Offense strategy is offensive

[hawkfan68]

If the offensive strategy is to run more then why are the Seahawks throwing more on 1st and 2nd downs? I noticed that a lot in yesterday's game. Did Bevell not get the memo? Lynch and the others were having a good game running the ball. The Raiders run defense is porous. Yet they decide plan a strategy to throw more on the earlier downs....that's puzzling to me. Is Bevell or whoever is calling the plays even on the same page with Carroll?

 

[KARAVARUS]

I don't have a problem throwing on first down. I mean, you can't run it every first down. I think if you're going to throw on first down, most teams will play close to the box because of Lynch, so you throw down the field. Sometimes it works, sometimes no. During this last game, I felt like I should have been the defensive coordinator for the Raiders because I could tell you exactly what play we were going to run before we ran it. My friends were sitting on the couch and they were actually getting annoyed at that fact. Something has to change, and it has to change fast.

 

[xgeoff]

I watched the Colts-Giants game today and the pass plays that the Colts call and the routes they run are just beautiful. They have some great wide receivers in TY Hilton and Reggie Wayne (though Wayne has lost a step or two) but I don't think Coby Fleener is all that. But the plays they run have guys running free all over the place.

This is not the first time I've seen the Colts play this year, and I just continue to be impressed with the plays they call and the routes their Receivers run.

 

[Hawks46]

I've tried but I just can't buy into Darrell bevell's offense. Percy Harvin had 11 catches for over 120 yds today for the jets. For us, we only got him the ball in those stupid jet sweeps and bubble screens. I don't see our receivers getting good separation and I don't think it is their fault.

I think we need better set of plays and play calling.

He was catching dump offs in a loss.

His WRs were actually blocking for him on screens. Probably because he hasn't had enough time to piss them all off yet.

 

[Tokadub]

Agreed about the Colts, that Offensive coordinator truly understands passing the ball... noticed it last year when the Colts whooped us... possibly the best offensive performance against our secondary from 2012-2013 if i remember correctly... some of those plays were just beautifully drawn up nearly indefensible. There is a reason Luck leads the league in passing yards and it's not because he's the best passer, that Offensive coordinator knows how to get yards and get guys open.

And for the Seahawks Offense? We are pretty much the opposite of the Colts with our passing game. Our guys never seem to get open on a typical play, Wilson has an absurd amount of throw aways and he is often forced to place the ball where his receiver has like a 5% chance to make a play because the route is so bad and the defense reads it so incredibly easy.

What really bothers me is that we never seem to run the same plays that work. Like you see a back shoulder throw to Baldwin for about 10-12 yards, Baldwin can stop on a dime and box out a defender no problem and his speed is enough that the defender can't smother him or he'll get burned. This kind of play seems like it should be the bread and butter for Baldwin, I don't think I remember it ever not working even... but yet we run it maybe a few times a season...

It's almost like Bevell wants to be so creative and unpredictable with these unique formations and routes that he ignores the high percentage plays.

We very rarely run slants like the one we saw Luke Willson do VS. the raiders, even though that is also an extremely high percentage play just like the Baldwin back shoulder throws on the edge.

We have neglected our Offensive Line to such a degree that Wilson's height really is a factor because the defense bursts right through the middle or around the edges on NEARLY EVERY PLAY! Drew Brees has the most career yards per game (passing + rushing) compared to Manning, Luck, Brady, Aaron Rodgers, ETC... And DREW BREES IS 6'0'' TALL and WAY LESS ATHLETIC THAN WILSON... There is no reason Wilson couldn't put up big numbers when he's at his best I think he's clearly a top 5 QB in the league despite lack of offensive talent.

So I mainly blame our Offensive Line and Bevell's play calling. Bevell is like right on the verge of being a great offensive coordinator, he just can't get it together. He seems to have the knowledge and capability/creativity to call a great game he just seriously lacks common sense and adjusting to the defense, going for high probability plays, etc.

And there's just no dang excuse that we lost Tate, he was the one receiver we had that could really compensate for our terrible Offensive Line, and our terrible passing routes. Tate had the ability to come up with the ball or get open on broken plays no matter what the circumstances happened to be, he consistently had the best numbers on our team in the games where Wilson was under the most pressure. Tate was very under rated on our team because Bevell used him so terribly, that's the only reason... myself and at least a few others knew Tate was an elite NFL talent and we were devastated when we lost him... We could very easily be 7-1 right now if we had kept Tate, so many 3 and outs and broken plays where nobody stepped up like Tate did for Wilson's whole career

 

[djb28]

why can't our line block? Isn't this the basics of football? How do you get in to the league if you can not block? How do you stay on a team if you can not block?

