Run Game Tactics and Personnel

the seahawks should work to improve o-line and rb depth.

at running back, i'd say go with carson and penny, and scarborough.

Also, bring in 2 bigger 'fullback' types... the kind of guys where you know they'll at least get 2 yards whenever it's needed, regardless of the defense.

Speaking of bigger backs, Penny is a fairly big back. At 5'11" and 235#, Scarborough is a load.

Carson, Penny, and Scarborough could potentionally be a 3-headed monster. Anyway, after your mainline 1-3 rushers, i'd say bulk out the 4th and 4th spots with big backs.

And the o-line and blocking tight ends need to have sufficient back-ups.

If Penny could learn to break that 'first tackle', it would add another dimension to his game. This last season, Penny actually did that on one middle run. It was a 6 or 7-yarder where he broke a tackle or two.

But having a couple of big, slower backs is always a good idea... guys who can always get you 2 yards or more... or at least, that guaranteed yard so you know you can always get that 3rd or 4th and 1.

in the punting game, maybe they should put a big running back at kick returner. the league leading punt return average was 14+. lockett averaged 5+ if memory serves. what if you could put a big running back in there, with soft hands, and they could have a good return average, but without ever getting a td?

if you put penny in at punt returner, he might get a td.

hopefully the coaches will have the sense to convert prosise to wideout.

oh, the thing about scarborough is... does he still have it? he's had a couple of injuries along the way. if he's got any gas left in his tank, 5'11" and 235# is a beast... ymmv

mrblitz":tjvcnl9x said:

But having a couple of big, slower backs is always a good idea... guys who can always get you 2 yards or more... or at least, that guaranteed yard so you know you can always get that 3rd or 4th and 1.v

Click to expand...

Slow and big is never a good idea at RB, or FB..........just ask Eddie Lacy.

You want explosive and physical, that's how you get those two yards when there's no hole................and we have that back, it's Chris Carson. Much like Lynch, he's brilliant at being physical at the point of attack and grinding out a yard or two when there's nothing there.

I'm all for trying to get more talented on the O-line, but we have great RB depth, no need to spend draft capital or FA cap space on RB's. Not with so many needs and depth issues at other positions.

I think the main problem with the punt return unit along with other Special Teams units (besides for maybe ST coach) was that there wasn't enough good depth to have premium players on ST. The players that would normally have been on ST were starting on both sides of the ball instead.

I like the run game analysis.

What are the chances the team can get more creative feom run sets either with motion, play action or even two RB sets?

Or are the backs not dangerous enough?

Both are certainly dangerous enough. They were starting to use more motion towards the end of the season. Time for some creative scheming Schotty.

I want to see some greater use of the FB like we saw from NE vs. KC.

yeah, the fullbacks, in addition to being able to get tough yardage, should be great blockers.

this scarborough kid could be a sleeper. we've got a really good running backs unit.

Uncle Si":357vnifz said:

I like the run game analysis.

What are the chances the team can get more creative feom run sets either with motion, play action or even two RB sets?

Or are the backs not dangerous enough?

Click to expand...

We started using motion this year, and shifting backs, for 2 back set you need a viable FB, Madden isn't it. You really want someone like Reese,run,block and catch.

I think at this point we have learned that we must refrain from asking for more creative play-calling from our OC's. Going through Bevell and Schotty has clearly indicated Pete keeps it bland by design.

chris98251":1yu392wu said:

Uncle Si":1yu392wu said:

I like the run game analysis.

What are the chances the team can get more creative feom run sets either with motion, play action or even two RB sets?

Or are the backs not dangerous enough?

Click to expand...

We started using motion this year, and shifting backs, for 2 back set you need a viable FB, Madden isn't it. You really want someone like Reese,run,block and catch.

Click to expand...

Do FB's even exist anymore?

I think what teams are doing is drafting hybrid FB/TE/Split ends like Kyle Juszczyk in SF, or even a guys like Taysom Hill in NO that can lead block, run the read and even pass.

Even in a run first offense like ours, it's tough to carry a FB on the roster for maybe 4-5 plays a game. With how fast defenses are now, the trend is more towards a versatile hybrid type player that can give you more than just lead blocking.

bbsplitter":7fn48nov said:

I think at this point we have learned that we must refrain from asking for more creative play-calling from our OC's. Going through Bevell and Schotty has clearly indicated Pete keeps it bland by design.

Click to expand...

This isn't the slightest bit true in regards to the run game. There was a lot of good analysis on our creative run plays and blocking schemes over the offseason.

It looks like everyone missed it.

Sgt. Largent":3jf4gl7r said:

chris98251":3jf4gl7r said:

Uncle Si":3jf4gl7r said:

I like the run game analysis.

What are the chances the team can get more creative feom run sets either with motion, play action or even two RB sets?

Or are the backs not dangerous enough?

Click to expand...

We started using motion this year, and shifting backs, for 2 back set you need a viable FB, Madden isn't it. You really want someone like Reese,run,block and catch.

Click to expand...

Do FB's even exist anymore?

I think what teams are doing is drafting hybrid FB/TE/Split ends like Kyle Juszczyk in SF, or even a guys like Taysom Hill in NO that can lead block, run the read and even pass.

Even in a run first offense like ours, it's tough to carry a FB on the roster for maybe 4-5 plays a game. With how fast defenses are now, the trend is more towards a versatile hybrid type player that can give you more than just lead blocking.

Click to expand...

A good FB like Reese opens everything up, you can't cheat on any of it as a blocker and release into the pattern guy, run blocker. I think the I would work great with our backs also.

Sgt. Largent":1xbqriod said:

Slow and big is never a good idea at RB, or FB..........just ask Eddie Lacy.

Click to expand...

I used to think that, but Marshawn Lynch changed my mind (yes, I know, big difference between Lynch big and Lacy big, but Lacy is an outlier).

I was always frustrated that he could get through the line but most times dragged down from behind because he wasn't fast enough to take it to the house.

However, his consistent gains brought me around. If your guy can get 4 yards every single time, then you win every game because your drives never stall and you control the clock. Yes, I know that's impossible, but it's an illustration of consistency vs homerun potential.

Chris Carson gets us consistent yards most of the time. Obviously he's not so effective with two injured guards blocking for him, but he's an up-the-gut rusher who can push the pile for positive yards on most plays.

It's far better to have a running back get between 2 and 5 yards than it is to have one who gets stuffed regularly but occasionally breaks a long one, even if the inconsistent guy has a better YPC (one of the reasons YPC is a Bad Stat). Keeping the chains moving and forcing the defense to respond are the important things.

KiwiHawk":3mkebwc8 said:

Sgt. Largent":3mkebwc8 said:

Slow and big is never a good idea at RB, or FB..........just ask Eddie Lacy.

Click to expand...

I used to think that, but Marshawn Lynch changed my mind (yes, I know, big difference between Lynch big and Lacy big, but Lacy is an outlier)..

Click to expand...

Lynch was 5'11, 215 lbs and ran a 4.4.

No part of Lynch was big or slow when talking about RB's.........other than his attitude and toughness.

mrblitz":b6fl8c1w said:

Also, bring in 2 bigger 'fullback' types... the kind of guys where you know they'll at least get 2 yards whenever it's needed, regardless of the defense.

Click to expand...

In my opinion the two best fullbacks we've had in the history of the organization were Mack Strong and Mike Robinson. They were bigger guys (256 and 240 respectively). However they were both athletic and definitely not slow. We don't want slow anywhere in the backfield. And there isn't a need for a fullback that can get two yards whenever it's needed if we have a three headed monster of three backs like you also mention.