
37 rushing
I'm talking baseline against somebody good on the road. From there if it's a walkover I expect 70-75 plays total. Basically we looked half speed last night.
 

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
846
Location
Kansas City, MO
theincrediblesok":sf240klg said:
66 total plays

29 passing (including sack)
37 rushing
I'm talking baseline against somebody good on the road. From there if it's a walkover I expect 70-75 plays total. Basically we looked half speed last night.
 

theincrediblesok

New member
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
1,550
Reaction score
0
MizzouHawkGal":1t92rqri said:
theincrediblesok":1t92rqri said:
66 total plays

29 passing (including sack)
37 rushing
I'm talking baseline against somebody good on the road. From there if it's a walkover I expect 70-75 plays total. Basically we looked half speed last night.


That was just a stat against the Packers pointing to the OP that we did more running plays than passing plays, we must of type out the reply at the same time as i didn't notice before you had stated about running 60 plays a game. Your right though about the half speed, there was some miss opportunities but they will fine tune that.
 

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
846
Location
Kansas City, MO
theincrediblesok":p9j5sj70 said:
MizzouHawkGal":p9j5sj70 said:
theincrediblesok":p9j5sj70 said:
66 total plays

29 passing (including sack)
37 rushing
I'm talking baseline against somebody good on the road. From there if it's a walkover I expect 70-75 plays total. Basically we looked half speed last night.


That was just a stat against the Packers pointing to the OP that we did more running plays than passing plays, we must of type out the reply at the same time as i didn't notice before you had stated about running 60 plays a game. Your right though about the half speed, there was some miss opportunities but they will fine tune that.
Yes, because I've noticed since Wilson arrived we seem to run 50-55 plays a game. I believe we speed it up 5-10 plays because Pete is letting Wilson loose because he finally has his security blanket (Harvin).
 

Seahawk Sailor

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
22,963
Reaction score
1
Location
California via Negros Occidental, Philippines
MizzouHawkGal":ii4g0moy said:
Yes, because I've noticed since Wilson arrived we seem to run 50-55 plays a game. I believe we speed it up 5-10 plays because Pete is letting Wilson loose because he finally has his security blanket (Harvin).

A lot of the reason why we've only run 50-55 plays a game stems from the fact that we weren't very good on third down the past couple of years. It's been a liability. We start converting a few more third downs and the number of plays we run in a game will skyrocket.
 

Blitzhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
2,482
Reaction score
41
kearly":1wj6ly8k said:
It definitely felt like Seattle got away from the run in the 3rd quarter, which coincided with Seattle having a few difficult drives all of a sudden. There was a 1st and goal from the nine where I was literally screaming "RUN THE FREAKING BALL" at the TV. Seattle had two ineffective passes, and one nice run down to the two yard line. They ended up kicking a FG.

Yes, it did feel like Seattle passed too much in this game, but that's mostly because Lynch was so unstoppable, and because Green Bay's secondary played very well I thought. Had it been an ordinary game for Lynch I would be just fine, if not encouraged, by the willingness to pass. The one thing that disappointed me is that this new offense with Harvin seems to have sacrficed the deep ball. I expect Wilson's YPA to drop quite a bit this season until the figure out how to get the 50 yard pass play back in the offense.

LOL, I was doing the same exact thing. I felt like GB was literally incapable of stopping Lynch for less than 5 yds and we should just pound it in. That said, I really liked the diversity of play calling I felt we lacked quite often in the past from Bevell, especially the ingenius TD to Coleman. So, I guess ya gotta take the bad w/ the good as they say. I really gotta give Bevell credit for calling one the best games I seen as someone else said.

I also got the feeling they were trying to protect the rookie RT Britt w/ the quick passing game over taking the deep shots in this game so we will have to see what happens as he develops.
 

Laloosh

New member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
8,688
Reaction score
0
Location
WA
Largent80":154ttmvx said:
Bevell called the best game I have ever seen called by a Hawk O.C.

I was begging for Bevell to run #24 up the gut all of the 3rd quarter in .net chat. I agree with the overall play calling and the result but it just felt like he was playing to their strengths in the 3rd. They were soft in the middle but their LBs and Safeties were getting to the edge when anyone not named Percy was trying to go laterally.
 

idahohawk

New member
Joined
Nov 28, 2013
Messages
405
Reaction score
0
No.

gowazzu02":k75f57kj said:
Now hear me out.

