Ultra-Conservative Offense A PC Rope-A-Dope?

Is our recent anemic offense (apart from the running game) all we've got, or is PC hiding his cards?

I hope it's the latter!!

GO HAWKS!!!

I don't think so. I think that falls on the side of "wishful thinking" to help grasp why our passing offense seems to be so out of sync.

Also, you don't risk losing playoff games by "hiding" stuff. I just think the bigger issue is the overall philosophy of being smart, running the ball, not turning it over, and riding the defense to win games. Not pretty, but it's been very effective.

However, do I expect to see wrinkles and or more aggressive play by the offense this week? Yes.

Last game when Harvin was in we looked good but when he went out we struggled. Baldwin was talking about this on KJR. He said the two weeks prior Harvin got all the snaps in the slot so when he went out it shuffled our receiving corp into a mode we hadn't practiced for. Add that to some of the worst weather conditions of the year and Bush out there head hunting and it really is no surprise we struggled some.

Half and half.

I think we have high reward plays available to use that we haven't touched, with high risk attached to them. However, if our defense continues to hold teams to 50 yards and 3 points per quarter, we still won't see them used.
On the other hand, if we have the ball and need to score, they'll be used, they'll be unseen and they'll be damaging.

Take a look at the Tampa game, once we went 21 down in the second half these are our offensive stats:

Wilson 14/17 181 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT (we drove to the TB 3 before he threw his first career red zone INT)
He had a further incomplete pass that was flagged as DPI for 29 yards

We also rushed for 112 yards on 20 carries.


I suspect that if it came down to it, we could capably play more aggressive, and with the bonus of rarely being in that situation, would be able to catch defenses by surprise. This is of course based on our ability to drive down the field at the end of the first half, the TB comeback and last season's Atlanta and Chicago games. I still feel we could have done the same in SF had the Niners not devastated the clock (I think we may be more aggressive against SF to prevent this happening again) and who knows how the Arizona game would have gone had they (correctly) called the game-ending INT as an incomplete pass

The only card PC is hiding is the Percy Harvin card, and that's not by his choice.

themunn":uyxjc4pp said:

Half and half.

I think we have high reward plays available to use that we haven't touched, with high risk attached to them. However, if our defense continues to hold teams to 50 yards and 3 points per quarter, we still won't see them used.
On the other hand, if we have the ball and need to score, they'll be used, they'll be unseen and they'll be damaging.

Take a look at the Tampa game, once we went 21 down in the second half these are our offensive stats:

Wilson 14/17 181 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT (we drove to the TB 3 before he threw his first career red zone INT)
He had a further incomplete pass that was flagged as DPI for 29 yards

We also rushed for 112 yards on 20 carries.


I suspect that if it came down to it, we could capably play more aggressive, and with the bonus of rarely being in that situation, would be able to catch defenses by surprise. This is of course based on our ability to drive down the field at the end of the first half, the TB comeback and last season's Atlanta and Chicago games. I still feel we could have done the same in SF had the Niners not devastated the clock (I think we may be more aggressive against SF to prevent this happening again) and who knows how the Arizona game would have gone had they (correctly) called the game-ending INT as an incomplete pass

Click to expand...

Yeah...the Tampa game was, for one, against Tampa, and for two before a 5 week long trend of playing conservatively and then expecting Russell to flip a switch in the fourth quarter and make pivotal plays when the entire world knows we're passing. As this has gone on, my feeling is that Russ has gotten worse and worse at being able to flip that switch, which makes sense to me. All game long he's playing with hesitancy, and then in an instant he's supposed to adopt the opposite mentality.

I think we can win the game and I think that Russ can still make the key play if need be (he did it vs the Saints). But we aren't creating an advantage by hiding our passing offense. Any advantage we might create there is outweighed IMO by then asking an out of rythm QB to then put it all on his shoulders during the final minutes after having been a game manager for 3.5 quarters. Last year I looked forward to Russell in the fourth quarter. This year I'm nowhere near as confident and I don't think it's all his fault.

I think flyinggreg is exactly right. the offense hasn't been scoring a lot of points lately. But they also have a +20 turnover margin for the regular season, with Russell throwing 9 picks and losing 5 fumbles. Those are outstanding numbers and winning the turnover battle on a consistent basis is still a winning recipe in the NFL.

