Serious points to get the O to produce

With the O (personnel including coaches) the way it is now, and assuming there is no way Bevell/Cable are going anywhere soon, here are the things IMO that would make the O better:

1- up tempo O. It seems when we run the O the traditional way the O cannot move the ball at all or at least with any consistency.
2- bring some form of the read option back. At least for some plays to keep the D guessing.
3- Shotgun almost every play. Russ seems to thrive out of the shotgun vs behind center.
4- Ok I'll cheat a little by saying bring in a real FB like Marcel Reece to open some holes for sake.
5- get rid of bubble screens
6- when you need the 1st down, script a play to throw to the receiver past the 1st down marker.
7- even during running plays spread out the personnel more to allow easier lanes for Russ to throw or the rb's to hit.

Look I'm not an NFL coach but these at least to me are pretty obvious things that even a laymen like myself can see improving what we have. Thoughts?

seabowl":3quhjye4 said:

With the O (personnel including coaches) the way it is now, and assuming there is no way Bevell/Cable are going anywhere soon, here are the things IMO that would make the O better:

1- up tempo O. It seems when we run the O the traditional way the O cannot move the ball at all or at least with any consistency.
2- bring some form of the read option back. At least for some plays to keep the D guessing.
3- Shotgun almost every play. Russ seems to thrive out of the shotgun vs behind center.
4- Ok I'll cheat a little by saying bring in a real FB like Marcel Reece to open some holes for sake.
5- get rid of bubble screens
6- when you need the 1st down, script a play to throw to the receiver past the 1st down marker.
7- even during running plays spread out the personnel more to allow easier lanes for Russ to throw or the rb's to hit.

Look I'm not an NFL coach but these at least to me are pretty obvious things that even a laymen like myself can see improving what we have. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

WINNER WINNER WINNER!!!

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Siouxhawk":1j3kxhdc said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Sorry but I don't see anywhere in the list saying to abandon the running game. Up tempo does not insinuate just a passing game.

seabowl":adkycs15 said:

Siouxhawk":adkycs15 said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Sorry but I don't see anywhere in the list saying to abandon the running game. Up tempo does not insinuate just a passing game.

Click to expand...

OK, my bad. I get where you're coming from now. I don't mind the uptempo game, but how long can you sustain that? And does uptempo and establishing the run complement each other? I could see picking your moments where we turn it on at different junctures of the game (just to change things up), but an entire game?

Siouxhawk":scwubxw2 said:

seabowl":scwubxw2 said:

Siouxhawk":scwubxw2 said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Sorry but I don't see anywhere in the list saying to abandon the running game. Up tempo does not insinuate just a passing game.

Click to expand...

OK, my bad. I get where you're coming from now. I don't mind the uptempo game, but how long can you sustain that? And does uptempo and establishing the run complement each other? I could see picking your moments where we turn it on at different junctures of the game (just to change things up), but an entire game?

Click to expand...

Forget junction in the game, junctions in the series.

Up Tempo means you have to have everyone tuned into things, personnel have to be ready to go in and play calls fast, a long run you have another back ready to go in as they unpile etc. We would need to have a lot better organizing on offense to do that all game.

Siouxhawk":3jt2i0eb said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

Siouxhawk":q1fz6b90 said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

jammerhawk":q6o3qar3 said:

Siouxhawk":q6o3qar3 said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

Click to expand...

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

So you were happy with us getting literally nothing play after play on the ground?

My thought is that game plans vary from game to game because they reflect health and opponent strengths and weaknesses.

Siouxhawk":1dzfrxi1 said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

Jville":3itw9ml9 said:

My thought is that game plans vary from game to game because they reflect health and opponent strengths and weaknesses.

Click to expand...

Sure do!

Unfortunately when ours was not working out there was no significant adjustment.

Our coaches got out coached, at. Least as far as the O was concerned.

Siouxhawk":30of9pba said:

jammerhawk":30of9pba said:

Siouxhawk":30of9pba said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

Run game?

