So what's the deal with the RZ offense?

[Ozzy]

because they try to force it to Kearse....

Teams double team and bracket both Doug and Graham in the RZ, that's no secret.

I don't like it either, but that's the reason Russell consistently throws it to Kearse, he sees the single coverage and gives Jermaine a chance to make a play.............unfortunately he's slow, short and has hands of stone.

This is 100% right.

 

[Siouxhawk]

The thing is, we are a big play type offense that thrives on setting up and executing "explosive plays." Perhaps we are a bit weak in the red zone because we work more on scoring from outside of the RZ.

Right. And all the while WE ARE scoring points via the field goal. We start to pull away, opponents get desperate and that plays right into the hands of our defense like that Sherm interception illustrated Sunday. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I think we're pretty solid at scoring points off turnovers too.

 

[Uncle Si]

The thing is, we are a big play type offense that thrives on setting up and executing "explosive plays." Perhaps we are a bit weak in the red zone because we work more on scoring from outside of the RZ.

Right. And all the while WE ARE scoring points via the field goal. We start to pull away, opponents get desperate and that plays right into the hands of our defense like that Sherm interception illustrated Sunday. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I think we're pretty solid at scoring points off turnovers too.

That formula BARELY worked against the Patriots though...

Come on... The Hawks need a vast improvement in the red zone. That's a given.

 

[Siouxhawk]

The thing is, we are a big play type offense that thrives on setting up and executing "explosive plays." Perhaps we are a bit weak in the red zone because we work more on scoring from outside of the RZ.

Right. And all the while WE ARE scoring points via the field goal. We start to pull away, opponents get desperate and that plays right into the hands of our defense like that Sherm interception illustrated Sunday. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I think we're pretty solid at scoring points off turnovers too.

That formula BARELY worked against the Patriots though...

Come on... The Hawks need a vast improvement in the red zone. That's a given.

As long as we're hanging more points on the scoreboard than our competition like we have the last 3 weeks, I really don't care. Besides, that will take care of itself. A solidifying line and a healthy Russ has given us that rhythm we have been seeking all season and that bodes well for another dramatic push.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The thing is, we are a big play type offense that thrives on setting up and executing "explosive plays." Perhaps we are a bit weak in the red zone because we work more on scoring from outside of the RZ.

Can't tell if you're serious or not, but it's silly to think we don't work on RZ scoring.

It's hard to score in the RZ, look what we do to teams, suffocate them. Even bad defenses gain an advantage with a short field to not have to protect the deep ball.

 

[Uncle Si]

The thing is, we are a big play type offense that thrives on setting up and executing "explosive plays." Perhaps we are a bit weak in the red zone because we work more on scoring from outside of the RZ.

Right. And all the while WE ARE scoring points via the field goal. We start to pull away, opponents get desperate and that plays right into the hands of our defense like that Sherm interception illustrated Sunday. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I think we're pretty solid at scoring points off turnovers too.

That formula BARELY worked against the Patriots though...

Come on... The Hawks need a vast improvement in the red zone. That's a given.

As long as we're hanging more points on the scoreboard than our competition like we have the last 3 weeks, I really don't care. Besides, that will take care of itself. A solidifying line and a healthy Russ has given us that rhythm we have been seeking all season and that bodes well for another dramatic push.

Two of those three games needed a dramatic defensive stand. The game lost before the big streak involved not scoring a late TD from the red zone.

Winning isn't the answer to every question, as the difference is so thin in this league.

 

[sutz]

The thing is, we are a big play type offense that thrives on setting up and executing "explosive plays." Perhaps we are a bit weak in the red zone because we work more on scoring from outside of the RZ.

Can't tell if you're serious or not, but it's silly to think we don't work on RZ scoring.

It's hard to score in the RZ, look what we do to teams, suffocate them. Even bad defenses gain an advantage with a short field to not have to protect the deep ball.

I didn't say we didn't practice RZ offense. I'm just talking about emphasis. Like was said earlier in the thread, several of our receivers are of the speed types, that need more room to get open than is available in the compressed field of the RZ. Our lack of running game earlier in the season exacerbates that as well. Now, with additional injuries to our RB corps this may not get better soon.

I was actually about half joking with my comment, but it bears scrutiny. We do work on explosive plays. As long as we can score from outside the 20, we're maintaining a high wins total. Sure, we'll need to get "better" in the playoffs. Not saying that either. But I'm also not going to complain about beating the best team in the AFC in their house, or winning a tough game against an NFC contender based on "we didn't score enough points." We did.

Meanwhile, I bet our coaches are working on the problems we're discussing anyway.

 

[HawkGA]

I used to think the same thing but I think coverage dictates why we go to Kearse so much. Other teams don't really respect him so he is the one on one matchup. It's not working so I would do something different. Try McEvoy or Richardson or a Prosise if he's healthy, something. Forcing it to Kearse isn't working.

Aren't there things they can do to try to beat the double coverage on Jimmy though? Put him in motion or something? Isolate him out wide on one side so that if the D wants to double him they really have to commit to it?

I'm just asking questions. I'm no X's and O's person.

 

[scutterhawk]

We won today and last week against the Patriots, but in both games we just couldn't seem to score a touchdown in the red zone. Is it play calling, execution or what? Its so frustrating because we could have easily blown both teams out, but I think we have something like 6 field goals from inside the 20.
I guess its not a problem until it costs us a win, but it's definitely one of the biggest weaknesses on the team right now.

Really good Goal Line stands by some really good Defenses.
Just like the ultra good Seahawks Defense did against the high octane Offense Patriots.
The closer to the Goal line, the more compressed the area is to defend.

 

[xgeoff]

Room for improvement for sure. I'm not sure they have a really good approach when they get into the red zone. I think with Rawls back and Russ' health improving the read-option will help this a lot. In any case, I'm confident they will figure this out.

 

[Schadie001]

I could be wrong but I haven't noticed in the RZ, Jimmy lining up by himself wide to one side on single coverage as we do so often with Kearse or Baldwin or even other guys. If Jimmy ran the quick slant he would score every time, his body is so wide and his height would make it very very difficult to go through and get the ball.

 

[DavidSeven]

The one area where a big QB has a real advantage is when the field is shortened.

Russ has had his struggles in the redzone and will continue to do so. He will never have great vision in that area. His explosiveness everywhere else makes up for it, but this is a reality.