Brutal honesty

[Siouxhawk]

You know the real "beauty" of up-tempo offense? If you go 3 and out, you get your defense back on the field 3 minutes sooner.

:34853_doh:

Sometimes I wonder why people bother. :229031_shrug:

Yes, and doing it all the time eliminates the element of surprise for the defense. Remember how that constant adherence to using the hurry-up worked out for Chip Kelly?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

As much as the up tempo is a nice change up, no way you could do it all game. Shoot, maybe 3 drives a game would be more realistic, but it's just not realistic to do it all day. Ask Chip Kelly how it works.......

 

[Siouxhawk]

Jinx :mrgreen:

 

[Popeyejones]

As a matter of philosophy Pete Carroll -- and teams with great defenses in general -- don't run uptempo offenses because to do so takes away the advantage of controlling the clock and strangling a team to death. It's just not the way that Pete Carroll plays and really just isn't the way to play when you have a dominate defense.

As for spreading things out more, I don't think that's really a good idea for the Hawks either, as (1) they tried that last year and it didn't really work, and (2) spreading things out puts even more pressure on the Seahawks' major pressure point: their offensive line.

Once you spread things out your six or seven on four blocking matchups revert to five on four, which is really not a recipe for success with the Hawks O-line.

TBF I think they might go uptempo more just as an experiment, but it is definitely a break from philosophy.

 

[PackerNation]

I think our Super Bowl window has closed. Unpopular, I know, but hear me out.

I disagree. Hear me out.

As long as you have a defense as good as you do, you are always going to be a contender. Not only that, your defense is actually improved over the last 2 seasons and will be solid for the foreseeable future. Guys like Reed, Griffin, Jones and Clark are good now and will get better and better as time goes on.

Earl Thomas: Hall of Fame.

Your problem is not the coaches or the game planning or Russell Wilson and anything outside of football he is involved in. Your problem is drafting quality Offensive Linemen. You have been spending top draft picks on them and have been missing. The guys you drafted are just not that good. It's one of the toughest areas to draft and to have immediate impact or even to develop. Green Bay moved up to grab Jason Spriggs with the 48th pick last year and the pundits, coaches and fans were ecstatic about his potential. He is a complete bust at this point. Meanwhile a 7th rounder (Murphy) out of Stanford who barely got a look, started yesterday and held up well under enormous pressure from the best DL in football. You have yet to find guys like that. Could it be your scouting? Priority?

Green Bay has the opposite problem. We have been drafting defenders to shore up a weak defense for years and keep missing. We might finally have a top 10 defense after all of those draft picks. One thing is for sure, our DL is much improved and it seems like Capers finally understands the potential Mike Daniels has and how good he is shooting gaps and not just occupying blockers. But considering how many draft picks we have spent on the defensive side of the ball, we should be a lot better than we are. We miss having Nick Collins at Safety. He was our "Earl Thomas".

Your window is not closing, but actually opening up. Your defense got better and you have a quality QB in Wilson. Those are the 2 things you need to be competitive and to make deep runs in the playoffs. You are 2-3 quality players away from fixing that offense. You are contenders right now but contenders with some holes that other teams can exploit. You have a good HC and front office dedicated to winning football. Those guys will keep you at or near the top for years to come.

Welcome to the "We have a great team filled with Hall of Famers and we can't seem to get over that hump" club. Green Bay has had 2 Hall of Fame QB's back to back over the course of 25 years and we have only 2 Super Bowl wins in that time. Put it in perspective. In 5 years, you have been the best team in the NFC with 5 playoff appearances, 2 SB's and 1 win.

Enjoy the journey. Your window is wide open.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Excellent and well-written Packer Nation. Best of luck on the season and perhaps our paths again will cross. I noticed that Murphy too and his play certainly didn't suggest to me that he was a rookie.

 

[bigskydoc]

 

[edogg23]

It's just the first game, there is plenty of time to get right, so I wouldn't overreact that the season is over, but I would like to see changes that are long overdue. The thing that really gets my upset is the whole off season the coaches knew the team had to get better in one area if they wanted to succeed, O-Line, and they got worse.

