I've been thinking...

[Seahawk_Dan]

I was having a discussion with my mom, who is just as much an avid (rabid) Seahawks fan just as I am, but I had a question about the upcoming game this Sunday against the Niners.

What if we lose?

Let me go into detail here. The past two weeks we've scored a grand total of 15 points. The Dolphins we struggled with and won in the final minutes, and against the Rams we lost to a Case Keenum lead offense. Yes, I understand that the Rams have one of the best front fours in the league but there is no reason we should not have won that game, but it felt like no matter what the engine just couldn't get jump started and it constantly puttered out.

The Niners beat the Rams 28-0 and lost to the Panthers 27-46. Notice anything here? We can point and laugh at the beating the Panthers gave the Niners, but for the most part they stayed in it before finally be trampled over. They've also scored a total of 55 points in two games to our 15, and they have Blaine Gabbert as their starting QB.

So what is the problem?

Russel's ankle?
The O-Line?
Bevell?
No more Marshawn?

If we lose will there be a shake up in someway such as a coach being replaced, a scheme change, or just completely re-tooling how the team works on offense (switching from our traditional run style to a more pass happy attack ala the end of last season)?

At that point, if Seattle were to go 1-2 and still failed to score more than 10 points in the game will it just be, "Oh, well, we're a fourth quarter team" - "Hey we were 2-3 last year." - "We haven't warmed up yet." - "It's because we don't have _____." - "It's <coach/player> fault."

What I guess I'm trying to say is that I'm genuinely curious if something would happen at all. The Seahawks are a talented team, a very talented team. A stellar defense that still manages to hold opponents under 10 points and tied for 2nd in sacks. The offense is just dripping with talent with Russel, Baldwin, Jimmy G, Kearse, Locket, Rawls. There's no reason why the team shouldn't be bullying everyone right now.

 

[FlyingGreg]

There won't be a change. Pete is stubborn.

The offense is not innovating. The defense still can't cover tight ends and doesn't force turnovers. Teams have learned how to attack our defense.

Our defense is still good, it just isn't what it used to be.

When will we adapt?

Teams know they need to be careful playing Denver's defense just like they are with ours. But somehow, Denver dominates still. They had 2 defensive TD's last week. They are maximizing their strengths.

Pete believes in going with what they do and relying on the players to make plays. It has largely worked. But, when they don't make plays, we struggle. The margin of error is very slim which is why we always seem to play close games.

Also, we have a hobbled QB and work in progress line (being kind). Until Ifedi gets back, we won't see the line improve. We need to rely on Russell magic and our D to get us by.

We also need Vannett back. He will help in blocking.

 

[Seahawk_Dan]

There won't be a change. Pete is stubborn.

The offense is not innovating. The defense still can't cover tight ends and doesn't force turnovers. Teams have learned how to attack our defense.

Our defense is still good, it just isn't what it used to be.

When will we adapt?

Teams know they need to be careful playing Denver's defense just like they are with ours. But somehow, Denver dominates still. They had 2 defensive TD's last week. They are maximizing their strengths.

Pete believes in going with what they do and relying on the players to make plays. It has largely worked. But, when they don't make plays, we struggle. The margin of error is very slim which is why we always seem to play close games.

Also, we have a hobbled QB and work in progress line (being kind). Until Ifedi gets back, we won't see the line improve. We need to rely on Russell magic and our D to get us by.

We also need Vannett back. He will help in blocking.

I understand Pete wants to relay on players to make plays, but if you're not putting them in a position to do so then you're not going to be going anywhere.

 

[FlyingGreg]

There won't be a change. Pete is stubborn.

The offense is not innovating. The defense still can't cover tight ends and doesn't force turnovers. Teams have learned how to attack our defense.

Our defense is still good, it just isn't what it used to be.

When will we adapt?

Teams know they need to be careful playing Denver's defense just like they are with ours. But somehow, Denver dominates still. They had 2 defensive TD's last week. They are maximizing their strengths.

