I'm gonna get slammed, but I do want to question this. I know the constant battle with a lot of us here has been let russ cook vs run heavy. My question is, why did it always have to be one or the other? Like when I looked at the Seahawks offense it had enough talent on offense that any team could dream of. Mobile deadly QB, Deep Threat, Slant Threat, TEs, RBs, O-Line was good enough (when RW was not holding the ball for a huge deep pass, they held up the 2.5 seconds that a top 3 QB should be able to utilize).
It seems like what we've seen for the past years for the Hawks is it's always been about run heavy or pass heavy. Why does it have to be one or the other? and regardless of what the Hawks chose to go with, they ran that despite what the opposing defenses strengths were (say the opposing defense was good against the run or had good secondary). Personally I wasn't in the we need to run or we need to "let russ cook" camp. I wanted the hawks to gameplan against the opponents defensive weakness whether its running, death by a thousand cuts or huge chunk plays (and forgive me if I think the Hawks actually had the talent to do all of it). Anyway pulse check, anyone else felt this way.
It seems like what we've seen for the past years for the Hawks is it's always been about run heavy or pass heavy. Why does it have to be one or the other? and regardless of what the Hawks chose to go with, they ran that despite what the opposing defenses strengths were (say the opposing defense was good against the run or had good secondary). Personally I wasn't in the we need to run or we need to "let russ cook" camp. I wanted the hawks to gameplan against the opponents defensive weakness whether its running, death by a thousand cuts or huge chunk plays (and forgive me if I think the Hawks actually had the talent to do all of it). Anyway pulse check, anyone else felt this way.