What run game? 90 yards total. Lacy? = invisible, let's hope this isn't what we get.. Prosise? = invisible. He's a star though ??? Rawls? = hurt as usual. Carson? = 39yards and only one effective running play. How many running plays were called?

The OLine= Matadors who can't pass block or run block. It was a poor gameplan that showed little ability to change up on O, and while I think Bevell at times can be effective he shows a paucity of ability to adjust.

The O was ugly and put unreal pressure on the D who held a superior O to just 17 points. They spent almost 2/3 of the game on the field. Zero scores for the OC, zero for Coach Fable, yes the spelling is correct, zero for the game plan. Fable = the illusion he can create an OLine that can pass protect or even run block. Sure I'm po'd b/c the BS we've been fed on the OLine is all that.

Eddy Lacy, ok, whatever? The team's best RB today is a rookie who got limited touches.

I would have scrapped the run game b/c it sucked. Full throttle? I'd have been happy for some or any limited effectiveness.

Click to expand...

So would you already abandon Pete's proclamation that we will run the ball in excess of 60 percent of the game?
That was supposed to be our offensive identity this year.

Click to expand...

If that was Pete's plan with this line, then yes, blow up that idea.

Remember in 2007 when Holmgren said we can't run so we will just pass. It worked. He wanted a good run game but saw the o-line and adjusted accordingly.

Maybe we need to adjust our philosophy to the reality that we can't just run at you. Use the pass to set up the run

One thought. I think it may be a wee bit early to give up on it, though. We have the Niners up next and I think we can get back on track against them.
Adding Rawls will also help.

If today was any reflection of the team's identity this season the D will be worn out by mid season.

The O had no identity tonight. Thanks for nothing Coach Bevell. Thanks for nothing Coach Cable. The only RB that showed up was the rookie.

The OLine was awful! The game plan failed to adjust.

If the D had not played an exceptional game it would let have been a blow out instead of an 8 point L.

SF at home next Sunday let's see how lame the 'run game' looks then.

Why do you say 'Lame?" You've experienced this team enough to know how fast they can get it together, especially at home against a division opponent. It's happened over and over again through the course of the last 5 seasons.
I don't think Pete's going to let his vision of a dominant run game go quite yet. And I think we still have the wherewithal to make it happen.

This was week 1, weird things happen week 1. The Packers were doing new things on defense, but that's it. Those don't excuse this performance, especially because we've seen this before, and it obviously needed to be fixed. The most troubling thing for me is, being that it was so obvious last year and yet was not fixed, does that mean that this was their best effort at fixing it? Or, is this Pete Carroll's acceptance of starting slow and coming together and banging the "it's how you finish" drum?

If things don't GREATLY improve within 2 weeks, I believe this will be the final straw at which Pete starts losing fan base confidence en mass.

Inept beginnings to seasons, and to games, an inept offense, it is now very unacceptable. This was old two years ago, it got Russ hurt and ruined the entire year last year, the script needs to be scrapped. Drastic changes must happen now or we will barely make the playoffs because of our historic defense and be one and done.

So the two things that will keep this slow motion car crash going would be, an inept coaching staff, or a stubborn coaching staff. What troubles me is that I feel we're seeing a bit of both.

What I would do:

Start Chris Carson
Pass to setup the run
Commit to some read option, more than "sprinkled in"
Mix up the tempo, not up tempo the whole game, but mix it up. Run it 2-3 times a half.

I think that even with our o line personnel, we have the talent to win it all, but we need to suck it up and make big changes RIGHT NOW.

Siouxhawk":17acygse said:

Good thoughts, but are we really ready to abandon a full throttle running game yet? I think Pete says he wanted it to be more like 60/40 run instead of the 50/50 run/pass from a year ago. I think we tried that all day against the Packers, but were bottled up save for a few nice Carson rambles, but do we really abandon Pete's preferred philosophy a mere game into the season?

Click to expand...

We don't have the offensive line to support the power run game anymore. The office let any one who was any good go and replaced them with rejects, projects, castoffs and UFA's no one else wanted. If you have a strong enough line any back can carry the ball.