DavidSeven":3eev428d said:
West TX Hawk":3eev428d said:
I think that lies within the core of the major problem though-no offensive system should be predicated upon a QB's ability for improvisation. The philosophy should be designed for success on its own, with a QB's scrambling talent only coming into play when necessary.
Our system is almost wholly contingent on Wilson creating opportunities 1/2 the time. A shift in ideological design and adaptation to the personel we do have should be implemented.
The system has been built around Wilson's ability to move because he isn't a typical drop-back QB. If you build an offense designed for a 6'4 QB who is expected to step up in the pocket, then Wilson is never going to be a successful. It is not about "improvising." It is about building a system that makes the most of Wilson's talent, which this staff has done with incredible success over the last four years. Russell Wilson is not a "plug and play" player, and to scheme him as such would've been a huge mistake.
Kind of funny: Seattle was the #1 DVOA OFFENSE for all of last year. This stat is cited often to defend the coaching, but now the same people who ignored those arguments want to use a two-game sample of the same stat to justify blowing everything up. Irony.
That is the point. We have put our hat on his scrambling ability. That is one of the reasons we spend nothing on OL. I fully understand our philosophy of keeping the defense intact and spending our money there. I even understand the logic behind the graham trade.
We have great talent on the offense, but it is not being utilized efficiently, especially without our mobile quarterback being mobile.
What we saw last week with read option still being on the table is that the change in strategy was not made. We lost the basis for our previous scheme, so you would think you would make adjustments to counter this. Those adjustments were not made. That falls on those responsible for the strategy, or lack thereof.
As a coaching staff in this sport, you have to be able to adjust for injuries. If you do adjust and still lose, so be it. We did not see that. That is why you see all of the angst against the offensive coaching.
Giving this great roster the best opportunity to win falls on coaching. If you rewatch the game there are holes in the short midfield zone constantly with the rams bringing 5. This was the case throughout the game. The only way to back off a heavy blitz is to burn them on it. For some reason no adjustment was made to do this, so the rams just kept bringing it.
There will ALWAYS be injuries and personnel that aren't optimal, but if we want to win games, we HAVE to have an offensive strategy to mitigate these weaknesses.