Pete believes in going with what they do and relying on the players to make plays. It has largely worked. But, when they don't make plays, we struggle. The margin of error is very slim which is why we always seem to play close games.

Also, we have a hobbled QB and work in progress line (being kind). Until Ifedi gets back, we won't see the line improve. We need to rely on Russell magic and our D to get us by.

We also need Vannett back. He will help in blocking.

I understand Pete wants to relay on players to make plays, but if you're not putting them in a position to do so then you're not going to be going anywhere.

Yes. And this is why we are in limbo right now.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Pete has a philosophy, and it works, if you have the horses.

1 - Run blocking is easier and less exhausting than pass blocking. That means younger guys can come in and contribute earlier. It also tires the defense out, so those 2 yard runs turn into 8 or 10 yard runs in the 3rd or 4th quarter.

2 - Keep the opposing defense on the field. The longer the opposing defense is on the field, the more rest for ours. That allows our pass rushers to exert more when on the field and it allows us to get by with quicker lighter guys.

3 - Take long shots to keep the opposing defense from bunching up on the run and to create overreactions.

We will leave out the RO stuff because that is situational but that also helps the run game (and the long passes without a great protective pocket).

So this works, but you need a run game that can make it work. We do not have battering ram RBs though. CM is not, he is a hit the hole fast guy. Rawls is not, while an effort guy that will run through tackles, he will get tired (Try to carry someone up the stairs. You can probably do it, but with effort. Great, now do that 30 times and see why constantly having someone on your back and being asked to push forward 10-15 feet is a bit deal).

We just don't have the horses. So we are trying to knock the fence down by smashing into it repeatedly, but we no longer have a rhino. We have a deer and maybe a small horse. It might not work and if it doesn't you are just punting back to the defense and tiring out yours. This is probably the root of the wishful thinking that led us to keep AC, we were hoping for a guy that can slam into the line and get positive yards after contact.

Also we do not adjust our attack (or defense) much to scheme for weaknesses on the other side.

We now have a team built for a passing attack* but we go in with a gameplan as if we still had a team built to run the ball. But we really are not built to pass either, because the line is still left bargain basement like back when we were running the ball as the focus. You can do that with a rush first line, not with a pass first.

I will leave out how adding Rubin & Reed are likely a result of our defense being on the field more, and how this makes it harder for the defense to shut the pass down - giving our offense even less chances.

Ultimately this comes down to the team being build 75% one way and then the gameplan being 75% the other. We still think we can do well the very things that we lost the people that let us do those things allowed. Yet we do not change, until the 4th quarter...which might be too late.

 

[RW92]

I was having a discussion with my mom, who is just as much an avid (rabid) Seahawks fan just as I am, but I had a question about the upcoming game this Sunday against the Niners.

What if we lose?

Let me go into detail here. The past two weeks we've scored a grand total of 15 points. The Dolphins we struggled with and won in the final minutes, and against the Rams we lost to a Case Keenum lead offense. Yes, I understand that the Rams have one of the best front fours in the league but there is no reason we should not have won that game, but it felt like no matter what the engine just couldn't get jump started and it constantly puttered out.

The Niners beat the Rams 28-0 and lost to the Panthers 27-46. Notice anything here? We can point and laugh at the beating the Panthers gave the Niners, but for the most part they stayed in it before finally be trampled over. They've also scored a total of 55 points in two games to our 15, and they have Blaine Gabbert as their starting QB.

So what is the problem?

Russel's ankle?
The O-Line?
Bevell?
No more Marshawn?

If we lose will there be a shake up in someway such as a coach being replaced, a scheme change, or just completely re-tooling how the team works on offense (switching from our traditional run style to a more pass happy attack ala the end of last season)?

At that point, if Seattle were to go 1-2 and still failed to score more than 10 points in the game will it just be, "Oh, well, we're a fourth quarter team" - "Hey we were 2-3 last year." - "We haven't warmed up yet." - "It's because we don't have _____." - "It's <coach/player> fault."