I think Pete puts a lot more weight on taking care of the football than most other coaches when he grades his quarterbacks . That's why russell can stand up there at the podium smiling confident and relaxed after throwing for 103 yards. He knows he did he was asked to do and the team won.

Offense scored 23 points on Januarary 11th vs the Saints.

Offense scored 27 points on December 2nd vs the Saints.

Frankly, I think its a trifecta of things working together.

#1 Facing some tough defenses, 4 of which, gave us their A games in physicality.

#2 Necessity, some times you need to go ALL OUT and attack, others you need to Protect The Lead, not force something into an opportunity for the opponents.

#3 I think the Seahawks know what they're doing, they understand the situation they're in, it wouldn't have surprised if they put the offense on leash, only to let it loose in the two most important games moving forward.

I think Russell Wilson will dominant the 49ers (compared to recent performances), I think he'll have full go to use his legs to take over without the hesitation and 2nd guessing. I think he'll key in on those WR matchups more and take more chances with the jumpball throws we would dominate at.

I also believe Bevell will mix it up for Wilson, and put everything together that we've seen or haven't seen the last month or so. Getting Tate involved in the screen, Luke Willson in the slot, MRob and Turbo running a wheel route, HB passes to Lynch (maybe a flea flicker), downfield bombs to Kearse, and Miller eating up the zone.

I think Bevell will give Wilson all the opportunity to succeed in this game, and that's mixing an effective run game with a great short to intermediate passing game (fully utilizing RBs and TEs) while taking all the necessary kill shots down the field with our WRS + Willson.

Happy":4lykgne3 said:

I think flyinggreg is exactly right. the offense hasn't been scoring a lot of points lately. But they also have a +20 turnover margin for the regular season, with Russell throwing 9 picks and losing 5 fumbles. Those are outstanding numbers and winning the turnover battle on a consistent basis is still a winning recipe in the NFL.

I think Pete puts a lot more weight on taking care of the football than most other coaches when he grades his quarterbacks . That's why russell can stand up there at the podium smiling confident and relaxed after throwing for 103 yards. He knows he did he was asked to do and the team won.

Click to expand...

That sounds exactly like a Niner fan describing Alex Smith or a description of Marty ball. That's not the worst thing in the world, but as a fan of those QBs or teams you have the niggling fear that at some point your passing offense will need to win a game, rather than just not lose a game.

It's prevent offense and you can win a ton of games that way. A lombardi? IMO, only if your D plays at a 2000 Ravens clip. Which our defense is doing. And yet...doesn't Russell take care of the ball well enough naturally without needing further handcuff him? When he was flinging it around last year he wasn't a pick machine.

I can't really put my heart into complaining about it with the success we've had. I just don't want to be sent into the offseason with the lingering feeling that we blew our chance because we were playing an NFCC or SB caliber team, we went in with the prevent offense, and just ran up against a team where keeping it close and then asking Russell to emerge from a 3.5 quarter conservative shell finally did us in. We're already seeing games where the defense has to provide the offense multiple chances for game winning drives before the offense manages anything, so let me say I have far less faith in a 4th quarter drive if we only have the 1 shot at it. Last year it was the other way around, last year the offense would execute the game-winning drive and the defense would struggle in the final minutes. I think that's because a season of playing prevent and the loss of the #1 WR has rendered our O no longer clutch.

I hope they incorporate the TE into more plays. Zach Miller was a monster last year in the playoffs. Luke Willson had a big play for TD against the 49ers in SF and then they stopped utilizing him and TE the rest of the game. They have talented TEs...need to call plays to them more and get them into games.

hawk45,

I think the difference is in russell's case he is capable of quite a bit more, whereas someone like alex smith, being a good game manager with the occasional scramble is all he brings to the table. His red zone accuracy is atrocious! But yeah I certainly understand where you're coming from and it is unnerving!

I firmly believe that the Hawks will do what it takes on offense to score on SF. I also believe that there is a small amount of rope-a-dope involved. It all depends on how things develop and I am not going to get into the details, but I think that the names we talk about tomorrow are Lynch, Baldwin and either Willson or Miller. That Lynch will have 140 combined yards and that there will be things we haven't seen all season.

I also get the feeling that Turbin might be a big factor in a play or two. He seems to break a run or two in every game he has played against SF. He had one called back in SF, last year he had a big one when the Niners knew it was coming and in SF he dropped a TD pass on a swing route where he was open. There is just something I see about him against SF.

