Bevell is reading this forum!

[pehawk]

Listening to the ESPN Football Today podcast from Monday, the ESPN Dallas reporter was talking about the Dallas Cowboys and said the one thing they did really well was sticking to their commitment to run.

Not just against the Seahawks, but last week as well. When Dallas went down 21-0 at half, they didn't abandon their run game and put faith in it that it would be dividends and eventually wear the opposing D down.

Same thing happened with Seahawks too. I think the stat was that Demarco was still at about 60 or 70 yards for the game until the last few rushes where he had something ilke two rushes for 20 to 30 yards each

And the beat writer even went on to say that it's interesting that even very smart coaches in the NFL for some reason abandon the run too early

Going forward, I'd love to hear this praise for Seattle in the coming weeks. You think they would have learned from San Diego. Now they have a sample size of 2: lose games when you don't run.


Listening to 10/13 podcast

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/podcast/archive?id=2544457

That's the thing about the running game; it ALWAYS pays off in the 4th quarter. Always. SD and AZ beat us through their commitment to the run, despite a lack of yards.

Which is why I don't buy into the "we couldn't run, we we're facing 9 man boxes vs Dallas"? Yeah, so? That's how it was last year too. I'll take a 3 and out if the Hawks ran on 1st and 2nd, over a 3 and out with passes on 1nd and 2nd. The latter doesn't help later in the game.

 

[DavidSeven]

After reading this article, I would guess Pete had a talk with his offensive coaching staff this week and told them they need to go back to what works best with this teams personnel, running the ball first, and taking shots down field once the D starts to stack the line to take away the run.

Dallas's defense started the game by stacking the line. There weren't going to commit more than what they started with.

 

[Wagon12]

Great, now Rams can key up on the run. I hope you're ready this game Russ, I have a feeling we'll need you more than ever

Well, they did manage to shut down the Niners run game!

Derp.

 

[pehawk]

After reading this article, I would guess Pete had a talk with his offensive coaching staff this week and told them they need to go back to what works best with this teams personnel, running the ball first, and taking shots down field once the D starts to stack the line to take away the run.

Dallas's defense started the game by stacking the line. There weren't going to commit more than what they started with.

You can replace the word "Dallas" with any opponent the Seahawks have faced the past 3 years. What Dallas did was nothing new. The only difference is a better OLine this year (run blocking primarily).

 

[ZagHawk]

Listening to the ESPN Football Today podcast from Monday, the ESPN Dallas reporter was talking about the Dallas Cowboys and said the one thing they did really well was sticking to their commitment to run.

Not just against the Seahawks, but last week as well. When Dallas went down 21-0 at half, they didn't abandon their run game and put faith in it that it would be dividends and eventually wear the opposing D down.

Same thing happened with Seahawks too. I think the stat was that Demarco was still at about 60 or 70 yards for the game until the last few rushes where he had something ilke two rushes for 20 to 30 yards each

And the beat writer even went on to say that it's interesting that even very smart coaches in the NFL for some reason abandon the run too early

Going forward, I'd love to hear this praise for Seattle in the coming weeks. You think they would have learned from San Diego. Now they have a sample size of 2: lose games when you don't run.


Listening to 10/13 podcast

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/podcast/archive?id=2544457

That's the thing about the running game; it ALWAYS pays off in the 4th quarter. Always. SD and AZ beat us through their commitment to the run, despite a lack of yards.

Which is why I don't buy into the "we couldn't run, we we're facing 9 man boxes vs Dallas"? Yeah, so? That's how it was last year too. I'll take a 3 and out if the Hawks ran on 1st and 2nd, over a 3 and out with passes on 1nd and 2nd. The latter doesn't help later in the game.

No kidding. If you look at any of our good run games, it always starts off real slow. Then Marshawn busts out and breaks a big one, and then suddenly there's another one...and another.

Hell look at Marshawn's big TD in the NFCCG, his run game started pretty slow until that happened.

 

[NorCalSeahawk]

After reading this article, I would guess Pete had a talk with his offensive coaching staff this week and told them they need to go back to what works best with this teams personnel, running the ball first, and taking shots down field once the D starts to stack the line to take away the run.

Dallas's defense started the game by stacking the line. There weren't going to commit more than what they started with.

That may be true, but I would never guess that this team would only try to rush the ball 5 times on PLANNED running attempts (2 by Lynch and Harvin and one by Turbin (that one by Turbin just ran out the half)) for 14 yards in the half, that is a joke. The cowboys were not setting the world on fire with their running game either, but they stuck with it and they broke Seattle on that last drive.