What I guess I'm trying to say is that I'm genuinely curious if something would happen at all. The Seahawks are a talented team, a very talented team. A stellar defense that still manages to hold opponents under 10 points and tied for 2nd in sacks. The offense is just dripping with talent with Russel, Baldwin, Jimmy G, Kearse, Locket, Rawls. There's no reason why the team shouldn't be bullying everyone right now.

You forgot one line. Lack of a #1 premiere wide receiver. Tyler is very good, don't get me wrong but he isn't A. Brown or A.J. Greeen. Baldwin is a #2 on most teams. And Kearse wouldn't make most teams. With our wide outs struggling to get open Russell can't run to create time, which allows our W.R. to create better spacing. And if you roll a double coverage towards Tyler, that pretty much shuts down the works. Abeit 3 points in a game. You're right, we could lose this Sunday. All of our games will be dangerous to the point of a last minute heroic play.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Pete has a philosophy, and it works, if you have the horses.

1 - Run blocking is easier and less exhausting than pass blocking. That means younger guys can come in and contribute earlier. It also tires the defense out, so those 2 yard runs turn into 8 or 10 yard runs in the 3rd or 4th quarter.

2 - Keep the opposing defense on the field. The longer the opposing defense is on the field, the more rest for ours. That allows our pass rushers to exert more when on the field and it allows us to get by with quicker lighter guys.

3 - Take long shots to keep the opposing defense from bunching up on the run and to create overreactions.

We will leave out the RO stuff because that is situational but that also helps the run game (and the long passes without a great protective pocket).

So this works, but you need a run game that can make it work. We do not have battering ram RBs though. CM is not, he is a hit the hole fast guy. Rawls is not, while an effort guy that will run through tackles, he will get tired (Try to carry someone up the stairs. You can probably do it, but with effort. Great, now do that 30 times and see why constantly having someone on your back and being asked to push forward 10-15 feet is a bit deal).

We just don't have the horses. So we are trying to knock the fence down by smashing into it repeatedly, but we no longer have a rhino. We have a deer and maybe a small horse. It might not work and if it doesn't you are just punting back to the defense and tiring out yours. This is probably the root of the wishful thinking that led us to keep AC, we were hoping for a guy that can slam into the line and get positive yards after contact.

Also we do not adjust our attack (or defense) much to scheme for weaknesses on the other side.

We now have a team built for a passing attack* but we go in with a gameplan as if we still had a team built to run the ball. But we really are not built to pass either, because the line is still left bargain basement like back when we were running the ball as the focus. You can do that with a rush first line, not with a pass first.

I will leave out how adding Rubin & Reed are likely a result of our defense being on the field more, and how this makes it harder for the defense to shut the pass down - giving our offense even less chances.

Ultimately this comes down to the team being build 75% one way and then the gameplan being 75% the other. We still think we can do well the very things that we lost the people that let us do those things allowed. Yet we do not change, until the 4th quarter...which might be too late.

I like that post Twisted. You nailed it. Good job.

Let me ask you this. While acquiescing to salary cap demands, what could've been done to make our line better in pass pro in the offseason? And do we completely abandon our run-first philosophy at this point or do we continue to work on it?

 

[chris98251]

Last year we had a more forgiving schedule when it came to division opponents, this year we are getting them earlier in our schedule, this gives less time to fix our issues and can put us in a hole way faster, losing two or three this early may be unrecoverable for a playoff birth.

 

[Largent80]

There won't be a change. Pete is stubborn.

The offense is not innovating. The defense still can't cover tight ends and doesn't force turnovers. Teams have learned how to attack our defense.

Our defense is still good, it just isn't what it used to be.

When will we adapt?

Teams know they need to be careful playing Denver's defense just like they are with ours. But somehow, Denver dominates still. They had 2 defensive TD's last week. They are maximizing their strengths.

