Fieldgulls: More to Seahawks’ pressure problem than just OL

[Spin Doctor]

Current Seahawks are easy to defensive gameplan against. Pressure up the middle. RW can't handle it. It disrupts everything, run game included. This is not a Cable OL. They've put together a decent pass blocking line that has no push in the running game. Protecting RW is commendable but they have destroyed the offense. If you are going to a college line then you need to run a college offense.

Pressure up the middle is the least of our problems on offense. Russ is probably the best QB in the NFL at avoiding the pass rush up the middle. He makes so many people miss. Procic we havent really seen much pressure up the middle either, at least on the left side. Our issue is that for whatever reason we are calling a one dimensional game on offense. Literally it is all streaks, and post routes. It doesn't matter what the opposing defense shows us, we keep doing the same thing. Our answer is to run the same plays in max protect. Even a 15 year old playing madden knows that in order to beat the blitz you have to either run a misdirection play or have a hot route. We have neither. Bevell, and Cable are absolute morons, and Pete Carroll isn't any better when it comes to the offensive side of the ball.

My question is; why do they keep running the same concepts expecting different results? Our initial game plans are poor, and on the offensive side we're not adjusting to what the defense is doing. If you wonder why Bevell hasn't gotten a head coaching job, this is why. I'm sick and tired of this.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Man, it feels like 2013 & 2014 when I ranted pretty regularly about our stupidly simplistic offensive formations. It's almost like...defenses can predict what we're going to do.

HOLY CHRIST, WHAT A REVELATION! Why did nobody discover this (aside from every opposing defense) before now?!

 

[Spin Doctor]

Man, it feels like 2013 & 2014 when I ranted pretty regularly about our stupidly simplistic offensive formations. It's almost like...defenses can predict what we're going to do.

HOLY CHRIST, WHAT A REVELATION! Why did nobody discover this (aside from every opposing defense) before now?!

The guys over at the NFL network have also made this comment before.

 

[WindCityHawk]

So the person running the offense is a stubborn idiot. Cool. Glad we keep finding new ways to quantify the same problem.

 

[mrt144]

Man, it feels like 2013 & 2014 when I ranted pretty regularly about our stupidly simplistic offensive formations. It's almost like...defenses can predict what we're going to do.

HOLY CHRIST, WHAT A REVELATION! Why did nobody discover this (aside from every opposing defense) before now?!

This goes deeper than that.

 

[chris98251]

Man, it feels like 2013 & 2014 when I ranted pretty regularly about our stupidly simplistic offensive formations. It's almost like...defenses can predict what we're going to do.

HOLY CHRIST, WHAT A REVELATION! Why did nobody discover this (aside from every opposing defense) before now?!

This goes deeper than that.

True about 40 to 50 yds typically.

 

[LudwigsDrummer]

A solid run game kills this discussion.

 

[sdog1981]

At this point all I can say is this.

Bevell is bad for Cable

And

Cable is bad for Bevell

At the minimum one has to go.

 

[RolandDeschain]

A solid run game kills this discussion.

See, that's exactly the wrong mindset. Even if you have an amazing back like Marshawn and your run game is successful because of that, it doesn't mean you should stick with stupidly simple formations and schemes that college defenders can read and predict.

I hate the "success means everything is fantastic" mentality. It's illogical. I bet you anything Bill Belichick doesn't look at success that way, and it's gotta be a huge part of why he has been so successful for so long.

 

[Crizilla]

At this point all I can say is this.

Bevell is bad for Cable

And

Cable is bad for Bevell

At the minimum one has to go.

that's a good way to put it

lel

 

[mrt144]

A solid run game kills this discussion.

See, that's exactly the wrong mindset. Even if you have an amazing back like Marshawn and your run game is successful because of that, it doesn't mean you should stick with stupidly simple formations and schemes that college defenders can read and predict.

I hate the "success means everything is fantastic" mentality. It's illogical. I bet you anything Bill Belichick doesn't look at success that way, and it's gotta be a huge part of why he has been so successful for so long.

BUT it's not entirely wrong since more efficient running wouldn't make passing be as high leverage as it currently is and also legit gain first downs and TDs would be awesome. Yes just saying that one simple trick would flip a switch Isnt a great mentality but an obvious deficiency is obvious and would help to improve upon

 

[chris98251]

A solid run game kills this discussion.

See, that's exactly the wrong mindset. Even if you have an amazing back like Marshawn and your run game is successful because of that, it doesn't mean you should stick with stupidly simple formations and schemes that college defenders can read and predict.

I hate the "success means everything is fantastic" mentality. It's illogical. I bet you anything Bill Belichick doesn't look at success that way, and it's gotta be a huge part of why he has been so successful for so long.

Marshawn was successful before he came here, just pissed off the Coaches with him being Lynch in Buffalo, imagine if he was able to actually have holes to run through and could attack the second level regularly. The level of success he had here is a testament to how good he really was.

