Serious points to get the O to produce

[Siouxhawk]

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

We don't have the offensive line to support the power run game anymore. The office let any one who was any good go and replaced them with rejects, projects, castoffs and UFA's no one else wanted. If you have a strong enough line any back can carry the ball.

I see what you're saying, but I have a feeling that we'll ride out any changes this week and attempt to stay the course and run it in excess of 60 percent of the time against San Francisco. Hopefully our O line benefits from now having tape of a real regular season game and adjusts as needed.

 

[Anthony!]

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

We don't have the offensive line to support the power run game anymore. The office let any one who was any good go and replaced them with rejects, projects, castoffs and UFA's no one else wanted. If you have a strong enough line any back can carry the ball.

I see what you're saying, but I have a feeling that we'll ride out any changes this week and attempt to stay the course and run it in excess of 60 percent of the time against San Francisco. Hopefully our O line benefits from now having tape of a real regular season game and adjusts as needed.

IF we are going to try to run the ball 60% of the time we are going to loose, Also if we are going to do that, trade Wilson and get a tier 3 QB here you dont need a top QB to run the ball 60% of the time, save the money so they can put more on defense. :sarcasm_off:

 

[cymatica]

Where do you get this 60% run figure. I've only heard Caroll say he wants a balanced offense not run heavy. 60% run with this o-line would be just plain stupid

 

[netskier]

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

Is Pete's proclamation to run more that 60% of the time really feasible before the OL learns to block well enough? It will probably begin working in four or five games. Maybe we should just run 100% of the time to maximize our time to learn to block. This would also protect Russ from being hurt, and this is crucial for winning the rest of the games.

 

[hgwellz12]

You guys are failing to see the insane loyalty to a love that NEVER was with Siouxhawk. He sees roses and champagne in the broken toilet in a Waffle House women's restroom.
To him, this "all part of some grand plan" and "what's the problem? We just need to run the ball more, soon they'll be unstoppable, just wait and see how GREAT we are next week against the Mighty Niners! Whoo Hooo!"

Disgusting.

 

[hgwellz12]

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

Is Pete's proclamation to run more that 60% of the time really feasible before the OL learns to block well enough? It will probably begin working in four or five games. Maybe we should just run 100% of the time to maximize our time to learn to block. This would also protect Russ from being hurt, and this is crucial for winning the rest of the games.

*LIKE*

 

[netskier]

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

If that was Pete's plan with this line, then yes, blow up that idea.

Remember in 2007 when Holmgren said we can't run so we will just pass. It worked. He wanted a good run game but saw the o-line and adjusted accordingly.

Maybe we need to adjust our philosophy to the reality that we can't just run at you. Use the pass to set up the run

But our problem is we can't pass block either. The passing attack puts Russ at risk for getting hurt. This whole approach seems braver than smart.

Smart would be drafting some good offensive line men, particularly on the blind side.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

If that was Pete's plan with this line, then yes, blow up that idea.

Remember in 2007 when Holmgren said we can't run so we will just pass. It worked. He wanted a good run game but saw the o-line and adjusted accordingly.

Maybe we need to adjust our philosophy to the reality that we can't just run at you. Use the pass to set up the run

But our problem is we can't pass block either. The passing attack puts Russ at risk for getting hurt. This whole approach seems braver than smart.

Smart would be drafting some good offensive line men, particularly on the blind side.

The Packers couldn't pass block today either. Rodgers was knocked down, and sacked all game today. The difference is how McCarthy decided to respond to what we were doing. In response to our pass rush switched to a quick hitting offense. 3 step drop, and the ball was out of Rodgers hand. McCarthy also took advantage of our aggressiveness with misdirection plays.

Now, compare that to what the Seahawks did. I saw a lot of under the center play from Russ, and long developing 5-7 step drop plays. We also played in tight formations, which only encouraged the Packers to attack the Seahawks where we are weakest; our line. I didn't see very much in the form check down routes either. The game plan baffled me, and even the Aikman seemed a bit confused by our approach to how the Packers were gaming our offense. No adjustments what so ever from our offensive coaches. This my friend, is the difference between our plebeian offensive and a high flying offense such as GBs.

 

[themunn]

The Packers couldn't pass block today either. Rodgers was knocked down, and sacked all game today. The difference is how McCarthy decided to respond to what we were doing. In response to our pass rush switched to a quick hitting offense. 3 step drop, and the ball was out of Rodgers hand. McCarthy also took advantage of our aggressiveness with misdirection plays.