The o-line is basically allowing this team to get socked in the mouth so hard that they can no longer function and the whole offense just falls apart. This is not even a good defensive front they faced.

Tom Cable should immediately be fired and while your at it replace Bevell as well. When the ONLY time you can move the ball is when you are in hurry up and your qb is doing the play calling it cannot be anymore obvious that the coaching staff is NOT helping this team at all.

I don't want to hear that Cable is doing the best he can with what we got. He has had years to get his guys in there and none of his picks are panning out except for Britt. We are getting knocked out with his guys.

 

[Hawkfish]

Slept on it. Offense line stinks.

 

[cymatica]

I cant stand all this talk of we were in the game and we lost to the packers on the road so whats the big deal. the big deal is the offense was pure garbage. I don't care if we lost by the same exact score but you have to move the ball. does no one realize the difference in moving the ball to mid field numerous times, getting 3 first downs every drive and then having to punt versus 3 and out all day and being 4th and 12, 4th and 15. a lot of possessions we lost yards instead of gaining even a single yard. its pathetic. not like the packers lit it up offensively. take away the 7 points Wilson handed them and they only score 10. but at least with those 10 they moved the ball to flip the field position and chewed up clock. they didn't look inept, they just looked like a team playing a great defense but were still able to control the game and accomplish things. Seattle was the exact opposite of that.

This 100%. It's not that they lost, it's how they lost and the fact it's a recurring problem several years now, everyone sees it but Pete.

 

[JimmyG]

You know the real "beauty" of up-tempo offense? If you go 3 and out, you get your defense back on the field 3 minutes sooner.

:34853_doh:

Sometimes I wonder why people bother. :229031_shrug:

Finally, a rational thought instead of the regurgitated "just run hurry-up, it'll solve all of our offensive woes!" nonsense. Earl Thomas just complained in the postgame about how often the defense has to be on the field. Do you know what the hurry-up offense does? It puts your defense on the field even more.

Someone mentioned Chip Kelly, and how disastrous his up-tempo offense was. Remember how awful his defenses were? Remember the insane snap counts his defenses racked up? It was like the equivalent of his defensive players playing 17-18 games in a season.

 

[StoneCold]

Never been in the "Fire Bevell" crowd that's been roaming around the board for a few years. But, after last season and what I watched today it just feels like the Bevell/Cable combination has grown stale. IMO a change from these two would've been good move this last offseason. I hope I'm wrong.

I am in your boat. Generally there are enough extenuating circumstances, a poor play here and there, an almost great play that doesn't quite come together that I can't pin it on Bevell, and not that this would have radically changed the way the Oline played, but I can't understand calling 3 pass plays to open the game. You know you have an Oline that is sub par, so let's call a couple of running plays to get there feet under them and try to give Russell a 3rd and 5 or something like it. No. You call a semi screen to Carson, something we suck at, a bubble screen to a well defensed ADB and since I blacked out at that point I don't remember what the 3rd pass play was.

Granted we tried to run the ball plenty after that and we sucked at that as well so it may have made no difference, but WTF Bevell/Pete?Cable? WTF?

 

[StoneCold]

You know the real "beauty" of up-tempo offense? If you go 3 and out, you get your defense back on the field 3 minutes sooner.

:34853_doh:

Sometimes I wonder why people bother. :229031_shrug:

Finally, a rational thought instead of the regurgitated "just run hurry-up, it'll solve all of our offensive woes!" nonsense. Earl Thomas just complained in the postgame about how often the defense has to be on the field. Do you know what the hurry-up offense does? It puts your defense on the field even more.

Someone mentioned Chip Kelly, and how disastrous his up-tempo offense was. Remember how awful his defenses were? Remember the insane snap counts his defenses racked up? It was like the equivalent of his defensive players playing 17-18 games in a season.

In most cases I would agree with this, but if an up tempo helps you move the ball and get first downs you would have eaten more clock with that than what we were doing with the 3 and outs.

