Mathieu says that Hawks use of Jimmy Graham is...

[edogg23]

This is exactly what a lot of people including myself have been saying all along, its so obvious!
Teams should have nightmares about game planning about playing the Seahawks. We have a dynamic QB, a beast for a rb, fast wide receivers, one of the best TE in the league, talent and speed all over the Defense etc...

Instead they probably laugh at us reviewing the tape to gameplan, they could take the same exact gameplan from 2 years ago and it would still 100% apply today. We run the same rudimentary plays over and over again on offense and defense. You could not get any more vanilla if you tried. And yet, somehow even while playing some of the most basic football schemes we still get more penalties than just about anyone.

Our coaching staff needs to adapt or this rapid assent from the top of the mountain is not going to end.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

We're predictable on both sides of the ball, and that's the way Pete's always played.

Pete Carroll has never run complicated offenses or defenses predicated on trickery and scheme. All his teams, even going back to year #1 at USC is about "we're bigger, faster and stronger than you and we're going to impose our will."

And that mentality and philosophy worked here when were WERE bigger, faster and stronger than our opponents. Now? Not so much, no team is intimidated by the Hawks, on either side of the ball. Thus the cracks in the foundation.

 

[HawkFan72]

Three dropped balls and a missed chance at a touchdown. Yeah, he really wasn't utilized at all.

Exactly. If Graham catches all those passes (which he normally does) then Mathieu keeps his mouth shut.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Three dropped balls and a missed chance at a touchdown. Yeah, he really wasn't utilized at all.

He's saying that Jimmy isn't used properly and I'm saying three dropped balls and a potential touchdown is evidence he is being used properly, he just didn't execute in the game against the Cards. And further more, he's on pace to be in the top 5 numbers wise all-time for Seahawk tight ends in a single season.

Jimmy is also on par to what he set in receiving yards each of the last 4 years. So again, he's not being underutilized, especially when he missed 3 catches himself on Sunday. That's the light of reality.

Here is Mathieu's squote

"I don’t think they use him quite as creatively as the Saints used him. I played against Jimmy in 2013 when he was with the Saints and I mean he was all over the field. The biggest thing with them was he created mismatches for him, and [Sunday] he wasn’t really in a position where we felt like it was a mismatch."

1. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't being utilized.
2. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't used properly
3. Being top 5 numbers wise as a TE doesn't mean much. He could potentially have been far and away #1.
4. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham was being underutilized
5. Jimmy Graham yards/game last 4 years, starting with 2011: 82, 66, 76, 56. With us? 55.
6. Jimmy Graham TDs last 4 years, starting with 2011: 11, 9, 16, 10. With us? 2
7. Jimmy Graham receptions/game, starting with 2011: 6.2, 5.7, 5.4, 5.3. With us? 4.6

Mathieu is saying we are not using Graham creatively. We can line up Graham as usual and force the ball to him every pass play. He will get his targets and share of catches. That does not mean he is being used creatively to force mismatches on the field. That just means we are lining him up in the usual spots and throwing the ball to him, without taking into account the unique propositions he brings as an athletic freak and great pass catcher.

If he's an athletic freak and great pass catcher, he should create his own mismatches. We saw him isolated on one defender on that second 2-point try and what did he do. He wasn't that creative. He fell down.
The downward spiraling stats you provided adds up to him not being a focal part of our offense anyhow. He's one cog and I could see him catching at least 5 more touchdown passed the rest of the year.

 

[Optimus25]

Three dropped balls and a missed chance at a touchdown. Yeah, he really wasn't utilized at all.

He's saying that Jimmy isn't used properly and I'm saying three dropped balls and a potential touchdown is evidence he is being used properly, he just didn't execute in the game against the Cards. And further more, he's on pace to be in the top 5 numbers wise all-time for Seahawk tight ends in a single season.

Jimmy is also on par to what he set in receiving yards each of the last 4 years. So again, he's not being underutilized, especially when he missed 3 catches himself on Sunday. That's the light of reality.

Here is Mathieu's squote

"I don’t think they use him quite as creatively as the Saints used him. I played against Jimmy in 2013 when he was with the Saints and I mean he was all over the field. The biggest thing with them was he created mismatches for him, and [Sunday] he wasn’t really in a position where we felt like it was a mismatch."

1. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't being utilized.
2. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't used properly
3. Being top 5 numbers wise as a TE doesn't mean much. He could potentially have been far and away #1.
4. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham was being underutilized
5. Jimmy Graham yards/game last 4 years, starting with 2011: 82, 66, 76, 56. With us? 55.
6. Jimmy Graham TDs last 4 years, starting with 2011: 11, 9, 16, 10. With us? 2
7. Jimmy Graham receptions/game, starting with 2011: 6.2, 5.7, 5.4, 5.3. With us? 4.6

Mathieu is saying we are not using Graham creatively. We can line up Graham as usual and force the ball to him every pass play. He will get his targets and share of catches. That does not mean he is being used creatively to force mismatches on the field. That just means we are lining him up in the usual spots and throwing the ball to him, without taking into account the unique propositions he brings as an athletic freak and great pass catcher.

If he's an athletic freak and great pass catcher, he should create his own mismatches. We saw him isolated on one defender on that second 2-point try and what did he do. He wasn't that creative. He fell down.
The downward spiraling stats you provided adds up to him not being a focal part of our offense anyhow. He's one cog and I could see him catching at least 5 more touchdown passed the rest of the year.

It's really hard to be isolated on a defender and use that to your advantage when you have to run your route in accordance with Bevells little cutesy fake read option fiasco. Isolating an NFL defender and pinning him helpless due to your immense size and athleticism advantage takes precise timing, which became impossible because Bevell obviously has the fourth grade level of two point conversions in his playbook, not only evidenced by last Sunday but also the nfccg, which took an absolute miracle to convert, and looked ill timed and unrehearsed from the jump.

 

[red grenadine]

Three dropped balls and a missed chance at a touchdown. Yeah, he really wasn't utilized at all.

He's saying that Jimmy isn't used properly and I'm saying three dropped balls and a potential touchdown is evidence he is being used properly, he just didn't execute in the game against the Cards. And further more, he's on pace to be in the top 5 numbers wise all-time for Seahawk tight ends in a single season.

Jimmy is also on par to what he set in receiving yards each of the last 4 years. So again, he's not being underutilized, especially when he missed 3 catches himself on Sunday. That's the light of reality.

Here is Mathieu's squote

"I don’t think they use him quite as creatively as the Saints used him. I played against Jimmy in 2013 when he was with the Saints and I mean he was all over the field. The biggest thing with them was he created mismatches for him, and [Sunday] he wasn’t really in a position where we felt like it was a mismatch."

1. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't being utilized.
2. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't used properly
3. Being top 5 numbers wise as a TE doesn't mean much. He could potentially have been far and away #1.
4. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham was being underutilized
5. Jimmy Graham yards/game last 4 years, starting with 2011: 82, 66, 76, 56. With us? 55.
6. Jimmy Graham TDs last 4 years, starting with 2011: 11, 9, 16, 10. With us? 2
7. Jimmy Graham receptions/game, starting with 2011: 6.2, 5.7, 5.4, 5.3. With us? 4.6

Mathieu is saying we are not using Graham creatively. We can line up Graham as usual and force the ball to him every pass play. He will get his targets and share of catches. That does not mean he is being used creatively to force mismatches on the field. That just means we are lining him up in the usual spots and throwing the ball to him, without taking into account the unique propositions he brings as an athletic freak and great pass catcher.

If he's an athletic freak and great pass catcher, he should create his own mismatches. We saw him isolated on one defender on that second 2-point try and what did he do. He wasn't that creative. He fell down.
The downward spiraling stats you provided adds up to him not being a focal part of our offense anyhow. He's one cog and I could see him catching at least 5 more touchdown passed the rest of the year.

You know about Lebron James? We can all agree Lebron James is an athletic freak and very good at basketball, yes?

If you took Lebron James and forced him to do nothing but take spot 3 point shots from the wing, he would probably play worse, agreed? Would you then blame him for not creating his own mismatches on the wing?

We are not placing Jimmy Graham in a position to excel like he historically has. Period. It took several games for our team to figure out we should line him out wide like a receiver, for goodness sakes.

He IS a focal part of our offense. He has the most targets for any receiver in our offense. Yet he has been ineffective, at best. Why? Has he suddenly become a bad player? Or is our offensive scheme one that negates or mutes his particular advantages? If it is the latter, why can't we alter the scheme? If we can't alter the scheme, why did we trade so much to obtain him in the first place? Is there suddenly no communication between the GM and the coaching staff?

 

[DavidSeven]

All this supposed creativity in New Orleans didn't do squat for him when the Seahawks played the Saints over the last few years. And it's not like we've been especially adept at shutting down tight ends.

