This is a good week to...

Air the friggin ball out.

NY has given up so many big plays, it is a cornucopia.

Get Richardson and Lockette down the field, and use a rollout to get them the ball, that way the O-Line can do what they do best....Not worry about blocking.

I predict we'll do two passes the entire game where the ball's in the air for more than 20 yards.

Agreed. It would make sense to go vertical against a bad Giants secondary, but it's going to depend on protection. Wilson actually has to have time to throw the ball deep, even to Lockette and Richardson.

Ironically, McAdoo (OC for the Giants) came out and said they were going to challenge us deep and couldn't be afraid to throw deep on us. With their OL, I can see us getting 6 sacks and Eli having a 3 INT game against us if they go that route. Throwing deep with their personnel has to be the worst thing they could do against us at home.

Hawks46":1skv60x3 said:

Agreed. It would make sense to go vertical against a bad Giants secondary, but it's going to depend on protection. Wilson actually has to have time to throw the ball deep, even to Lockette and Richardson.

Click to expand...

I am so sick of this incorrect assertion. Going deep doesn't mean you have to rely on long-developing routes requiring good pass protection.

Here's Peyton Manning going deep (thrown from the 38, caught at the two, so 36 yards in the air) where he does a three-step drop and immediately throws.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... rd-TD-pass

WE CAN STILL GO DEEP WITHOUT DECENT PASS PROTECTION. At least, we could, if we actually did something like send two guys on sideline go routes on opposite sides of the field with Wilson throwing to whichever one he prefers depending on coverage.

Like I said, roll out, use a "rolling pocket", do something different that they haven't seen.

It is painfully clear that this o-line is not up to the task, so if our OC would actually look at what the other team is giving us, we may get on track. But it begins with being innovative with what you know YOU have and what the other TEAM is giving you.

RolandDeschain":147574b7 said:

Hawks46":147574b7 said:

Agreed. It would make sense to go vertical against a bad Giants secondary, but it's going to depend on protection. Wilson actually has to have time to throw the ball deep, even to Lockette and Richardson.

Click to expand...

I am so sick of this incorrect assertion. Going deep doesn't mean you have to rely on long-developing routes requiring good pass protection.

Here's Peyton Manning going deep (thrown from the 38, caught at the two, so 36 yards in the air) where he does a three-step drop and immediately throws.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... rd-TD-pass

WE CAN STILL GO DEEP WITHOUT DECENT PASS PROTECTION. At least, we could, if we actually did something like send two guys on sideline go routes on opposite sides of the field with Wilson throwing to whichever one he prefers depending on coverage.

Click to expand...

Pick on the left side. Demps and Hosley are the ones giving up the bip plays. Both miss tackles like crazy and blow coverages. I wouldn't shy away from throwing at Cromartie & Rolle, but I wouldn't go out of my way to challenge them either. They're not chumps and they have made a lot of big plays. I think Hosley and Demps will give up a couple huge plays to us if we roll Wilson right and have him throw to somebody leaking out the deep left on a flag or wheel route. Rolle and Cromartie like to anticipate and jump routes, so if you want to beat them deep, we'll have to sell some double moves or pump a short crossing route with a deep route over the top.

I think our biggest concern should be protection and blocking though. The Giants have Beason out and they had a pretty bad run defense to begin with. The Hawks need to get the running game going early and that'll suck the secondary up to the LOS for the deep ball. If we can't put up a good offensive performance against the Giants, we got problems.

RolandDeschain":d32mnj1p said:

Hawks46":d32mnj1p said:

Agreed. It would make sense to go vertical against a bad Giants secondary, but it's going to depend on protection. Wilson actually has to have time to throw the ball deep, even to Lockette and Richardson.

Click to expand...

I am so sick of this incorrect assertion. Going deep doesn't mean you have to rely on long-developing routes requiring good pass protection.

Here's Peyton Manning going deep (thrown from the 38, caught at the two, so 36 yards in the air) where he does a three-step drop and immediately throws.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... rd-TD-pass

WE CAN STILL GO DEEP WITHOUT DECENT PASS PROTECTION. At least, we could, if we actually did something like send two guys on sideline go routes on opposite sides of the field with Wilson throwing to whichever one he prefers depending on coverage.

Click to expand...

This type of play opens up up for more INTs though. Yes, in a play you describe you could take a chance on the better coverage, but it still is a big risk if the defender covers better than you thought they would.

The reason why all the Hawks plays take time to develop is that Wilson waits for his receivers to be open before he throws to them.

With Pete's ball control mindset and focus on not giving away the ball, these type of big reward type plays will not be seen much. Wilson doesn't often chuck it deep unless he has time to see if the receiver might have a step on the defender.

Wilson would not be a good fit in Holmgrens offense.

However, he is long gone, and it is about time for Bevell and Cable to devise some plays for us to use RW's skills that we have not yet seen. The entire offense had to be changed with and then without Harvin, get with the program and devise some big play potential in the passing game. This is a great week to do it.

As much as it makes sense to air it out, that's not how Pete rolls.

He's stubborn, he likes to pound the rock with safe play action short passes. Which is fine, it's what we do best, but it usually means these kind of games (like last week) are way closer than they should be.

oakland had a terrible pass D as well. How did that work out?

Honestly, they'll probably take their shots downfield and Bevell will probably be creative but if it were me I would game plan a quick passing game/ball control running game like you would implement against a monster pass-rush defense (hint: KC)

I'm not saying going Daryl Lamonica on them, but hell, we actually could make an adjustment now and then.