 

[IrishNW]

I'm not even mad that the offensive line sucks, everyone's offensive line in the NFL sucks except for a few teams. Im mad that we refuse to adapt our offense around it. It cant be a coincidence that our offense comes to life EVERY SINGLE TIME when the games either out of hand or its a two min drill. Its time to start playing full court press with our offense and let Wilson take over.

 

[Seymour]

....As the years go by, I'm more and more convinced that the problem lies squarely on the shoulders of Cable, and, by extension, Carrol who's philosophy, and unwillingness to move on from Cable, is costing this team.

Absolutely 100% true.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I think our Super Bowl window has closed.

You can certainly make a case for the fact that this O-line is so terrible that there's no way our offense can function enough to go to the SB THIS year. I'd listen to that argument with how putrid the O-line was yesterday creating NO WAY at all for the offense to move the ball.

But to go a step further and say our SB window has closed entirely? That's absurd.

The core of our best players aren't even 30 yet, and we have a top 5-6 QB, so your statement is categorically false. Our window is still wide open with this core for at least another 4-5 years as long as John, Pete, Russell and guys like Earl, Clark, Sherm, Wagner and the younger players keep progressing as they've already shown.

 

[mrt144]

You know the real "beauty" of up-tempo offense? If you go 3 and out, you get your defense back on the field 3 minutes sooner.

:34853_doh:

Sometimes I wonder why people bother. :229031_shrug:

Finally, a rational thought instead of the regurgitated "just run hurry-up, it'll solve all of our offensive woes!" nonsense. Earl Thomas just complained in the postgame about how often the defense has to be on the field. Do you know what the hurry-up offense does? It puts your defense on the field even more.

Someone mentioned Chip Kelly, and how disastrous his up-tempo offense was. Remember how awful his defenses were? Remember the insane snap counts his defenses racked up? It was like the equivalent of his defensive players playing 17-18 games in a season.

Worrying about TOP induced by offensive tempo is something you can worry about after worrying about offensive efficacy.

Some of our shortest drives yesterday were not under uptempo constraints. Our only points were induced under up tempo.

It's nice theory football to say that going uptempo will gas our defense but if thats the only way we get points and the other modes of offensive also gas the defense without putting up points, then it's clear up tempo is better even with the potential harm to the defense.

 

[mikeak]

As a matter of philosophy Pete Carroll -- and teams with great defenses in general -- don't run uptempo offenses because to do so takes away the advantage of controlling the clock and strangling a team to death. It's just not the way that Pete Carroll plays and really just isn't the way to play when you have a dominate defense.
.

After years and years of watching three and out when do you realize that 7 completed plays under uptempo takes longer than three straight outs?

I remember a Titans game about 3 years ago. We MASTERFULLY dinked and dunked our way downfield. We had this long drive and just kept short passes, runs going mixing it up. Completely opened up the game

We are in love with running the ball despite our inability to do so. Short, quick throws are required to open up the rest of the game when your O-line is this bad. Rolling the QB to the sides and then hitting guys in stride - moving the pocket. Hot routes all basic concepts and if we got to the line quickly - had everyone set, stopped the defense from substituting and then worked the clock we could start moving the ball

 

[mikeak]

I cant stand all this talk of we were in the game and we lost to the packers on the road so whats the big deal. the big deal is the offense was pure garbage. I don't care if we lost by the same exact score but you have to move the ball. does no one realize the difference in moving the ball to mid field numerous times, getting 3 first downs every drive and then having to punt versus 3 and out all day and being 4th and 12, 4th and 15. a lot of possessions we lost yards instead of gaining even a single yard. its pathetic. not like the packers lit it up offensively. take away the 7 points Wilson handed them and they only score 10. but at least with those 10 they moved the ball to flip the field position and chewed up clock. they didn't look inept, they just looked like a team playing a great defense but were still able to control the game and accomplish things. Seattle was the exact opposite of that.

This 100%. It's not that they lost, it's how they lost and the fact it's a recurring problem several years now, everyone sees it but Pete.

I have said this in three posts around here - agree 100%

I didn't expect a win yesterday. I just didn't want to see something as bad offensively as prior years. I got to see something much much worse.........

 

[BlueBlood]

What a bunch of babies