XxXdragonXxX
Well-known member
I think thwy finally got put a chip back on their shoulder and started playing as a team.
Missing_Clink":1v4pkvmu said:I went with Bevell. The biggest change to me is that the passing offense is no longer just backyard scrambles and chucking it deep. They have actually developed a short, timing based passing game and it is doing wonders to mitigate their pass protection deficiencies. Really happy they finally realized this was what they needed to do.
seahawksny":2jd5prjy said:The biggest factor is very simple
When we preserve our identity which is running the ball, throwing down field and Russell using his legs. we win
when we get away from our identity, IE stupid bubble screens to Percy Harvin that takes away from my points above, and relying on tight ends, who albeit supremely talented do not block to support our strengths. we lose.
I just dont understand why Pete chooses to be experimental. Last year for 5 games. This year for up until 9 games. Its a terrible thing to say, but Graham getting hurt will help this team tremendously.
ApnaHawk":czd981w1 said:Ever since I officially joined this board, the team has been on a run. :thirishdrinkers:
MizzouHawkGal":1zqz8fcv said:1. Russell Wilson learning to pass quicker and finally doing Ciara.
2. Mr. Rawls.
3. Pierre at center.
4. Lane.
5. Bevell actually calling decent plays like a rollout that gives Wilson a run/pass option instead of a short slant in the teeth of the defense using some dude who's whole value is being a gunner on special teams or go routes in deep passing situations.
Scottemojo":pogm418v said:I don't buy that the o-line suddenly got that much better, except at center.
On one of the early plays in the Vikings game, Britt whiffed badly. just as badly as when he first started playing guard.
But the ball was already out, the route was a short one, the D had no chance even on a blown block to get a sack. The short pass game, the new emphasis on a lot more spread plays, has made the line look better than it is.
Seafan":vo88fatb said:The quick pass emphasis by the coaches (why the heck did it take 8 weeks?) and decent execution by RW who was responsible for the 2-4 start. The OL improvement has helped the running game but it isn't the decisive factor in RWs turnaround. The defense isn't the same as last year but with a credible offense there is hope the defense can improve.
erik2690":1uoj2oo7 said:Seafan":1uoj2oo7 said:The quick pass emphasis by the coaches (why the heck did it take 8 weeks?) and decent execution by RW who was responsible for the 2-4 start. The OL improvement has helped the running game but it isn't the decisive factor in RWs turnaround. The defense isn't the same as last year but with a credible offense there is hope the defense can improve.
I get that you have your slant on things, but if this is "decent" execution what does good, great and perfect execution look like? Maybe that's sorta semantic, but "decent" just reeks of backhanded compliment for some reason when the dude is on such a ridiculous 3 game stretch. Maybe my interpretation more than your meaning and maybe this is all a bit to argumentative, but I guess I'm essentially asking what your 'execution grading scale' looks like.