Breakdown on the 7 sacks, and more.

[Happybelly]

There is blame to go around. I go to bat for certain units and coaches because I feel there's tendency here to put it all on the shoulders of one single piece of the offense/coaching.

There are certainly things we can do to make life easier for Russell, which we were able to do fairly well in the second half against a very disciplined and effective blitzing unit. That being said, there are throws available above (some easy, some hard) that a different quarterback would make. That is just a fact. The short-middle of the field is basically irrelevant in this offense. It is either being missed or not ran because there's no point (other than drawing a defender). That is a huge limitation to have to deal with against a relentless blitzing attack; yet we were able to move the ball somewhat effectively without run production. That is a credit to the overall offense.

That being said, this is not an indictment of Russell Wilson at all. The "multiple" effect of his rushing and his big play potential is about the only thing keeping this offense dynamic in spite of an utter lack of size or playmaking on the outside. However, it is fair to suggest he has limitations in other areas of the game that make life difficult for the OC, O-line and receivers. During his QB Camp with Gruden, about the only weakness Gruden could identify was Wilson's difficulty in dealing with an auto-blitz on empty formations. That has carried through to his pro career.

Still, the Arizona game showed progress. If we can finally solve that riddle and get the right personnel at WR/TE, then I have no doubt that this can evolve into a dominant offense with Russell at the helm.

You can count me among the ones who thinks Russ is the future of the franchise. Particularly do I think his ability to extend plays is vital when our receivers cannot "post up" defenders. I also think that our OC calls a lot of boom or bust plays that don't give the QB any options besides hold the ball and wait, scramble, or throw it away.

However, the tenor of many posters here has been to hang all the problems on the offensive line. Britt, Bailey, and others have been blamed for blocks that on 2nd view don't look like their mistakes. I mean, that screen play with the play fake right first should have made Bevell stand with his nose in the corner, fer Chrissakes. Yet some hung it on Bailey.

This is the biggest head scratcher to me. I really don't understand why they don't have more route options. I also wish I knew why it seems they rarely have hot reads for blitzes that bring more people than they can block, it seems like such a basic thing.

 

[Scottemojo]

Yes, Happybelly, yes it does seem so very simple.

 

[DavidSeven]

This is the biggest head scratcher to me. I really don't understand why they don't have more route options. I also wish I knew why it seems they rarely have hot reads for blitzes that bring more people than they can block, it seems like such a basic thing.

Some of that probably is on play-calling, but I think there are certain limitations that we have to contend with that other teams might not. For example, on that last sack, I'd imagine a perfect play against that coverage might be a crossing route over the short-middle (but Russell has never consistently thrown there). The DB is sitting so far back that he probably wouldn't get there in time to prevent the 1st; and if he whiffed, then the receiver would house it because there's no safety help. That being said, maybe we shouldn't be calling three verticals in that situation. Still, I think we are playing with a short deck here (no pun), which makes it more difficult.

 

[Yxes1122]

Thank you Scotte, great post. Appreciate the analysis. Not that your trying to shift the blame, but the pics you provided seem to lead some credence to the argument that our WR don't get open on a regular basis.

 

[SomersetHawk]

Thanks for the analysis Scott, though I fear something that should spark some intelligent debate is about to eventually transpire into a Wilson bashing/defending thread. Hopefully not.

Are you sure Bailey's whiff was actually deliberate? I mean, quite clearly he had no intention of blocking the guy but it seems like an odd play and I wondered if he got it wrong.

That last one's a definite head-scratcher and pretty much sums Bevell up for me. Just when I'm feeling positive about him (after the flea-flicker), we follow it up with a real wtf play. Ballsy defensive call for sure though, the footballing equivalent of Bevell being teabagged.

That play was undone by the playfake to the right, not Bailey letting his guy go. First of all, it's a play from the gun, so the time to even get the ball back to the QB means there is exactly zero time for a fake throw right. That might be a good play if Russ doesn't take the time to do that. I have watched that play a dozen times, and it looks like Bailey does everything a guard should do on a screen release.

Having only seen it once I'll happily trust you on that. I'm hearing some people saying Bailey was terrible and I must admit his performance didn't look as bad as that to me, how did he hold up for you? Comfortable with the reasonable possibility that he'll be our starting LG next year?