Pete believes in going with what they do and relying on the players to make plays. It has largely worked. But, when they don't make plays, we struggle. The margin of error is very slim which is why we always seem to play close games.

Also, we have a hobbled QB and work in progress line (being kind). Until Ifedi gets back, we won't see the line improve. We need to rely on Russell magic and our D to get us by.

We also need Vannett back. He will help in blocking.

This for days. I think we lose this game and maybe it will be good as heads may roll.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Sioux,

I don't think we could have gotten pass blocking. Everyone wants that. And I am not a great believer in our evaluation of lower round OL guys anyway, much less UDFAs, though other teams seem to manage it.

What we did was try to get better at pass blocking at the cost of effectiveness running the ball. We have a mobile QB, we just have to scheme our pass game in place between our run game.

We could have at least focused on getting the run game better. Or pay the cost and get an average pass blocking line, knowing the run game suffers. But trying to get slightly better at pass blocking while getting much worse at run blocking was a horrific idea.

The personnel choices on how to construct the line were terrible. Evans was a keeper who we dumped, as an example. Sowell? Well wtf. But the choices were made, and like Pope being gone we are stuck with them.

Either way, we need to abandon the fantasy that by beating on someone for 1-2 quarters with no results we will start to wear them down by the 3rd & 4th to come roaring back. Because by then our defense is spent, even if we come back to score asking our defense to continually hold the fort is unreasonable. AND OUR DEFENSE IS NOT SHUTDOWN ANYMORE.

We either need to go full Pittsburgh and push to score at every opportunity, or we need to revamp that line and make sure we get 3-4 yards per carry against the good defenses. Saying our guys are not good because we played the 'good defenses' is not good enough - in the playoffs EVERYONE has 'good defenses'.

We need to start counting won quarters by score, not clock time. Because we do have the pieces to score - we just need to play like it is the 4th quarter in the 1st.

 

[OkieHawk]

We need to start counting won quarters by score, not clock time. Because we do have the pieces to score - we just need to play like it is the 4th quarter in the 1st.

This really can't be said enough.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Sioux,

I don't think we could have gotten pass blocking. Everyone wants that. And I am not a great believer in our evaluation of lower round OL guys anyway, much less UDFAs, though other teams seem to manage it.

What we did was try to get better at pass blocking at the cost of effectiveness running the ball. We have a mobile QB, we just have to scheme our pass game in place between our run game.

We could have at least focused on getting the run game better. Or pay the cost and get an average pass blocking line, knowing the run game suffers. But trying to get slightly better at pass blocking while getting much worse at run blocking was a horrific idea.

The personnel choices on how to construct the line were terrible. Evans was a keeper who we dumped, as an example. Sowell? Well wtf. But the choices were made, and like Pope being gone we are stuck with them.

Either way, we need to abandon the fantasy that by beating on someone for 1-2 quarters with no results we will start to wear them down by the 3rd & 4th to come roaring back. Because by then our defense is spent, even if we come back to score asking our defense to continually hold the fort is unreasonable. AND OUR DEFENSE IS NOT SHUTDOWN ANYMORE.

We either need to go full Pittsburgh and push to score at every opportunity, or we need to revamp that line and make sure we get 3-4 yards per carry against the good defenses. Saying our guys are not good because we played the 'good defenses' is not good enough - in the playoffs EVERYONE has 'good defenses'.

We need to start counting won quarters by score, not clock time. Because we do have the pieces to score - we just need to play like it is the 4th quarter in the 1st.