At the end of the day, Graham is the same player that Michael Bennett said he was in 2013. Not to say he can't or won't help us, but he ultimately is looking like the same guy who our own defensive players derided after that 2013 playoff game. You throw him up against a physical defense, and suddenly the arms get a little shorter and he isn't quite as aggressive to his spot. He was given a ton of opportunities to make plays on Sunday night over smaller defenders and just didn't get it done. I have a hard time blaming his utilization for that.

Sometimes I wonder if you defend Bevell because of a contrarian streak.

Take the results of the game away.

An opposing player who is damn good said the same thing many on here have noticed: Seattle's offense does not often create mismatches with it's use Graham (or others).

What Tyronne said is germaine to a discussion about our OC. Also, while you are absolutely correct in pointing out we have shut down Graham while struggling with other tight ends, it isn't like New Orleans used Graham as a traditional tight end, they mostly use him as a big WR, and this defense has not struggled with big receivers, not until this year anyway. Also, I would point out, that if Graham lacks the physicality to play the role of a traditional tight end, then it says nothing good about our offensive coordination to continue to use him as one. Isn't it the job of offensive coordination to use player talents to their best?

Take you must defend Bevell bias out of reading Tyronnes comments. Is it true? Did we run plays to isolate Graham on a specific defender or not? How he played in the game has zero to do with that question.

My main point is that I don't see what complexity really does for us here, especially when the offense was moving fine without drive-killing penalties. Graham would've had a very nice game if he made a few very make-able plays. The attention he drew got Baldwin and Lockett isolated on plays that were (or could've been) big. We get Graham isolated all the time in the redzone, and Russell/Graham still can't make that work for whatever reason. Could it be that Graham just isn't the game-changing talent everyone on .NET agreed he wasn't when our own players dissed him two years ago?

Tyronne has every incentive to add fuel to the fire for Seattle's struggling offense. However, I just don't think it necessarily gets to the truth of the problem, which is that we don't have the right talent. We have passing-down tight ends mixed with an OL that can't pass block. Jermaine Kearse is literally wasting space. It's also seemingly 10x harder for Russell to complete a simple slant or screen pass than any other QB. I look at the talent we got, and I just don't see why we should expect to score a ton of points.

I have no real passion for the job Bevell does one way or the other. I think the staff as a whole is good enough to field a terrific offense with the right players. I just think the incessant chatter about him overlooks what is right in front of us: we don't have top-10 offensive talent and our QB is in the midst of growing-pains. A piss-poor OL is killing this offense more than any deficiency in scheme and a suddenly average defense is costing us games. That's my take.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

I have no real passion for the job Bevell does one way or the other. I think the staff as a whole is good enough to field a terrific offense with the right players. I just think the incessant chatter about him overlooks what is right in front of us: we don't have top-10 offensive talent and our QB is in the midst of growing-pains. A piss-poor OL is killing this offense more than any deficiency in scheme and a suddenly average defense is costing us games. That's my take.

The OL is not good. Bevell is actively making it look worse by refusing to adapt to the situation with the simplest of things, like hot routes on 3rd and long, and instead calling 4-verts that actively put all the weight right on that underperforming OL. Bevell doesn't stick with the run, he doesn't consistently design good plays, his two-point conversion concepts are just WTF, and he is definitely not the guy to play to Wilson's strengths. As was said elsewhere...

If you couldn't see that AZ was keyed in on pass rushing, overpursuing the backfield and blowing their gaps by the end of the first half, you shouldn't be calling plays in the NFL.

I saw the same thing. Arizona was flat-out cavalier in neglecting run defense, and we didn't do anything with it. I don't care if you're Tom Moore or Josh McDaniels, you're going nowhere if you can't quickly identify and adapt to basic tendencies. It's been obvious for a while now - Bevell is highly slow to adapt. And while penalties, OL, WR, and QB all play their role, this is a tendency that's hard to ignore, and I don't think it's one that will go away with better talent.

I am ready to move on from Bevell. If his offense is as rudimentary and his play-calling as blind as smarter people are saying, then it's not impossible to imagine a new system paying immediate dividents.

 

[DavidSeven]

his two-point conversion concepts are just WTF, and he is definitely not the guy to play to Wilson's strengths.