Seattle's game has always been to never to adjust to other teams game plans, make them adjust to theirs. This game was one of the only times I have seen a team do that to them. I guess we'll see if they can get back to their bread and butter this week.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

That's the thing about the running game; it ALWAYS pays off in the 4th quarter. Always. SD and AZ beat us through their commitment to the run, despite a lack of yards..

The running game only pays off if you've got the possessions and attempts in the first three quarters sufficient enough to have worn down the opposing defense.

Which we did not, thus why we went away from the run. I think it was Bill Parcells who said the run game is not predicated on success, but attempts. You've got to get to that magic number of 25-30 rush attempts to have effectively worn down the defense to the point of things finally breaking open in the 4th quarter.

Dallas did this to our defense due to their lopsided TOP advantage, which is why Murray broke loose at the end of the game and was gashing our worn out D. Our offense? It stunk the entire game.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have run more, but what you're saying about the run game ALWAYS paying off is not true, gotta have the TOP and attempts.

 

[daveCFPrez]

Yea, lets give Lynch the ball.

BUT LETS HAVE THE O LINE BLOCK WELL ENOUGH TO RUN THE #@$%#$@% BALL !!!!!

 

[pehawk]

That's the thing about the running game; it ALWAYS pays off in the 4th quarter. Always. SD and AZ beat us through their commitment to the run, despite a lack of yards..

The running game only pays off if you've got the possessions and attempts in the first three quarters sufficient enough to have worn down the opposing defense.

Which we did not, thus why we went away from the run. I think it was Bill Parcells who said the run game is not predicated on success, but attempts. You've got to get to that magic number of 25-30 rush attempts to have effectively worn down the defense to the point of things finally breaking open in the 4th quarter.

Dallas did this to our defense due to their lopsided TOP advantage, which is why Murray broke loose at the end of the game and was gashing our worn out D. Our offense? It stunk the entire game.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have run more, but what you're saying about the run game ALWAYS paying off is not true, gotta have the TOP and attempts.

Agreed, I was generalizing. I still would rather this incarnation of the Hawks go 3 and out with runs on 1st and 2nd, than the opposite. It matches their personnel better.

 

[tom sawyer]

So comforting to know ... NOW, that Bevell has discover the value of Lynch. :hmmmm:

 

[AgentDib]

That is assuming that the chances of going 3 and out are the same in either case. I don't think this is nearly as obvious as most apparently do. How do you judge between a N% chance of a first down with run-run-pass over a >N% chance of a first down with play calls that are predicated on match up advantages? Staying on the field is also good for wearing down opposing defenses (and protecting our defense).

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Agreed, I was generalizing. I still would rather this incarnation of the Hawks go 3 and out with runs on 1st and 2nd, than the opposite. It matches their personnel better.

For sure, and I think Pete learned that Sunday, not to panic and go away from the run when the offense is struggling.

But he's also right in that a successful run game requires the defense to get off the field, AND the offense to convert on 3rd downs in order to keep the chains moving to get those attempts up to a successful level. Neither of which we accomplished.

Unfortunately the Rams have been very good at frustrating Russell and our run game, so I don't expect us to be much more successful Sunday.

 

[pehawk]

When the Hawks OL has been in decent health, they've been able to run all over that Rams front 7.

2012 in St Louis will forever be a scar in my melon, because Lynch made hay with his carries, and the Hawks still lost. Even with Unger out, I like this Hawks OL more than I did then.

 

[BlueBlood]

When we dont run and pound people it plays right into the opponents hands. How many times have we seen this team start out a little slow on the scoreboard but end up throttling a team in the second half?

Tennessee, Tampa Bay and Im sure Im forgetting one close game from last year wouldve been losses with the way we are seeing the games called. What happened to patience, belief and consistency we displayed last year?

Our defense is being left out on the field for far too long. Atleast when you run the ball you drain the opposing defense and allow your defense to rest.

I honestly dont see this team being worse than last year. They are just having an identity crisis.

 

[nsport]

That's the thing about the running game; it ALWAYS pays off in the 4th quarter. Always. SD and AZ beat us through their commitment to the run, despite a lack of yards..

The running game only pays off if you've got the possessions and attempts in the first three quarters sufficient enough to have worn down the opposing defense.

Which we did not, thus why we went away from the run. I think it was Bill Parcells who said the run game is not predicated on success, but attempts. You've got to get to that magic number of 25-30 rush attempts to have effectively worn down the defense to the point of things finally breaking open in the 4th quarter.