Very good points. I made a reference in another thread that going with the style of offense where we try to wear down the opposing defense and then establish control in the second half is an all-or-nothing concept. You can't half-ass it. But like you said, you have to have the horses to do it.
My thinking is that we tried to resort back to that approach in these first two games and discovered that it ain't happenin. We have really put a big burden on our defense in the past to establish prime field position by forcing a 3-and-out or a turnover. That gave our offense more shots at scoring and dovetailed nicely with Pete's approach to ball security and employing a less riskier scheme. But as you correctly stated, the defense this year, while still being superior, hasn't come up with a turnover yet and has left the offense in one of the poorest starting field position in the league.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not being critical of the defense. Even if we start inside our own 20, it's the offenses job to put together long scoring drives. I'm just pointing out that we're in that process of finding our identity when we have control of the ball and I feel that's been our biggest stumbling block for us out of the gates.

I'd like to see us go back to what was working at the end of last season, sure. But like you said, asking this line to pass protect is more difficult than run blocking. Russ's ankle is going to heal and he'll be back to his mobile self, which will help, but I don't want to see him creamed time and again on even a quick three-step drop and quick release, which has happened.

I'm really hoping the return of Ifedi and Vannett and better blocking from our backs can give Russ enough time to get our aerial game rolling again. Once that starts and defenses drop back a little more, that's when our run game hopefully finds more open spaces to roam through and we get into that rhythm we all know is within us.

 

[mrt144]

Pete has a philosophy, and it works, if you have the horses.

1 - Run blocking is easier and less exhausting than pass blocking. That means younger guys can come in and contribute earlier. It also tires the defense out, so those 2 yard runs turn into 8 or 10 yard runs in the 3rd or 4th quarter.

2 - Keep the opposing defense on the field. The longer the opposing defense is on the field, the more rest for ours. That allows our pass rushers to exert more when on the field and it allows us to get by with quicker lighter guys.

3 - Take long shots to keep the opposing defense from bunching up on the run and to create overreactions.

We will leave out the RO stuff because that is situational but that also helps the run game (and the long passes without a great protective pocket).

So this works, but you need a run game that can make it work. We do not have battering ram RBs though. CM is not, he is a hit the hole fast guy. Rawls is not, while an effort guy that will run through tackles, he will get tired (Try to carry someone up the stairs. You can probably do it, but with effort. Great, now do that 30 times and see why constantly having someone on your back and being asked to push forward 10-15 feet is a bit deal).

We just don't have the horses. So we are trying to knock the fence down by smashing into it repeatedly, but we no longer have a rhino. We have a deer and maybe a small horse. It might not work and if it doesn't you are just punting back to the defense and tiring out yours. This is probably the root of the wishful thinking that led us to keep AC, we were hoping for a guy that can slam into the line and get positive yards after contact.

Also we do not adjust our attack (or defense) much to scheme for weaknesses on the other side.

We now have a team built for a passing attack* but we go in with a gameplan as if we still had a team built to run the ball. But we really are not built to pass either, because the line is still left bargain basement like back when we were running the ball as the focus. You can do that with a rush first line, not with a pass first.

I will leave out how adding Rubin & Reed are likely a result of our defense being on the field more, and how this makes it harder for the defense to shut the pass down - giving our offense even less chances.

Ultimately this comes down to the team being build 75% one way and then the gameplan being 75% the other. We still think we can do well the very things that we lost the people that let us do those things allowed. Yet we do not change, until the 4th quarter...which might be too late.

I agree on this - the blueprint is proven but we don't have the building materials at the moment.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

Disagree, because looking at the OL and the RBs, including their play during much of the preseason, and including CM's YPC numbers so far, we DO have the building blocks to play that way. They need to gel better but there's reasonable evidence to support that it will come together.

If SF's DL has a weakness then it's at the DT's, right up the middle where, if we have a strength on the OL, that's the right matchup we want come Sunday. A lot of teams have DL's built more for the passing game; our OL is built to be the antithesis to what those DL's want to see.

 

[FlyingGreg]

Disagree, because looking at the OL and the RBs, including their play during much of the preseason, and including CM's YPC numbers so far, we DO have the building blocks to play that way. They need to gel better but there's reasonable evidence to support that it will come together.