 

[LawlessHawk]

I don't have a problem throwing on first down. I mean, you can't run it every first down. I think if you're going to throw on first down, most teams will play close to the box because of Lynch, so you throw down the field. Sometimes it works, sometimes no. During this last game, I felt like I should have been the defensive coordinator for the Raiders because I could tell you exactly what play we were going to run before we ran it. My friends were sitting on the couch and they were actually getting annoyed at that fact. Something has to change, and it has to change fast.

Yeah, I think most would agree with your first couple sentences there if we were consistently coming away with 6 or 7 or 8 or 12 yard gains as opposed to sitting at 2nd and 10 and behind the sticks all the time... (((and then here comes the bubble screen for no gain.)))

 

[pehawk]

I cant be sure, because it's been so long since I've seen it, but, it seemed to me the Colt's OC adjusted. He adjusted, wait for it, get this, he adjusted MIDGAME!??!! Yes, midgame! And to think, I thought adjusting play-calling to what the defense is showing was illegal.

Our offense cant even adjust on the sidelines or on the field to blitzing. In fact, opponents can blitz all game and we'll never see an adjustment.

Bevell is to in-game adjustments what dinosaurs are to peanut butter.

 

[Largent80]

With our new shiny FB @ 280 pounds I expect blitzes will be picked up a lot better.

I see O-Linemen trying their cut blocks and whiffing, and have seen it multiple times, the ball gets hiked and boom, the guards dive for the lower legs. I really hate that style for 2 reasons, IF the blocker does not have that skill there is no amount of coaching that will give him that skill.

Secondly, it causes injuries, AND I believe we create a LOT of pre-snap penalties because of it.

 

[gulliver]

As always, the truth is somewhere in between.

The OL is a mess of epic proportions. I think we're all frustrated by the following juxtaposition:

(1) Watching opposing QB's dance around in the pocket for 5, 6 or 7 seconds and complete passes while our DTs and DEs push against a wall

(2) Meanwhile, Russ has all of 1.5 seconds before he gets flushed and has to run for his life, with little or no hope of completing a pass.

So basically our passing game is limited to 1.5-second releases (or sacks).

The part where Bevell can be blamed is how frequently he refuses to work around it, and instead opts to lean on the passing game and go into empty sets etc. So far this season, through the Raiders game, we have run a 48-52 run-pass mix, obviously favoring the pass somewhat. WHY?!?! We are a broken team right now who can't pass protect to save our lives. We should be running close to 60% of the time, and instead we're throwing against the buzzsaw of opposing defenses our OL can't stop.

 

[gulliver]

FUN FACT:

*We are 4-0 in games where we rushed more than we passed (GB, DEN, WAS, OAK)

*We are 1-3 in games where we passed more than we rushed (SD, DAL, STL, CAR)

 

[Cartire]

FUN FACT:

*We are 3-0 in games where we rushed more than we passed (GB, DEN, WAS)

*We are 2-3 in games where we passed more than we rushed (SD, DAL, STL, CAR, OAK)

Playing with the lead vs Playing from behind. Dont need to look to deep into this.

 

[gulliver]

FUN FACT:

*We are 4-0 in games where we rushed more than we passed (GB, DEN, WAS)

*We are 1-3 in games where we passed more than we rushed (SD, DAL, STL, CAR, OAK)

Playing with the lead vs Playing from behind. Dont need to look to deep into this.

Wrong.

• We led Dallas until the final 3 minutes.
• We led SD through the 1st. We trailed by a maximum of 13 points, and we only did it for a total of 3 minutes and 50 seconds. They were never ahead by more than 6 for the rest of the game (until final FG with 0:16 on the clock)
• Carolina was neck-and-neck, and never ahead by more than a FG.
• STL was the only game where they got out in front big and early

Not good enough.

We are passing when we don't have to.

 

[Cartire]

FUN FACT:

*We are 3-0 in games where we rushed more than we passed (GB, DEN, WAS)

*We are 2-3 in games where we passed more than we rushed (SD, DAL, STL, CAR, OAK)

Playing with the lead vs Playing from behind. Dont need to look to deep into this.

Wrong.

• We led Dallas until the final 3 minutes.
• We led SD through the 1st. We trailed by a maximum of 13 points, and we only did it for a total of 3 minutes and 50 seconds. They were never ahead by more than 6 for the rest of the game (until final FG with 0:16 on the clock)
• We led Oakland the whole game.
• Carolina was neck-and-neck, and never ahead by more than a FG.
• STL was the only game where they got out in front big and early

Not good enough.

We are passing when we don't have to.

Uhhh, Its still a lead thing. If we had a comfortable lead, IE GB, WAS, and even DEN, we run more so that we can run the clock as well.

Leading through the first qtr of one game is still playing from behind for 3 qtrs. Neck and Neck is not a comfortable lead.

Oakland we ran 38 times to passing 35 times. So.... what are you talking about again?

So really were 4-0 in games where we rushed more then we passed. Teams run more when they have a lead and are trying to milk time. Teams pass more when they are needing to score faster.

