stack55":7kso3qef said:
Even Kurt Warner said the hawks were to predictable on 1st and
2nd down since Pete said we were going to run the ball. We can still run the
Ball but switch it up with pass plays and play action on 1st and 2nd down.
That’s why our run game went stale. They gambled we would run.
Yeah he said it, but it wasn't true. I know he said it before Russell tossed the interception, so decided to collate the play-calling to that point to confirm my suspicions.
We ran 12 times for 48 yards on first down (plus another 5 yard scramble on a passing play), and dropped back 10 times (11 if you include the scramble), tossing for 98 yards, a TD, one incompletion and a sack.
Of the 12 designed rushing plays, only 2 went for negative yardage (-2 each time), and 2 went for 1 yard - one of which was a designed RW keeper, and the other was called back for a holding penalty anyway, so didn't cost anything... apart from the sack RW took on the next play to make it 2 and 24.
The rest went for 15, 5, 5, 7, 4,4,3, 8
Our problem wasn't that we were rushing too much on first down, it was the long sacks and penalties that forced us into 3rd and long multiple times, and the terrible playcalling that we made in those positions.
The defense held Rivers to just 13 completions on 26 attempts, and 0 points in the second half. They rushed all over us yes, but it was still a game of margins. Calls like the OPI on Moore (which ruled out a third down conversion and led to the missed FG) added to it. It was definitely a tough day at the office and I thought we'd be better, but in no way do I think we were outclassed. When you consider the defense managed to get the ball back with enough time on the clock for the offense to get up and almost throw a game-tying score, you have to say that this was a team that maybe played badly but was still fighting at the death. That's the opposite of being outclassed.