If SF's DL has a weakness then it's at the DT's, right up the middle where, if we have a strength on the OL, that's the right matchup we want come Sunday. A lot of teams have DL's built more for the passing game; our OL is built to be the antithesis to what those DL's want to see.

NOTHING that happened in pre-season matters. At all.

Completely meaningless.

 

[seahawkfreak]

Pete has a philosophy, and it works, if you have the horses.

1 - Run blocking is easier and less exhausting than pass blocking. That means younger guys can come in and contribute earlier. It also tires the defense out, so those 2 yard runs turn into 8 or 10 yard runs in the 3rd or 4th quarter.

2 - Keep the opposing defense on the field. The longer the opposing defense is on the field, the more rest for ours. That allows our pass rushers to exert more when on the field and it allows us to get by with quicker lighter guys.

3 - Take long shots to keep the opposing defense from bunching up on the run and to create overreactions.

We will leave out the RO stuff because that is situational but that also helps the run game (and the long passes without a great protective pocket).

So this works, but you need a run game that can make it work. We do not have battering ram RBs though. CM is not, he is a hit the hole fast guy. Rawls is not, while an effort guy that will run through tackles, he will get tired (Try to carry someone up the stairs. You can probably do it, but with effort. Great, now do that 30 times and see why constantly having someone on your back and being asked to push forward 10-15 feet is a bit deal).

We just don't have the horses. So we are trying to knock the fence down by smashing into it repeatedly, but we no longer have a rhino. We have a deer and maybe a small horse. It might not work and if it doesn't you are just punting back to the defense and tiring out yours. This is probably the root of the wishful thinking that led us to keep AC, we were hoping for a guy that can slam into the line and get positive yards after contact.

Also we do not adjust our attack (or defense) much to scheme for weaknesses on the other side.

We now have a team built for a passing attack* but we go in with a gameplan as if we still had a team built to run the ball. But we really are not built to pass either, because the line is still left bargain basement like back when we were running the ball as the focus. You can do that with a rush first line, not with a pass first.

I will leave out how adding Rubin & Reed are likely a result of our defense being on the field more, and how this makes it harder for the defense to shut the pass down - giving our offense even less chances.

Ultimately this comes down to the team being build 75% one way and then the gameplan being 75% the other. We still think we can do well the very things that we lost the people that let us do those things allowed. Yet we do not change, until the 4th quarter...which might be too late.

When did run blocking become easier and less exhausting than pass blocking?

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Disagree, because looking at the OL and the RBs, including their play during much of the preseason, and including CM's YPC numbers so far, we DO have the building blocks to play that way. They need to gel better but there's reasonable evidence to support that it will come together.

If SF's DL has a weakness then it's at the DT's, right up the middle where, if we have a strength on the OL, that's the right matchup we want come Sunday. A lot of teams have DL's built more for the passing game; our OL is built to be the antithesis to what those DL's want to see.

NOTHING that happened in pre-season matters. At all.

Completely meaningless.

How can you Gifbomb C-mike without preseason. Huh?? Huh??? Or was that photobomb him...heh heh heh

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

Disagree, because looking at the OL and the RBs, including their play during much of the preseason, and including CM's YPC numbers so far, we DO have the building blocks to play that way. They need to gel better but there's reasonable evidence to support that it will come together.

If SF's DL has a weakness then it's at the DT's, right up the middle where, if we have a strength on the OL, that's the right matchup we want come Sunday. A lot of teams have DL's built more for the passing game; our OL is built to be the antithesis to what those DL's want to see.

NOTHING that happened in pre-season matters. At all.

Completely meaningless.

Not 'completely' - there was a lot of optimism here on the forum, and expressed by the likes of Cable too, about the explosive runs that CM was pulling off. Granted there may not have been much 'scheming' but it was was during firsts against firsts. It does have some meaning and again, CM's YPC is impressive even in the first two real games.

I'm a natural optimist but plenty suggests that this offense will get it together and begin to overpower D's here starting soon. Left to Right, they are all big and aggressive.