Sgt. Largent":pwu8nr6q said:

As much as it makes sense to air it out, that's not how Pete rolls.

He's stubborn, he likes to pound the rock with safe play action short passes. Which is fine, it's what we do best, but it usually means these kind of games (like last week) are way closer than they should be.

Click to expand...

Pete likes to run the ball and do a safe, controlled passing game, but he is also a fan of "The big play". Can't remember the phrase that was thrown around last year about the number of plays over a certain yardage that we either led the league or were in the top 5. Pete likes to be safe, but he is also a gun slinger. I think one of the things missing from our offense this year is the gunslinger plays. Reasons range from crappy Oline, to Wilson is off a bit to defenses are pumped up to be playing the Champs.

What I love about the upcoming second half is we don't need to be a great deal better than we've been in the first half. Just a few plays and we are 7-1. Let's see if we can finish strong.

SC

They'll take big plays when they are there, but this team will NEVER gamble for big plays.

StoneCold":bvb0ljtj said:

Sgt. Largent":bvb0ljtj said:

As much as it makes sense to air it out, that's not how Pete rolls.

He's stubborn, he likes to pound the rock with safe play action short passes. Which is fine, it's what we do best, but it usually means these kind of games (like last week) are way closer than they should be.

Click to expand...

Pete likes to run the ball and do a safe, controlled passing game, but he is also a fan of "The big play". Can't remember the phrase that was thrown around last year about the number of plays over a certain yardage that we either led the league or were in the top 5. Pete likes to be safe, but he is also a gun slinger. I think one of the things missing from our offense this year is the gunslinger plays. Reasons range from crappy Oline, to Wilson is off a bit to defenses are pumped up to be playing the Champs.

What I love about the upcoming second half is we don't need to be a great deal better than we've been in the first half. Just a few plays and we are 7-1. Let's see if we can finish strong.

SC

Click to expand...

Toxic differential.

Believe it or not, we are third in toxic differential right now.

Isn't that the name of a metal band from Centralia?

RolandDeschain":geuebslz said:

Hawks46":geuebslz said:

Agreed. It would make sense to go vertical against a bad Giants secondary, but it's going to depend on protection. Wilson actually has to have time to throw the ball deep, even to Lockette and Richardson.

Click to expand...

I am so sick of this incorrect assertion. Going deep doesn't mean you have to rely on long-developing routes requiring good pass protection.

Here's Peyton Manning going deep (thrown from the 38, caught at the two, so 36 yards in the air) where he does a three-step drop and immediately throws.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... rd-TD-pass

WE CAN STILL GO DEEP WITHOUT DECENT PASS PROTECTION. At least, we could, if we actually did something like send two guys on sideline go routes on opposite sides of the field with Wilson throwing to whichever one he prefers depending on coverage.

Click to expand...

Hey, I agree with you, you don't have to go all caps on me and such. And it's not an incorrect assumption; with our installed offense, we use a lot of play action from under center and the pistol. The problem with our protection isn't usually getting collapsed from the DE's, but from the interior straight up the middle. Then Wilson has to scramble in 2 seconds and the whole thing falls to crap. Our protection is so bad that that Manning clip you showed; he would've at least got hit in that amount of time behind our OL.

Like Largent80 said, we used to roll the pocket and had designed roll outs. I don't know what happened to them, but between our read option, screens, rollouts, run game, and play action, that should be enough to keep a defense guessing. Our WRs either aren't getting open, or Wilson isn't seeing them....all of this compounded by crap protection that breaks down in under 2 seconds. I don't have access to the all 22, so I can't tell you, but there's a disconnect somewhere.

I'd love to see us take a couple of shots at Richardson just like that Manning clip. You don't always have to hit that pass over the top, just be willing to throw it and the defense will back off. The boxing analogy would be hit them in the body (run game) until they lower their gloves, then go at them with haymakers (passes over the top).

Scottemojo":m26dy95z said:

StoneCold":m26dy95z said:

Sgt. Largent":m26dy95z said:

As much as it makes sense to air it out, that's not how Pete rolls.

He's stubborn, he likes to pound the rock with safe play action short passes. Which is fine, it's what we do best, but it usually means these kind of games (like last week) are way closer than they should be.

Click to expand...

Pete likes to run the ball and do a safe, controlled passing game, but he is also a fan of "The big play". Can't remember the phrase that was thrown around last year about the number of plays over a certain yardage that we either led the league or were in the top 5. Pete likes to be safe, but he is also a gun slinger. I think one of the things missing from our offense this year is the gunslinger plays. Reasons range from crappy Oline, to Wilson is off a bit to defenses are pumped up to be playing the Champs.

What I love about the upcoming second half is we don't need to be a great deal better than we've been in the first half. Just a few plays and we are 7-1. Let's see if we can finish strong.

SC

Click to expand...

Toxic differential.

Believe it or not, we are third in toxic differential right now.

Click to expand...

Yes, toxic differential, though my little brain was trying to remember explosive plays. Thanks.

Hawks46":1z2rxbjc said:

Hey, I agree with you, you don't have to go all caps on me and such.

Click to expand...

I didn't mean the caps stuff was directed at you, I'm just venting general frustration caused by our offensive play calling and 3rd-grade-level scheming.

The part that gets me is this. Bevell actually HAS tried to get the ball down the field, with the results being mixed and leaning to the incomplete pass and some have been lucky they were't picked, one Sunday was easy if Hayden catches it.

So there are several reasons why it hasn't worked, but if we go back to last years offense, I think we go on a roll.

Baldwin is a GO this week as well.