What was wrong on the attempt to Graham? On the final 2-point conversion attempt, we had Graham iso'ed to the right on the 5'9 Mathieu with Russ doing a little pop-pass action to Graham's side. This is everything anyone could ask for from playcalling standpoint. You're utilizing the threat of Lynch, the threat of Wilson, and the 9-inch advantage that Graham has over a shorter DB.

So, what happens on this play? Graham gets into his route too slowly and Russ inexplicably refuses to throw the ball until it's way, way too late. Except to the extent that Bevell is responsible for coaching them through execution (and honestly, I think that is moreso on their respective position coaches), you cannot put the failure of that play on him. We got the exact look we wanted, and the players laid an egg.

 

[Laloosh]

his two-point conversion concepts are just WTF, and he is definitely not the guy to play to Wilson's strengths.

What was wrong on the attempt to Graham? On the final 2-point conversion attempt, we had Graham iso'ed to the right on the 5'9 Mathieu with Russ doing a little pop-pass action to Graham's side. This is everything anyone could ask for from playcalling standpoint. You're utilizing the threat of Lynch, the threat of Wilson, and the 9-inch advantage that Graham has over a shorter DB.

So, what happens on this play? Graham gets into his route too slowly and Russ inexplicably refuses to throw the ball until it's way, way too late. Except to the extent that Bevell is responsible for coaching them through execution (and honestly, I think that is moreso on their respective position coaches), you cannot put the failure of that play on him. We got the exact look we wanted, and the players laid an egg.

I thought Graham going outside rather than running a slant or in breaking route would have been waaay less likely to succeed there.

The Graham walking for the first 4 steps thing was obviously planned but why run an out if you're going to slow play it like that?

Here's the play:

On the other 2 pt conversion, unsurprisingly, Kearse was held but no call.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Three dropped balls and a missed chance at a touchdown. Yeah, he really wasn't utilized at all.

He's saying that Jimmy isn't used properly and I'm saying three dropped balls and a potential touchdown is evidence he is being used properly, he just didn't execute in the game against the Cards. And further more, he's on pace to be in the top 5 numbers wise all-time for Seahawk tight ends in a single season.

Jimmy is also on par to what he set in receiving yards each of the last 4 years. So again, he's not being underutilized, especially when he missed 3 catches himself on Sunday. That's the light of reality.

Here is Mathieu's squote

"I don’t think they use him quite as creatively as the Saints used him. I played against Jimmy in 2013 when he was with the Saints and I mean he was all over the field. The biggest thing with them was he created mismatches for him, and [Sunday] he wasn’t really in a position where we felt like it was a mismatch."

1. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't being utilized.
2. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham wasn't used properly
3. Being top 5 numbers wise as a TE doesn't mean much. He could potentially have been far and away #1.
4. Nowhere is Mathieu saying Graham was being underutilized
5. Jimmy Graham yards/game last 4 years, starting with 2011: 82, 66, 76, 56. With us? 55.
6. Jimmy Graham TDs last 4 years, starting with 2011: 11, 9, 16, 10. With us? 2
7. Jimmy Graham receptions/game, starting with 2011: 6.2, 5.7, 5.4, 5.3. With us? 4.6

Mathieu is saying we are not using Graham creatively. We can line up Graham as usual and force the ball to him every pass play. He will get his targets and share of catches. That does not mean he is being used creatively to force mismatches on the field. That just means we are lining him up in the usual spots and throwing the ball to him, without taking into account the unique propositions he brings as an athletic freak and great pass catcher.

If he's an athletic freak and great pass catcher, he should create his own mismatches. We saw him isolated on one defender on that second 2-point try and what did he do. He wasn't that creative. He fell down.
The downward spiraling stats you provided adds up to him not being a focal part of our offense anyhow. He's one cog and I could see him catching at least 5 more touchdown passed the rest of the year.

It's really hard to be isolated on a defender and use that to your advantage when you have to run your route in accordance with Bevells little cutesy fake read option fiasco. Isolating an NFL defender and pinning him helpless due to your immense size and athleticism advantage takes precise timing, which became impossible because Bevell obviously has the fourth grade level of two point conversions in his playbook, not only evidenced by last Sunday but also the nfccg, which took an absolute miracle to convert, and looked ill timed and unrehearsed from the jump.

