Running backs

Aristotle22

New member
Joined
Dec 8, 2012
Messages
580
Reaction score
0
As I was watching last night it looked to me like Turbin takes the hand off and just goes fast, but doesn't wait for blocking to develop and runs out of room quickly. Michael shows some patience to set up a cut, which seems more effective. I thought number 30also did a good job of that( although the d he played against not as good). I just wish he would have caught that pass for a touchdown. Man I miss Lynch
 

AF_Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
52
I saw the same thing. "Shoestring" Turbin goes down way to easy every time it seems and hits the hole without hesitation (but doesn't wait for the holes to develop). CM is more patient and shiftier and is not afraid of contact. If only CM were a better pass blocker he'd probably get more touches. Hopefully during the preseason that improves because he is undoubtedly the better back.
 

DavidSeven

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
5,742
Reaction score
0
I thought Michael had a few impressive moments, but I'm surprised people thought there was such a huge disparity between he and Turbin yesterday. Seems like confirmation bias. Not that Turbin did anything special; he didn't. But Michael got clogged up and single-tackled nearly just as much. On top of that, his blocking still looks pretty bad (when was the last time you saw Lynch or Turbin try to cut-block someone?) and he coughed up a ball which is probably worth something like -50 yards in Carroll's mind.

The run blocking just wasn't there, and the field conditions weren't great. I don't think we got a great look at either of them. The competition is still on IMO.
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
DavidSeven":303zmrc8 said:
I thought Michael had a few impressive moments, but I'm surprised people thought there was such a huge disparity between he and Turbin yesterday. Seems like confirmation bias. Not that Turbin did anything special; he didn't. But Michael got clogged up and single-tackled nearly just as much. On top of that, his blocking still looks pretty bad (when was the last time you saw Lynch or Turbin try to cut-block someone?) and a he coughed up a ball which is probably worth something like -50 yards in Carroll's mind.

The run blocking just wasn't there, and the field conditions weren't great. I don't think we got a great look at either of them. The competition is still on IMO.

I'd agree. The blocking was bad enough that I would have a hard time saying any back had a bad day overall. Other than Bronson dropping that TD. That's gonna cost him.
 

Pandion Haliaetus

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
848
3 Things To Consider:

1. Broncos have one of the best run defenses in the game, and when you add in healthy Wolfe, Vickerson, Von Miller, and Rahim Moore plus newcomers Ware, Ward, and Talib... it only got better.

2. Seahawks played without 60% of their known starting O-Line, and gave plenty of reps to rookie Justin Britt.

3. The Broncos came out with intensity and were trying to send a message that they were tough enough. Seahawks played a lot of its young players, some right away, and it was a learning experience and growing pains.

Let's just wait to see how the guys who had bad games respond with profressionalism before we throw them all under the bus.
 

Melencause

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2014
Messages
237
Reaction score
0
Hawks46":27peqwet said:
DavidSeven":27peqwet said:
I thought Michael had a few impressive moments, but I'm surprised people thought there was such a huge disparity between he and Turbin yesterday. Seems like confirmation bias. Not that Turbin did anything special; he didn't. But Michael got clogged up and single-tackled nearly just as much. On top of that, his blocking still looks pretty bad (when was the last time you saw Lynch or Turbin try to cut-block someone?) and a he coughed up a ball which is probably worth something like -50 yards in Carroll's mind.

The run blocking just wasn't there, and the field conditions weren't great. I don't think we got a great look at either of them. The competition is still on IMO.

I'd agree. The blocking was bad enough that I would have a hard time saying any back had a bad day overall. Other than Bronson dropping that TD. That's gonna cost him.

This.
 

mrinsatiable

New member
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
After seeing Michael and Turbin play in the first pre season game last night..i came to the harsh realization that neither of these guys can replace Marshawn Lynch anytime soon. Given the fact that this maybe Lynch's last season with the team i'm not prepared for see how the hawks scheme without a serious threat to the running game.
 

Basis4day

Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
5,924
Reaction score
0
mrinsatiable":jghaw3x0 said:
After seeing Michael and Turbin play in the first pre season game last night..i came to the harsh realization that neither of these guys can replace Marshawn Lynch anytime soon. Given the fact that this maybe Lynch's last season with the team i'm not prepared for see how the hawks scheme without a serious threat to the running game.

If we were playing with that entire 2nd/ 3rd string o-line i'd agree with you.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,339
Reaction score
3,882
mrinsatiable":3ackga1v said:
After seeing Michael and Turbin play in the first pre season game last night..i came to the harsh realization that neither of these guys can replace Marshawn Lynch anytime soon. Given the fact that this maybe Lynch's last season with the team i'm not prepared for see how the hawks scheme without a serious threat to the running game.

