Bear with me...
I'm basically elaborating off of @CalgaryFan05 thread on the Lion perspective write up and it got me thinking.
Yes Cross and Lucas are vastly superior to Stone and Jake (yea I used first names because I can't spell Forsi...Forsyit...Forc).
However..
Did the backups force Shane to deviate from what he would have done had our starters been in? Pete is pretty stubborn with sticking to his thing, but considering how we finished the Rams game with the backups in, even Pete knew there had to be offensive scheme changes.
In other words
Beating the blitz with the short passing game. The Seahawks knew they wouldn't have tackles capable of containing the blitz so they effectively schemed out of it. It worked wonderfully. Geno had more time than I had seen in a long time (against a good pass rush to boot) and the offense seemed to really dictate the pace.
Had Lucas and Cross been in, perhaps Pete starts his "taking a long shot" strategy that doesn't bode well if the QB is instantly under duress.
Could it be possibly that having two starting tackles out was an advantage against the Lions?? I'm not saying it was, but how we played offensively sure seemed different to me.
Any thoughs?
I'm basically elaborating off of @CalgaryFan05 thread on the Lion perspective write up and it got me thinking.
Yes Cross and Lucas are vastly superior to Stone and Jake (yea I used first names because I can't spell Forsi...Forsyit...Forc).
However..
Did the backups force Shane to deviate from what he would have done had our starters been in? Pete is pretty stubborn with sticking to his thing, but considering how we finished the Rams game with the backups in, even Pete knew there had to be offensive scheme changes.
In other words
Beating the blitz with the short passing game. The Seahawks knew they wouldn't have tackles capable of containing the blitz so they effectively schemed out of it. It worked wonderfully. Geno had more time than I had seen in a long time (against a good pass rush to boot) and the offense seemed to really dictate the pace.
Had Lucas and Cross been in, perhaps Pete starts his "taking a long shot" strategy that doesn't bode well if the QB is instantly under duress.
Could it be possibly that having two starting tackles out was an advantage against the Lions?? I'm not saying it was, but how we played offensively sure seemed different to me.
Any thoughs?