SoulfishHawk
Well-known member
If the somehow get Procise back for the playoffs, along w/Rawls? That's a heck of a backfield.
Getting Marcell Reece on track and looking good during the next two games would bode well too. Recce may have the better chance of getting into a groove at this stage than what Procise does, in the same role.SoulfishHawk":1tzriprq said:If they somehow get Procise back for the playoffs, along w/Rawls? That's a heck of a backfield.
LeftHandSmoke":2zagboga said:Getting Marcell Reece on track and looking good during the next two games would bode well too. Recce may have the better chance of getting into a groove at this stage than what Procise does, in the same role.SoulfishHawk":2zagboga said:If they somehow get Procise back for the playoffs, along w/Rawls? That's a heck of a backfield.
Isn't this where Procise was being used most?Sgt. Largent":1qadyf8y said:LeftHandSmoke":1qadyf8y said:Getting Marcell Reece on track and looking good during the next two games would bode well too. Recce may have the better chance of getting into a groove at this stage than what Procise does, in the same role.SoulfishHawk":1qadyf8y said:If they somehow get Procise back for the playoffs, along w/Rawls? That's a heck of a backfield.
Reece is a 250 lb FB, not a complete RB like Prosise or Rawls, etc.
He can certainly carry the ball, but he's not going to give you 10-20 carries a game and be effective. But he has shown he's a good out of the backfield/route runner.
So Prosise would be a much better option if we can get him back and taking some of the load off Rawls down the stretch.
LeftHandSmoke":1k4m5kft said:Isn't this where Procise was being used most?Sgt. Largent":1k4m5kft said:LeftHandSmoke":1k4m5kft said:Getting Marcell Reece on track and looking good during the next two games would bode well too. Recce may have the better chance of getting into a groove at this stage than what Procise does, in the same role.SoulfishHawk":1k4m5kft said:If they somehow get Procise back for the playoffs, along w/Rawls? That's a heck of a backfield.
Reece is a 250 lb FB, not a complete RB like Prosise or Rawls, etc.
He can certainly carry the ball, but he's not going to give you 10-20 carries a game and be effective. But he has shown he's a good out of the backfield/route runner.
So Prosise would be a much better option if we can get him back and taking some of the load off Rawls down the stretch.
Weight-wise, PC has said that Reece is lighter now and the roster has him listed at 235.
http://www.seahawks.com/team/players/ro ... rcel-reece
theincrediblesok":ngl8ux8s said:I don't see anyone mentioning the threat of Wilson running again, although not 100% but enough to still be dangerous. I think we will end up using more of the read option during the playoffs. If Wilson is scrambling for 6-8 seconds, that is going to help tired out the defense. Which in our case Rawls can start looking like a stud by the 2nd half of the game after he helps pound that defense in the 1st half.
mistaowen":2ed3z8qh said:Seahawkfan80":2ed3z8qh said:What 3 defenses do you think could hamper our play in the playoffs? Just curious. I think Green Bay was decent but not overwhelming.
Thanks for the input.
Giants defense is good. Packers defense would realistically have to play in Seattle if it came to that and I think Russ doesn't miss 2-3 easy TDs.
Largent80":2ed3z8qh said:Week to week it appears that the Seahawks are facing the best defensive front in the league.
We all know that 16 teams are not the best in the league, so at some point, fingers need to be pointed in the O-Lines direction.
LeftHandSmoke":xl6gatrd said:Run stats for left, middle, right
https://mobile.twitter.com/JeffRatcliff ... 8273485828
Hawks are better running to the right, by far.
mrblitz":xl6gatrd said:i think that the zone blocking thing is too complex, and for the past 2 or 3 years, they haven't even assembled the correct personnel to run that.
if memory serves, last year, they briefly went to a 'straight-ahead, power-running game' and that was where rawls got his 200-yard game.
given the raw talent of our o-linemen, they need to dump the zone blocking thing, and just tell everyone to 'put a hat on a hat, and push'. they'll be fine if they do that.
Largent80":2z01mymm said:^ But yet here we are with the merry go round at RT. Gilliam back in. Juggling RT all the way up until the playoffs. Highly unorthodox and not desirable. I would like to see Rees, compete for that RT spot next spring. He has a year in the system and Gilliam and Sowell are likely gone.
True but it's nice that we don't have even worse problems. (3) means third-string:Largent80":1qpsru8w said:^ But yet here we are with the merry go round at RT. Gilliam back in. Juggling RT all the way up until the playoffs. Highly unorthodox and not desirable. I would like to see Rees, compete for that RT spot next spring. He has a year in the system and Gilliam and Sowell are likely gone.
Hawkscanner":18rd2tta said:Thanks for the responses so far guys. Good thoughts overall. I have a slightly different question that I'd love to get some thoughts on, and that's this ...
With the time remaining this season, can Seattle's run game improve to the point of being NFL average?"
That's an interesting question and it all depends on how you look at it. According to Football Outsiders, they have the Seahawks run game ranked #18 in terms of DVOA (admittedly DVOA is far from a perfect measuring rod), so if you accept their opinion, Seattle is virtually there. As it stands right now, Seattle's run game is averaging 3.5 yards/carry. Can they improve to the point where they're consistently giving more like 4.0 yards/carry? Given the inexperience of this O-Line, is that too high of a mountain to scale though in too short an amount of time? Personally, I think if they make it a real intense point of emphasis, I wonder if it might not be possible. And if that happens, I would add this -- if this Seahawks team can get back to generating just average NFL production ... then this team most certainly is a serious Super Bowl title contender. Thoughts?