 

[BullHawk33]

Gruden brought it up in his quarterback camp with Wilson about 16 minutes in. His point was that for Wilson, he needs to recognize the code 1 blitzes and know where to go with the ball especially with empty backfield sets with minimal protection. If you look at the 2nd sack, you will see the receiver on the left is cutting in and Russ has to throw into the free running blitzer for the hot route, but he doesn't throw it. This one is a great example of what Gruden was pointing out.

Now we don't know if this is because of RW or because Bevell doesn't have enough of an emphasis on the hot routes but it is an area where we struggle. Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees and a number of other good QB's can cut a team apart for these mistakes and the receivers are on the same page, adjusting their routes at the line to take advantage. RW needs to get to the same level of understanding.

 

[Scottemojo]

I think Bailey will be OK as a LG. Though I am not convinced yet that Carpenter is as good as gone.

 

[davidonmi]

I mostly noticed the same thing throughout the game. In fairness to Wilson the oline did blow a couple assignments that didn't lead to sacks. The 23 yard pass to lynch being an example.
Not sure why he chooses to play it so safe

 

[cdallan]

Hats off Scotte. Like you said, there's blame to go round, but there's a couple of things that Bevell is doing that drive me crazy:-

Empty sets - I see more downside than upside. Would you rather have Lynch catching the ball in the flat and being able to square his shoulders and get some space to run into, or do you want him running routes from the line of scrimmage and trying to catch the ball like a WR, likely well covered and facing back to the QB? Plus, out of the backfield he gets a chance to chip a rusher, and given that there's two sides of the field to release to I think there's more chance he goes uncovered or the LB covering him gets picked and can't cover him.

Hot routes - the Cards have recently given us fits with their blitz schemes. IIRC our loss to them featured some almost instant pressure through A-gap blitzes. Given this, how do we end up with 3 WRs running long-developing routes with their backs to the QB? What is he supposed to do? Where is his hot read in that situation, and why wasn't that a focus of the game plan? Situationally, you must know you're going to need that, right?

On a wider scale, I don't know why we don't try to get C-Mike on the edge more? That 3rd down pitch to Harvin which went for a TD v SD also worked for Michael against the Giants - more like this please.

 

[scutterhawk]

So, you're saying that he just should have thrown the ball away on all those sacks?
NONE of the Seahawks Receivers scare anyone, and it all dumps right back on Wilson's shoulders.
What I'm waiting for now, is for someone to show that they have the Solution.
We're seeing and hearing lots of blame, what I'm not seeing or hearing, is someone that is ready to ride up and save the day.
Super easy to poke holes, so if you have fixes, I'm ready to be enlightened.

 

[Scottemojo]

THey did try a toss right with Turbin, it lost 6. It was to counter what looked like a middle run blitz.

I don't know why no CM, but the Cards live on turnovers, perhaps his loose carrying of the ball had them concerned to put him in.

 

[DavidSeven]

On a wider scale, I don't know why we don't try to get C-Mike on the edge more? That 3rd down pitch to Harvin which went for a TD v SD also worked for Michael against the Giants - more like this please.

We did run a similar play against Arizona (though with Turbin, not Michael); it got destroyed. I think AZ is a little more athletic up front than NYG. Not sure if Michael would've gotten more... maybe.

 

[kearly]

However, the tenor of many posters here has been to hang all the problems on the offensive line. Britt, Bailey, and others have been blamed for blocks that on 2nd view don't look like their mistakes. I mean, that screen play with the play fake right first should have made Bevell stand with his nose in the corner, fer Chrissakes. Yet some hung it on Bailey.

My brother and I were talking about pass pro after the game ended. I estimated that at most, maybe two of the seven sacks were on the OL (turns out it was maybe none). I even brought up that same screen play you keep harping on. When a QB is getting sacked on an (uncovered) screen play, that's gotta be on the OC or QB. Has to be.

One thing I would add that hasn't been mentioned in this thread yet. Wilson suffered a batted pass early in the game that thwarted a likely 3rd down conversion and forced a punt (or FG, but probably a punt). After that play, you could tell that Wilson looked apprehensive throwing over the Cardinals' D-line, Campbell in particular.

On that screen-sack, Wilson did have a chance to make the play, but hesitated. I think the hesitation came from a fear of a batted pass turned interception. It was probably an irrational fear. I think that batted pass early in the game got in his head for quite some time, and he didn't really shake it until pretty late in the game. Just my opinion / speculation.

 

[Scottemojo]

So, you're saying that he just should have thrown the ball away on all those sacks?
NONE of the Seahawks Receivers scare anyone, and it all dumps right back on Wilson's shoulders.
What I'm waiting for now, is for someone to show that they have the Solution.
We're seeing and hearing lots of blame, what I'm not seeing or hearing, is someone that is ready to ride up and save the day.
Super easy to poke holes, so if you have fixes, I'm ready to be enlightened.