Or possibly the timing mishaps are due to the QB taking to long to get rid of the ball. Just look at Laloosh's gif of the 2-piont try. If Russ can make the timing play just as Jimmy breaks to the sideline, it's in his hands. But he needs to throw it right about the "10" mark on the field. When he continues rolling out and Jimmy stops, the play is dead.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Um, no, Russ doesn't even so much as LOOK over at Graham, who is being covered by a guy he has almost a foot on. Absolutely TYPICAL brutal play call by Bevell. What a joke. Graham is one on one with Matthieu, he would have ZERO shot at stopping that play. Graham clearly wasn't even a consideration on this play. Because you know, that would actually be the RIGHT call. :roll:

Why in the hell did they even go get him????

 

[Scottemojo]

Honest questions for SiouxHawk.
Who is more important to the future of the Seahawks, Darrell Bevell or Russell Wilson? Which one would you get rid of first if forced to choose?
Here, I will make it easy
Question 1, Answer here:
Question 2, Answer here:
I will be very surprised if you answer these questions straight up. or at all.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Um, no, Russ doesn't even so much as LOOK over at Graham, who is being covered by a guy he has almost a foot on. Absolutely TYPICAL brutal play call by Bevell. What a joke. Graham is one on one with Matthieu, he would have ZERO shot at stopping that play. Graham clearly wasn't even a consideration on this play. Because you know, that would actually be the RIGHT call. :roll:

Why in the hell did they even go get him????

So why are you putting the blame on Bevell when the obvious mismatch was there for the taking? Russ has to pull the trigger. It's been like that all year.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Honest questions for SiouxHawk.
Who is more important to the future of the Seahawks, Darrell Bevell or Russell Wilson? Which one would you get rid of first if forced to choose?
Here, I will make it easy
Question 1, Answer here:
Question 2, Answer here:
I will be very surprised if you answer these questions straight up. or at all.

Because it's a strange hypothetical that doesn't need to be answered. It's like asking which of the Wright brothers could you have cared to live without while on an intercontinental flight ... They were both pretty important in getting you where you wanted to go.

 

[Scottemojo]

Honest questions for SiouxHawk.
Who is more important to the future of the Seahawks, Darrell Bevell or Russell Wilson? Which one would you get rid of first if forced to choose?
Here, I will make it easy
Question 1, Answer here:
Question 2, Answer here:
I will be very surprised if you answer these questions straight up. or at all.

Because it's a strange hypothetical that doesn't need to be answered. It's like asking which of the Wright brothers could you have cared to live without while on an intercontinental flight ... They were both pretty important in getting you where you wanted to go.

I knew you could not do it.

 

[mrt144]

Honest questions for SiouxHawk.
Who is more important to the future of the Seahawks, Darrell Bevell or Russell Wilson? Which one would you get rid of first if forced to choose?
Here, I will make it easy
Question 1, Answer here:
Question 2, Answer here:
I will be very surprised if you answer these questions straight up. or at all.

Because it's a strange hypothetical that doesn't need to be answered. It's like asking which of the Wright brothers could you have cared to live without while on an intercontinental flight ... They were both pretty important in getting you where you wanted to go.

I knew you could not do it.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Honest questions for SiouxHawk.
Who is more important to the future of the Seahawks, Darrell Bevell or Russell Wilson? Which one would you get rid of first if forced to choose?
Here, I will make it easy
Question 1, Answer here:
Question 2, Answer here:
I will be very surprised if you answer these questions straight up. or at all.

Because it's a strange hypothetical that doesn't need to be answered. It's like asking which of the Wright brothers could you have cared to live without while on an intercontinental flight ... They were both pretty important in getting you where you wanted to go.

I knew you could not do it.

Because it's an irrelevant request.

 

[mrt144]

Honest questions for SiouxHawk.
Who is more important to the future of the Seahawks, Darrell Bevell or Russell Wilson? Which one would you get rid of first if forced to choose?
Here, I will make it easy
Question 1, Answer here:
Question 2, Answer here:
I will be very surprised if you answer these questions straight up. or at all.

Because it's a strange hypothetical that doesn't need to be answered. It's like asking which of the Wright brothers could you have cared to live without while on an intercontinental flight ... They were both pretty important in getting you where you wanted to go.

I knew you could not do it.

Because it's an irrelevant request.

It's strictly a hypothetical you refuse to answer.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Because it's a strange hypothetical that doesn't need to be answered. It's like asking which of the Wright brothers could you have cared to live without while on an intercontinental flight ... They were both pretty important in getting you where you wanted to go.

I knew you could not do it.

Because it's an irrelevant request.

It's strictly a hypothetical you refuse to answer.

I'd rather keep the focus on what we have instead of what we don't have. I think we're fortunate to have both.