 

[pehawk]

FUN FACT:

*We are 3-0 in games where we rushed more than we passed (GB, DEN, WAS)

*We are 2-3 in games where we passed more than we rushed (SD, DAL, STL, CAR, OAK)

Playing with the lead vs Playing from behind. Dont need to look to deep into this.

Wrong.

• We led Dallas until the final 3 minutes.
• We led SD through the 1st. We trailed by a maximum of 13 points, and we only did it for a total of 3 minutes and 50 seconds. They were never ahead by more than 6 for the rest of the game (until final FG with 0:16 on the clock)
• We led Oakland the whole game.
• Carolina was neck-and-neck, and never ahead by more than a FG.
• STL was the only game where they got out in front big and early

Not good enough.

We are passing when we don't have to.

Uhhh, Its still a lead thing. If we had a comfortable lead, IE GB, WAS, and even DEN, we run more so that we can run the clock as well.

Leading through the first qtr of one game is still playing from behind for 3 qtrs. Neck and Neck is not a comfortable lead.

Oakland we ran 38 times to passing 35 times. So.... what are you talking about again?

So really were 4-0 in games where we rushed more then we passed. Teams run more when they have a lead and are trying to milk time. Teams pass more when they are needing to score faster.

Does "Team Sarc83" come with t-shirts?

 

[Cartire]

Does "Team Sarc83" come with t-shirts?

How about this way of thinking...

Do people actually think that the reason we lost 3 games was because we didnt run enough?

St. Louis was purely special teams failure for that loss.
S.D. we barely ran, but we also barely had the ball. Running more would hardly have improved out performance on defense.
Cowboys is the only game where we could have run a tad more I guess. But running doesnt help our Defense stop a 3rd and 19 from converting.

The issue isnt us running enough.

 

[pehawk]

Does "Team Sarc83" come with t-shirts?

How about this way of thinking...

Do people actually think that the reason we lost 3 games was because we didnt run enough?

No, I don't, not totally anyways. But, as is my main gripe with Bevell, he certainly wont ever run to help his defense out, at all. He seems oblivious to the overall circumstances. In the Dallas game this caused me to bark at my TV, a lot.

 

[DavidSeven]

Rush/Pass ratios are not just a function of playing from behind/ahead (though that is a big part of it), it also a function of the passing game's ability to convert first downs to keep the defense honest and the offense on the field. If you're going 3-and-out repeatedly, you're not giving your run game a chance.

What is the common thread of the Dallas, Oakland, Carolina games? Russell having extremely inefficient days. Unless you want to completely hide our franchise QB on every 1st and 2nd down, we need to actually convert on pass plays to get the run numbers up. If we get typical "Russell Wilson" performances on those days, I guarantee you the run numbers are way, way up.

It amazes me that people actually think Pete Carroll doesn't know these elementary "run vs. pass" stats backwards and forwards. The dude has a stat for almost every conceivable measurable in the game. I'm sure he is fully aware of the often mis-applied run/pass win probability stat.

 

[gulliver]

Uhhh, Its still a lead thing. If we had a comfortable lead, IE GB, WAS, and even DEN, we run more so that we can run the clock as well.

Leading through the first qtr of one game is still playing from behind for 3 qtrs. Neck and Neck is not a comfortable lead.

Oakland we ran 38 times to passing 35 times. So.... what are you talking about again?

So really were 4-0 in games where we rushed more then we passed. Teams run more when they have a lead and are trying to milk time. Teams pass more when they are needing to score faster.

So you're saying these games in which we were either leading, tied, or trailing by less than a TD, the game was already so out of control that we had *no choice* other than to throw out the balanced game plan and start airing it out?

There are bigger Bevell fans on this board than I, but even I give him more credit than that.

If you're an OC and you're THAT spastic--that you completely lose your cool unless you're up by 20+ points--you're not coaching in the NFL.

 

[Cartire]

Uhhh, Its still a lead thing. If we had a comfortable lead, IE GB, WAS, and even DEN, we run more so that we can run the clock as well.

Leading through the first qtr of one game is still playing from behind for 3 qtrs. Neck and Neck is not a comfortable lead.

Oakland we ran 38 times to passing 35 times. So.... what are you talking about again?

So really were 4-0 in games where we rushed more then we passed. Teams run more when they have a lead and are trying to milk time. Teams pass more when they are needing to score faster.

So you're saying these games in which we were either leading, tied, or trailing by less than a TD, the game was already so out of control that we had *no choice* other than to throw out the balanced game plan and start airing it out?

There are bigger Bevell fans on this board than I, but even I give him more credit than that.

If you're an OC and you're THAT spastic--that you completely lose your cool unless you're up by 20+ points--you're not coaching in the NFL.

So answer the question. Do you think we would have won one of those three losses if we ran more?