The first or maybe second drive? of the 2nd half. MArshawn ripped two straight 10 plus yard gains. Turbo comes in rips another 10 yarder. Then we throw 3 straight incompletions!

It was clear they couldn't stop the beast. He had over 100 yards but it could of been 150 plus..imo.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,718
Reaction score
1,749
Location
Roy Wa.
I think the deep ball suffered because they were playing off a lot, also why the jet sweep and Lynch dominated. They didn't want to get burned with the deep ball and hoped to contain us in front of them. They just didn't expect 10 yd sweeps and 10 yard runs up the gut. When they bit hard Lockette and Coleman scored, but if you look at the Lockette play they still had a deep safety that Lockette juked to get in.
 

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
846
Location
Kansas City, MO
chris98251":17ah3i0u said:
I think the deep ball suffered because they were playing off a lot, also why the jet sweep and Lynch dominated. They didn't want to get burned with the deep ball and hoped to contain us in front of them. They just didn't expect 10 yd sweeps and 10 yard runs up the gut. When they bit hard Lockette and Coleman scored, but if you look at the Lockette play they still had a deep safety that Lockette juked to get in.
They chose death by a thousand papercuts rather then the sword. Works for me.
 
OP
OP
gowazzu02

gowazzu02

New member
Joined
Feb 7, 2014
Messages
1,911
Reaction score
0
idahohawk":1uwttt6x said:
No.

gowazzu02":1uwttt6x said:
Now hear me out.

The first or maybe second drive? of the 2nd half. MArshawn ripped two straight 10 plus yard gains. Turbo comes in rips another 10 yarder. Then we throw 3 straight incompletions!

It was clear they couldn't stop the beast. He had over 100 yards but it could of been 150 plus..imo.


Fair enough other members were right there with me in the third......im not being critical, he called a great game. Im just of the mindset that when your averaging 7-10 yards running it right down heir throats you are doing them a favor by passing.......

Allow me a baseball reference, how a team gets second life when the skipper pulls the ace who was throwing 98 all day. The reliever is good but the other team had no prayer against te ace
 

Sports Hernia

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,755
Reaction score
3,372
Location
The pit
gowazzu02":3mmb51ar said:
Now hear me out.

The first or maybe second drive? of the 2nd half. MArshawn ripped two straight 10 plus yard gains. Turbo comes in rips another 10 yarder. Then we throw 3 straight incompletions!

It was clear they couldn't stop the beast. He had over 100 yards but it could of been 150 plus..imo.
Overall no, at certain times yes. Lynch was unstoppable, and there was a span where they didn't give it to him and we had to punt. Also a first and goal from the 9, I think we kicked a FG after some poor playcalling. That should have been handoff city to Lynch 3 times in a row if you must...... Just a little gripe, as Bevell will get into one of his brain fart ruts, but
Overall the play calling was good.
 

XxXdragonXxX

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
87
Location
Enumclaw, WA
BlueTalon":3ubx5cod said:
Largent80":3ubx5cod said:
Bevell called the best game I have ever seen called by a Hawk O.C.
I dunno, that NFCCG against the Panthers was pretty awesome.


I remember the defensive game plan in that game being better than the offense. Putting a linebacker on Smith to bump him and then pass him off to the CB was pretty genius.
 

bigDhawk

New member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
182
Reaction score
0
Location
Dallas, TX
gowazzu02":3ldh801p said:
Now hear me out.

The first or maybe second drive? of the 2nd half. MArshawn ripped two straight 10 plus yard gains. Turbo comes in rips another 10 yarder. Then we throw 3 straight incompletions!

It was clear they couldn't stop the beast. He had over 100 yards but it could of been 150 plus..imo.

191 total passing yards
207 total rushing yards

How much more balance do we want?

Yeah, maybe Beast could have had a buck fifty, but remember they are also trying to manage his workload and total carries to hopefully have him at peak performance come the post-season. I think that is reflected in the offensive balance we achieved. We had the game well in hand and there was no need to rack up a high carry total for Beast just because we could.
 
Top