I can't figure out how anyone can say that with a backup line and very little oppurtunities to get in space. Lynch wouldn't of done much better under these circumstances. I think Michael flashed moments of elite level talent if you were looking for it. He just looks different in movement than most backs. I think scouts are right about him. Lets let him get some more work before we throw out the he is a pedestrian NFL running back. Like Wilson a couple of years ago, people are going to regret bagging on him imo.
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,974
Reaction score
0
Wasn't a good game for our RBs. Turbin seems to suffer more from bad blocking than Michael or Ware do. Pretty much since he got here he's only looked good when given big holes to run through between the tackles. I thought he looked terrible in this game, and not because of his stats. Lynch and Michael have a way of knowing when the run blocking isn't there and when that happens they cut upfield to see if they can get a tough 1-3 yards. Turbin seems to lack that instinct, and ends up missing his chances to get concession yardage.

As long as Lynch is here and Michael is struggling in pass pro, Turbin will be the #2 back. My opinion of Turbin gets lower and lower each season, but I am at peace with that. I do think that if Lynch goes down and we need an early downs back, they would be kind of nuts to not make Michael the featured back though.

Michael did everything right on his fumble, I would be surprised if Pete held that against him. I think the protection will be a much bigger issue since our 3rd down back will have to protect a lot.
 

ivotuk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
23,141
Reaction score
1,858
Location
North Pole, Alaska
I have to agree about Turbin not getting any openings.

Christine still worries me though, the fumble and then the stupid penalty. This isn't his first rodeo yet he still makes an egregious error.

I think Demitrius Bronson is going to be a very good running back. How could he not with a name like Bronson? We could nickname him the "Vigilante" or, if he has any speed, we could call him "Bronson Burner." But keep your eye on this kid.
 

Pandion Haliaetus

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
848
Perspective: The Seahawks were running against a better, healthier, and much fresher Run Defense than the one we saw shut down Marshawn Lynch in the Superbowl despite having our full complement of O-Lline and Harvin to spread the defense out.

What the back-up O-Line and back-up RBs did in this game should have more or less been half expected. Again, Denver has one of (arguably if not) the best Run Defenses in the NFL, and because of injuries last season, they also have quality depth as well in this regard. Seahawks didn't have their best players on the field... and the ones that were, weren't for long.

So really it doesn't have to be about tearing down Turbin, Michael, and a backup line for their performances. Those guys faced a monster Run D that shut them down. Denver is a quality opponent with a lot of great strengths and their defense is much better than it was during the Superbowl since injured players got healthy and they upgraded some of their weaker positions.
 

Pandion Haliaetus

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,883
Reaction score
848
ivotuk":jiisyrl1 said:
I have to agree about Turbin not getting any openings.

Christine still worries me though, the fumble and then the stupid penalty. This isn't his first rodeo yet he still makes an egregious error.

I think Demitrius Bronson is going to be a very good running back. How could he not with a name like Bronson? We could nickname him the "Vigilante" or, if he has any speed, we could call him "Bronson Burner." But keep your eye on this kid.

So a fumble where the defender made hell of a play putting a hat square on the ball while Michael simultaneously was kept from being down by contact because he was on top of a defender while having the concentration and focus to track the ball through the scrum of Broncos defenders which resulted in his teammates getting the opportunity to recover it was a worst mistake than dropping the wide open go ahead TD and failing to punch it in two GL situations if I remember correctly.

And Michael's block how egregious it seemed is what we want to see from him, now he just needs to learn not to cut block a defender that is already engaged by a blocker.
 

kobebryant

New member
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
2,511
Reaction score
1
Thought Michael looked good. Patient and then explosive when he decided to let er rip; though that crappy playing surface seemed to give out often when he tried to make his powerful cuts.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,475
Reaction score
1,256
Location
Bothell
I get the motivation to draw conclusions from the game.

It's still a tiny sample size, they weren't playing against the same defensive players, the playing surface was not in NFL condition, there was that hour long lightning delay and then they weren't even playing behind an NFL caliber offensive line. The problem with artificially narrowing all of those uncertainty ranges in order to come up with a strong opinion is not just overconfidence but that you are throwing away a lot of data and effectively bringing all that randomness with you into your conclusion.
 

ivotuk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
23,141
Reaction score
1,858
Location
North Pole, Alaska
Pandion Haliaetus":gn0wtz9c said:
ivotuk":gn0wtz9c said:
I have to agree about Turbin not getting any openings.

Christine still worries me though, the fumble and then the stupid penalty. This isn't his first rodeo yet he still makes an egregious error.

I think Demitrius Bronson is going to be a very good running back. How could he not with a name like Bronson? We could nickname him the "Vigilante" or, if he has any speed, we could call him "Bronson Burner." But keep your eye on this kid.

So a fumble where the defender made hell of a play putting a hat square on the ball while Michael simultaneously was kept from being down by contact because he was on top of a defender while having the concentration and focus to track the ball through the scrum of Broncos defenders which resulted in his teammates getting the opportunity to recover it was a worst mistake than dropping the wide open go ahead TD and failing to punch it in two GL situations if I remember correctly.