Dallas did this to our defense due to their lopsided TOP advantage, which is why Murray broke loose at the end of the game and was gashing our worn out D. Our offense? It stunk the entire game.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have run more, but what you're saying about the run game ALWAYS paying off is not true, gotta have the TOP and attempts.

Agreed, I was generalizing. I still would rather this incarnation of the Hawks go 3 and out with runs on 1st and 2nd, than the opposite. It matches their personnel better.

This touches on the key to success. Last year we were incredibly efficient on 3rd down - this was due in part to commitment to running on 1st and 2nd down. 3rd and manageable is much better then 3rd and 10. At the game last week I kept saying to my friend that it was amazing we were converting these 3rd and long's, but it won't last because it's not sustainable - and that's exactly what happened.

Last year we kept drives going because it was 3rd and 5 or less mostly. In the 4th quarter, those 3rd and short's disappear because the running back can gash the defense for 5-10 ypc since the defense is wearing down at that point. We saw it last year, and we saw it again on Sunday, albeit done to us this time.

 

[byau]

A few more things I recall hearing on radio shows

1) Marshawn, while he can run outside, prefers to run straight into the line

Takeaway: Marshawn loves contact, he's a bruiser, and he'll not only run right at you, he's happiest doing that

2) Mike Golic said that from his experience, a D-line has maybe 3 or 4 explosions in them in a drive, they don't explode everytime

Takeaway: D-line rushing takes a lot out of you

Overall: can you imagine, even if Marshawn only gets 2 yards per carry to start out, he'll just keep coming out you to wear you down. He runs at you, you stop him at 2 yards, he gets back up and says "Here I come again". And just keeps at it and keeps at it. Not to mention it seems like it would be easier mentally on O-line for rush blocking instead of dropping back for pass blocking. You're not working your way backwards and you're not as fearful of getting rolled on

Seems like it'd be a rather easy thing to do to at least pound the ball a few times more. And Turbin, while not as good as Marshawn, seriously seems to have a really quick burst each time he runs straight ahead and that's got to wear a defensive line down too.

You definitely need the 3rd and short conversions though to keep getting the attempts

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Yea, lets give Lynch the ball.

BUT LETS HAVE THE O LINE BLOCK WELL ENOUGH TO RUN THE #@$%#$@% BALL !!!!!

That hasn't been a problem all year. Pass protection, maybe. But not run blocking.

Against Dallas, I did notice Seattle's run concepts get a lot more simplified. That was probably the presence of a backup center talking.

 

[scutterhawk]

After reading this article, I would guess Pete had a talk with his offensive coaching staff this week and told them they need to go back to what works best with this teams personnel, running the ball first, and taking shots down field once the D starts to stack the line to take away the run.

Dallas's defense started the game by stacking the line. There weren't going to commit more than what they started with.

When I saw that pass to Walters in the backfield, I knew that the Cowboys had Bevels' playbook for the game at hand.
Harvin being stifled and smothered in the backfield was a disgusting waste of speed and talent, and the bonus to their game plan?, keeping Russell Wilson from having enough time to track his targets, and plugging up his escape routes.
It was pretty damned obvious that the Cowboys were playing old school Seahawks style of football.
Icing on the cake for them?, injuries of key players....They knew that after a short week for preparation, the Seahawks would not be able to get replacement players playing up to optimum.
When 100% healthy, the Seahawks are the better team of the two, but it sure didn't help that they were being stymied with bad Officiating at key times.....just like with the Deadskins...the only reason we overcame in that game, is because the injuries weren't as prevalent.
I'm not sniveling about bad Officiating, but it is disrespectful to have a bunch of assholes be the deciding factor of who gets the nod to favoritism.

 

[hawk45]

After reading this article, I would guess Pete had a talk with his offensive coaching staff this week and told them they need to go back to what works best with this teams personnel, running the ball first, and taking shots down field once the D starts to stack the line to take away the run.

Dallas's defense started the game by stacking the line. There weren't going to commit more than what they started with.

You can replace the word "Dallas" with any opponent the Seahawks have faced the past 3 years. What Dallas did was nothing new. The only difference is a better OLine this year (run blocking primarily).

Pehawk's above point strips naked the excuse that we couldn't run because Dallas was committed to stop it. Every game, every team's first priority has always been to stop Lynch, so much so that they state it pre-game because it's so obvious they realize there's no point in dissembling. The fact that we have stuck with the run against far better rushing defenses, with far worse run-blocking (all last year), further invalidates that excuse.

 

[Blitzer88]

I understood that concept, does that mean I have a chance to be an NFL offensive coordinator?