 

[Ozzy]

I honestly came here looking for a Sioux explanation and defense of the offensive playcalling. Baldinger, Dungy and plenty of others have been critical of our offensive playcalling and failure to adjust. I would love to be inside the building but its strange to me that there isn't a voice of reason somewhere that is screaming for a change whether its a player, assistant coach, equipment manager etc. someone. I am possible the biggest Wilson fan(including Anthony!) and its one thing I wish he would do, is to demand better. I think some of the greats had this ability and its one area he struggles in. He is such a team guy, trusts his coaches, teammates etc that he refuses to believe they can't execute that he stays silent.....at least that's my theory.

Lynch was good, not great before coming here. Wilson and the threat of the read option and his ability to scramble helped Lynch immensely in the running game. that's not to say Lynch didn't help Wilson but I think its understated how much effect Wilson had on the running game.

Whoever posted above about Bevell not being good for Cable and Cable not being good for Bevell nailed it. It's possible both are good coaches but they can't get out of each others way.

 

[WindCityHawk]

A solid run game kills this discussion.

If your coordinator is only good when he has a Hall of Fame running back, your coordinator is not good.

Good coaches make the most with what they have. They don't sit back and say, "Oh if only the players executed perfectly this would work." (See also: Bevell's comments about Lockette after XLIX).

After years of drafts and camps and cuts, we have the roster we have, and if Bevell can't work with these 53 pieces, then he shouldn't be part of this team. The same goes for Cable (though to Cable's credit, I think he's doing more with what he's been given).

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Whoever posted above about Bevell not being good for Cable and Cable not being good for Bevell nailed it. It's possible both are good coaches but they can't get out of each others way.

Still not sure why Pete is always absolved from blame when we're bashing Cable and Bevell.

Seven years ago when Pete was hired he wanted a physical ball control zone blocking punishing run first style of offense, so he hired Cable, and he wanted an O-Coordinator that could run that layered progression run first to open up play action style of offense..............so he hired Bevell.

The rest is history. If I'm handing out blame for our offensive issues, Pete's at the top of my list. He's the stubborn coach still clinging to a system that hasn't been effective or productive in almost three years now.

 

[Ozzy]

I've been guilty of this as well and its a completely valid point. If its truly a scheming issue that isn't up to par for today's NFL then its Pete's fault and really his fault alone. We can complain about Bevell, Cable but its up to Pete to fix it and he hasn't.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Whoever posted above about Bevell not being good for Cable and Cable not being good for Bevell nailed it. It's possible both are good coaches but they can't get out of each others way.

Still not sure why Pete is always absolved from blame when we're bashing Cable and Bevell.

Because he's harder to replace. There's always a direct relationship between the perceived ease of a fix and fans' receptivity to that fix.

But Pete is exactly where I land with my blame as well. If he can't adapt to the situation our injuries have left us when we have the tools to adapt, then he alone will be responsible for the outcome.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Whoever posted above about Bevell not being good for Cable and Cable not being good for Bevell nailed it. It's possible both are good coaches but they can't get out of each others way.

Still not sure why Pete is always absolved from blame when we're bashing Cable and Bevell.

Because he's harder to replace. There's always a direct relationship between the perceived ease of a fix and fans' receptivity to that fix.

But Pete is exactly where I land with my blame as well. If he can't adapt to the situation our injuries have left us when we have the tools to adapt, then he alone will be responsible for the outcome.

I'm not asking for anyone to be replaced, I'm just making sure the people who ARE asking acknowledge and understand where the root of their problem extends from. Pete.

Pete has total autonomy at any point in the pre-season and regular season to sit Bevell, Cable and Russell down and say "This isn't working, so we're going in a different direction with the offense, so this is what I want out of you scheme wise and playcall wise."

But he hasn't, and he doesn't.

 

[scutterhawk]

A solid run game kills this discussion.

See, that's exactly the wrong mindset. Even if you have an amazing back like Marshawn and your run game is successful because of that, it doesn't mean you should stick with stupidly simple formations and schemes that college defenders can read and predict.

I hate the "success means everything is fantastic" mentality. It's illogical. I bet you anything Bill Belichick doesn't look at success that way, and it's gotta be a huge part of why he has been so successful for so long.

Yah, :lol: Belichick likely threw that game last Season in NE, he probably felt sorry for Pete and his "Simple College Formations".
Pete & Co. are just so LUCKY, LUCKY, LUCKY to have WON so many games since 2013, ESPECIALLY when it seems all they are able to do, is dial up (according to a bunch of Pro football Guru's here) Simplistic College Offensive Schemes.

 

[mrt144]

Whoever posted above about Bevell not being good for Cable and Cable not being good for Bevell nailed it. It's possible both are good coaches but they can't get out of each others way.

Still not sure why Pete is always absolved from blame when we're bashing Cable and Bevell.

Because he's harder to replace. There's always a direct relationship between the perceived ease of a fix and fans' receptivity to that fix.

But Pete is exactly where I land with my blame as well. If he can't adapt to the situation our injuries have left us when we have the tools to adapt, then he alone will be responsible for the outcome.

See 95% of Bills fans in regards to Tyrod.