And Michael's block how egregious it seemed is what we want to see from him, now he just needs to learn not to cut block a defender that is already engaged by a blocker.

Relax. Nobody is "tearing down" the running backs. We're stating our "perspective" on the game, both good and bad. There are always 2 sides any play. You "appear" to think Christine was not at fault on that fumble, I'm of the opinion that he was, and that's one of the reasons he has struggled to get on the field.

If CMike takes care of those issues, he will be one of the best backs in the NFL, but until then, he needs to focus on eliminating those types of mistakes. Whether you agree or not, people are going to talk about both the negatives and the positives, and hopefully they will be open-minded enough to change their opinion as a player improves.
 

bbsplitter

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
681
Reaction score
23
This is nothing new with Turbin, it has been obvious since the day we drafted him that he does not have the strongest base and is tackled quite easily. This is no doubt obvious to the coaching staff however, and yet they still played Turbin as the backup, and shoved Michael down into the dark abyss of the active roster and gave him pretty much zero playing time. They even played Ware, who was picked 4 rounds later, and threw Coleman in a couple of times at HB instead of playing Michael. So obviously they believe that Michaels shortcomings are more important to overcome than Turbins, and the other RB.

I don't understand why Michael was out there trying to kill himself on a crappy field, when it's patience and discipline the coaches wanted to see from him. Multiple time he did not follow his lead blocker, and cut back into a tackle or tried something fancy and slipped or lost his balance. Sure, he looks like a ball of explosive energy waiting to be released, but it doesn't matter unless he shows the patience to follow his blocks and get into open field. I think he also had the most opportune time to shine, as he was running behind the line that started the game, and denver had just switched out their D. So theoretically he was in the best situation to succeed out of all the RB. Overall I thought it was a very disappointing showing.
 

bbsplitter

Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2013
Messages
681
Reaction score
23
Pandion Haliaetus":1qnrb2mi said:
ivotuk":1qnrb2mi said:
I have to agree about Turbin not getting any openings.

Christine still worries me though, the fumble and then the stupid penalty. This isn't his first rodeo yet he still makes an egregious error.

I think Demitrius Bronson is going to be a very good running back. How could he not with a name like Bronson? We could nickname him the "Vigilante" or, if he has any speed, we could call him "Bronson Burner." But keep your eye on this kid.

So a fumble where the defender made hell of a play putting a hat square on the ball while Michael simultaneously was kept from being down by contact because he was on top of a defender while having the concentration and focus to track the ball through the scrum of Broncos defenders which resulted in his teammates getting the opportunity to recover it was a worst mistake than dropping the wide open go ahead TD and failing to punch it in two GL situations if I remember correctly.

And Michael's block how egregious it seemed is what we want to see from him, now he just needs to learn not to cut block a defender that is already engaged by a blocker.

Michael was carrying the ball rather loose, I expected more considering all of the "high and tight" technique he was being praised for in camp.
 

hawk45

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
10,009
Reaction score
16
Watching the game I share the feelings of many who felt our running backs didn't have a good game. That CMike looked best, that Turbin looked awful.

Agree with Dib though that I'm not putting much stock in those feelings given the line they were running behind and the other factors he pointed out.

Re: Turbin, my feelings on him didn't change much, he remains the back least likely to do anything under less-than-optimal blocking conditions. But even with good blocking, I'd rather have CMike out there going forward if Lynch isn't a choice.
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
On one occasion, Turbin either doesn't follow Coleman or Coleman goes the wrong way. Wherever the blame lies, if Turbs follows Coleman it is a good play. No matter what, Turbin was an easy tackle.

CM danced too damn much. He will have to learn to make that cut and go. And he doesn't have enough want to for pass blocking. I would suspect a real game plan would have him pass catching in space a lot more.

Ware whiffed on pass blocks, looked slow, and didn't break tackles either. His screen pass was one butt ugly play.

Coleman can get to his block, but looks weak when he does. Other than the near TD run, there were not many plays where the RB followed Coleman.

Small is far and away the best true fullback. They had him run sideline flare patterns about 5 times in the game, he looks out of place in space. The pass he dropped would have been a one yard loss, TJ should have gone elsewhere or thrown it away. It is kind of funny to watch how Denver players approach Small. They were a bit tentative, like he was going to blow up their legs. He went for a cut block, and missed, but the guy was more concerned with not getting his knees destroyed than being a part of the play.

Not only did the blocking suck, I got the distinct impression they were calling the simplest zone block runs just to see if these guys would execute. The RB sideline patterns within a couple yards of the LOS to the sideline were really odd, there was no other routes working off those routes most times and they were covered every. single. time. Why continually take a pass blocker out of the backfield for a fairly difficult pass to a slow player? Anyway, pre-season, limited playbook, and all that crap.
 
Top