Now, compare that to what the Seahawks did. I saw a lot of under the center play from Russ, and long developing 5-7 step drop plays. We also played in tight formations, which only encouraged the Packers to attack the Seahawks where we are weakest; our line. I didn't see very much in the form check down routes either. The game plan baffled me, and even the Aikman seemed a bit confused by our approach to how the Packers were gaming our offense. No adjustments what so ever from our offensive coaches. This my friend, is the difference between our plebeian offensive and a high flying offense such as GBs.

I missed most of the first half, coming in just to see our last drive where we marched down the field in short time to put 3 points on the board

Then in the second half we had a drive where Wilson fumbled early on, a drive where he marched down field, and if not for an egregious non-call on PI we'd probably have a TD, a 3 and out on an appalling Jimmy Graham drop, and a quick march downfield which almost resulted in TD (actually, while Darboh's catch was spectacular there was no reason for him to leave his feet there, hopefully will come with experience).

It was a really strange half in that yes, the O-line was bad, but we were fractionally away from executing and it made things look much much worse.

If we get the TD on the interception return, or punch it in with 4 attempts from the 1 then the game probably plays out different, but those are the breaks you sometimes have to deal with. I feel confident that we'll get over it and look more adept on offense in the next few weeks.

 

[Aircrew]

With the O (personnel including coaches) the way it is now, and assuming there is no way Bevell/Cable are going anywhere soon, here are the things IMO that would make the O better:

1- up tempo O. It seems when we run the O the traditional way the O cannot move the ball at all or at least with any consistency.
2- bring some form of the read option back. At least for some plays to keep the D guessing.
3- Shotgun almost every play. Russ seems to thrive out of the shotgun vs behind center.
4- Ok I'll cheat a little by saying bring in a real FB like Marcel Reece to open some holes for sake.
5- get rid of bubble screens
6- when you need the 1st down, script a play to throw to the receiver past the 1st down marker.
7- even during running plays spread out the personnel more to allow easier lanes for Russ to throw or the rb's to hit.

Look I'm not an NFL coach but these at least to me are pretty obvious things that even a laymen like myself can see improving what we have. Thoughts?

I actually laughed at #6, so true, so bleeping true.

 

[brimsalabim]

Didn't Russell Wilson have half our rushing yards himself?

 

[brimsalabim]

As bad as this offensive line performs we should be practicing nothing but screens.

 

[netskier]

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

If that was Pete's plan with this line, then yes, blow up that idea.

Remember in 2007 when Holmgren said we can't run so we will just pass. It worked. He wanted a good run game but saw the o-line and adjusted accordingly.

Maybe we need to adjust our philosophy to the reality that we can't just run at you. Use the pass to set up the run

But our problem is we can't pass block either. The passing attack puts Russ at risk for getting hurt. This whole approach seems braver than smart.

Smart would be drafting some good offensive line men, particularly on the blind side.

The Packers couldn't pass block today either. Rodgers was knocked down, and sacked all game today. The difference is how McCarthy decided to respond to what we were doing. In response to our pass rush switched to a quick hitting offense. 3 step drop, and the ball was out of Rodgers hand. McCarthy also took advantage of our aggressiveness with misdirection plays.

Now, compare that to what the Seahawks did. I saw a lot of under the center play from Russ, and long developing 5-7 step drop plays. We also played in tight formations, which only encouraged the Packers to attack the Seahawks where we are weakest; our line. I didn't see very much in the form check down routes either. The game plan baffled me, and even the Aikman seemed a bit confused by our approach to how the Packers were gaming our offense. No adjustments what so ever from our offensive coaches. This my friend, is the difference between our plebeian offensive and a high flying offense such as GBs.

I agree completely.

Adjusting as you suggest is the obviously right thing to do. Now, why do you think that our offensive coaches did not make this adjustment?

 

[doctorsubie]

Agree with all the points made... though in my unprofessional opinion, a faster-tempo offense might, for this o-line ineptitude, just mean quicker 3-and-outs.

Is it me, or does Seattle not run screen passes to the backs? I'm not talking about those wide receiver bubble screens (that go for a whopping 3 or 4 yards).

With how awful our o-line is, it might actually work--as the d-line runs past the turnstile that is our o-line, instead of thinking "hmmm, maybe I'm being set up for a screen," the defense might instead just think this is par-for-the-course...

One issue I keep hearing is how Pete and Darrell seem unable to adapt the offensive to the fact that our o-line isn't going to provide Wilson any time in the pocket...

I would think it's rudimentary football 101; they need to talk to Coach Chris Petersen, because it's pretty clear that for this entire year, our o-line is going to be overmatched. Petersen showed he can consistently get his teams to play above their potential (aka Boise St vs Oklahoma in 2007 Fiesta Bow).