A throw away is better than a sack, right?

Baldwin is a slot receiver who rarely runs routes to the short middle of the field. Pretty easy solution there.

Don't do a long developing play fake on a screen.

Norwood has shown a talent for finding the holes in zones.

And I did point out that the passing game got a lot more consistent when the playcalling trended towards a short, quick passing game.

But if you want to say I only poked holes, whatever. Seeing as your solution seems to be go get different receivers.

 

[HansGruber]

I enjoyed the post and it was interesting to see the photos, but I'm curious how you know what the linemen were "supposed" to do on the given plays? Luke Willson was just on ESPN last week saying that nobody outside of the locker room knows what plays they're supposed to run and that things change completely as they lined up and linemen are calling out assignments.

So, did you get that info from coaching staff? If not, where? Are you just basing this on your own guesses, according to what you saw on film? How do you know that everyone on the field was perfectly executing whatever play was called in by the coaches, including whatever adjustments or assignment changes were called as they were lining up?

My problem with fan interpretation of game calling and what happens on plays is exactly what Luke WIllson, Warren Moon, Brock Huard, Pete Carroll and countless other athletes and coaches have all said in interviews. Unless you're part of the huddle and actually standing on the O-line, it is impossible for you to know how players are performing because you have no idea what plays are being called and what audibles/adjustments are being made at the line.

 

[Scottemojo]

I mostly noticed the same thing throughout the game. In fairness to Wilson the oline did blow a couple assignments that didn't lead to sacks. The 23 yard pass to lynch being an example.
Not sure why he chooses to play it so safe

Yeah, Bailey whiffed big on that one.

 

[Mojambo]

The infallible Russell Defense Squad has bee alerted. Please stand by.....

No offense, but this type of post hardly serves to elevate the discourse.

I find this, perhaps inevitable, factionalization around Russell Wilson depressing.

 

[cdallan]

So, you're saying that he just should have thrown the ball away on all those sacks?
NONE of the Seahawks Receivers scare anyone, and it all dumps right back on Wilson's shoulders.
What I'm waiting for now, is for someone to show that they have the Solution.
We're seeing and hearing lots of blame, what I'm not seeing or hearing, is someone that is ready to ride up and save the day.
Super easy to poke holes, so if you have fixes, I'm ready to be enlightened.

A throw away is better than a sack, right?

Baldwin is a slot receiver who rarely runs routes to the short middle of the field. Pretty easy solution there.

Don't do a long developing play fake on a screen.

Norwood has shown a talent for finding the holes in zones.

And I did point out that the passing game got a lot more consistent when the playcalling trended towards a short, quick passing game.

But if you want to say I only poked holes, whatever. Seeing as your solution seems to be go get different receivers.

When you send Wilson on a play fake bootleg to the strong side, try to have more than just a TE 6 yds ahead of him as a target on that half of the field...

 

[tom sawyer]

I see alot more receivers this year not "opening" for RW. Backs to the QB.

I also see a lot of our CBs running perceived routes and not clinging to WR and playing the ball as much as they did last year.

We need more intensity in tent city!

 

[kearly]

I enjoyed the post and it was interesting to see the photos, but I'm curious how you know what the linemen were "supposed" to do on the given plays? Luke Willson was just on ESPN last week saying that nobody outside of the locker room knows what plays they're supposed to run and that things change completely as they lined up and linemen are calling out assignments.

So, did you get that info from coaching staff? If not, where? Are you just basing this on your own guesses, according to what you saw on film? How do you know that everyone on the field was perfectly executing whatever play was called in by the coaches, including whatever adjustments or assignment changes were called as they were lining up?

My problem with fan interpretation of game calling and what happens on plays is exactly what Luke WIllson, Warren Moon, Brock Huard, Pete Carroll and countless other athletes and coaches have all said in interviews. Unless you're part of the huddle and actually standing on the O-line, it is impossible for you to know how players are performing because you have no idea what plays are being called and what audibles/adjustments are being made at the line.

I think that's a good argument for using a grain of salt when evaluating individuals. This has been the main argument against PFF.

But when it comes to evaluating a playcall, it's a self-evident thing. These were not audibles. They were run as called, and the design was poorly conceived. Seattle does not audible a ton, I would guess our team is near the bottom of the league in audibles.