 

[Own The West]

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

Is Pete's proclamation to run more that 60% of the time really feasible before the OL learns to block well enough? It will probably begin working in four or five games. Maybe we should just run 100% of the time to maximize our time to learn to block. This would also protect Russ from being hurt, and this is crucial for winning the rest of the games.

Pete's commitment to the run game is BS. We had 18 rushes yesterday; two of which were scrambles. So 16 of 45 plays we're rushes. 3 of those were 'meaningless' rushes at the end of the half to run the clock out, and we actually got a first down.

But a 2:1 pass to run ratio in a one-score game, where our defense was cramping up and down a DB. Lacy was garbage, but Carson and Procisse were making positive gains. We can run the ball if we call running plays. We don't though -- and then we throw in play action? Nobody in the building expects us to run unless we have two backs in -- in which case we ALWAYS run.

If we ran the ball 30 times a game, we'd be 14-2 every year because nobody would have enough time to hang more than 10 points on this D.

 

[Boycie]

With the O (personnel including coaches) the way it is now, and assuming there is no way Bevell/Cable are going anywhere soon, here are the things IMO that would make the O better:

1- up tempo O. It seems when we run the O the traditional way the O cannot move the ball at all or at least with any consistency.
2- bring some form of the read option back. At least for some plays to keep the D guessing.
3- Shotgun almost every play. Russ seems to thrive out of the shotgun vs behind center.
4- Ok I'll cheat a little by saying bring in a real FB like Marcel Reece to open some holes for sake.
5- get rid of bubble screens
6- when you need the 1st down, script a play to throw to the receiver past the 1st down marker.
7- even during running plays spread out the personnel more to allow easier lanes for Russ to throw or the rb's to hit.

Look I'm not an NFL coach but these at least to me are pretty obvious things that even a laymen like myself can see improving what we have. Thoughts?

I like it!

 

[joeseahawks]

Lets say you draw that nice play and practice it 10 times during the week.
Then you get to GB and Bevell calls it. Russell walks to the huddle, relays the play to the guys and everyone knows what to do. Let's say the receiver will take 2 seconds to get to his spot.
Now, let's imagine ... within 1 second after the ball is snapped, the DL is in Russell's face, because someone on the O-Line blew up his assignment.
What shall we do?
My point is: If the O-Line can't even block for a second, we can practice /call all the plays we want ... nothing is going to change.
To me, the ONE thing that needs to be worked on all week ... is O-Line Blocking.

With the O (personnel including coaches) the way it is now, and assuming there is no way Bevell/Cable are going anywhere soon, here are the things IMO that would make the O better:
1- up tempo O. It seems when we run the O the traditional way the O cannot move the ball at all or at least with any consistency.
2- bring some form of the read option back. At least for some plays to keep the D guessing.
3- Shotgun almost every play. Russ seems to thrive out of the shotgun vs behind center.
4- Ok I'll cheat a little by saying bring in a real FB like Marcel Reece to open some holes for sake.
5- get rid of bubble screens
6- when you need the 1st down, script a play to throw to the receiver past the 1st down marker.
7- even during running plays spread out the personnel more to allow easier lanes for Russ to throw or the rb's to hit.
Look I'm not an NFL coach but these at least to me are pretty obvious things that even a laymen like myself can see improving what we have. Thoughts?

I actually laughed at #6, so true, so bleeping true.

 

[mrt144]

If we ran the ball 30 times a game, we'd be 14-2 every year because nobody would have enough time to hang more than 10 points on this D.

This all falls apart without 1st downs or 3rd down conversions.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

With the O (personnel including coaches) the way it is now, and assuming there is no way Bevell/Cable are going anywhere soon, here are the things IMO that would make the O better:

1- up tempo O. It seems when we run the O the traditional way the O cannot move the ball at all or at least with any consistency.
2- bring some form of the read option back. At least for some plays to keep the D guessing.
3- Shotgun almost every play. Russ seems to thrive out of the shotgun vs behind center.
4- Ok I'll cheat a little by saying bring in a real FB like Marcel Reece to open some holes for sake.
5- get rid of bubble screens
6- when you need the 1st down, script a play to throw to the receiver past the 1st down marker.
7- even during running plays spread out the personnel more to allow easier lanes for Russ to throw or the rb's to hit.

Look I'm not an NFL coach but these at least to me are pretty obvious things that even a laymen like myself can see improving what we have. Thoughts?

Beast Mode enabled the read option. Without him they're not sucking up on the middle--much easier to spy Wilson.

 

[seabowl]

Well there was some up tempo O happening albeit when we were down at the end and they had to. I did see some read option. The rest we need work on.