I agree with you Happy, RW is capable of putting up points AND taking care of the ball. In Smith's case I think his own limitations dictate things. In RW's case, it's dictated by a D playing historically well, a pretty good run game, either injured OL or injured #1 WR, and so on. So I can't 100% just kill the strategy. It's just taking years off my life.

@loaf I'd like to think the Hawks will do what it takes to score on SF but 5 weeks of history makes me unsure. All I feel I can count on right now is that the Hawks will do what it takes to not turn the ball over on offense. Without multiple turnovers...

But at Century Link I think we can get the multiple turnovers. Oh please oh please. Because to avoid multiple turnovers I think SF would have to play prevent offense themselves. In which case I think eventually with special teams and such our offense would still find itself on a short enough field a few times.

The defense always get mutiple turnovers. The problem is, the offense fails to convert those TOs into TDs lately.

You dominate with the run, you dominate.

RichNhansom":26kt67yf said:

Last game when Harvin was in we looked good but when he went out we struggled. Baldwin was talking about this on KJR. He said the two weeks prior Harvin got all the snaps in the slot so when he went out it shuffled our receiving corp into a mode we hadn't practiced for. Add that to some of the worst weather conditions of the year and Bush out there head hunting and it really is no surprise we struggled some.

Click to expand...

I'm disappointed, but not exactly surprised, that Baldwin is being a bitch about losing playing time. I kinda wish sometimes he would have more of a "nose to the ground, I'll do what I can for the team" attitude.

Vanilla and ultraconservative playcalling won't cut it in this game until you get a huge lead. I'm not saying huge and stupid risks either. Ditch the predictability over the next 2 games and Seattle will be hoisting the Lombardi on he late evening of Feb 2nd!

Captain Obvious reporting for duty here, being without Harvin is far from best case scenario, but at least this week we don't have to all doo doo in our shorts when an offense that only seemed to run through Harvin now has to play a second half without him. In the Saints game it kind of balanced out I guess because his contribution led to some scoring. But I was pretty rocked when he went out the second time and so was Bevell and the rest of our passing offense it seemed to me.

I think it might be wise, if we were to advance to the SB, to balance out the targets MUCH more, because the safety always being over top of Harvin will be looking to kill him (but not providing help vs. Tate and Kearse). I'm at the point where I think Harvin is safer on kick returns than catching passes, and he can still have a huge effect there.

hawk45":77vs0u3r said:

themunn":77vs0u3r said:

Half and half.

I think we have high reward plays available to use that we haven't touched, with high risk attached to them. However, if our defense continues to hold teams to 50 yards and 3 points per quarter, we still won't see them used.
On the other hand, if we have the ball and need to score, they'll be used, they'll be unseen and they'll be damaging.

Take a look at the Tampa game, once we went 21 down in the second half these are our offensive stats:

Wilson 14/17 181 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT (we drove to the TB 3 before he threw his first career red zone INT)
He had a further incomplete pass that was flagged as DPI for 29 yards

We also rushed for 112 yards on 20 carries.


I suspect that if it came down to it, we could capably play more aggressive, and with the bonus of rarely being in that situation, would be able to catch defenses by surprise. This is of course based on our ability to drive down the field at the end of the first half, the TB comeback and last season's Atlanta and Chicago games. I still feel we could have done the same in SF had the Niners not devastated the clock (I think we may be more aggressive against SF to prevent this happening again) and who knows how the Arizona game would have gone had they (correctly) called the game-ending INT as an incomplete pass

Click to expand...

Yeah...the Tampa game was, for one, against Tampa, and for two before a 5 week long trend of playing conservatively and then expecting Russell to flip a switch in the fourth quarter and make pivotal plays when the entire world knows we're passing. As this has gone on, my feeling is that Russ has gotten worse and worse at being able to flip that switch, which makes sense to me. All game long he's playing with hesitancy, and then in an instant he's supposed to adopt the opposite mentality.

I think we can win the game and I think that Russ can still make the key play if need be (he did it vs the Saints). But we aren't creating an advantage by hiding our passing offense. Any advantage we might create there is outweighed IMO by then asking an out of rythm QB to then put it all on his shoulders during the final minutes after having been a game manager for 3.5 quarters. Last year I looked forward to Russell in the fourth quarter. This year I'm nowhere near as confident and I don't think it's all his fault.

Click to expand...

Tampa have a pretty good defense though, their biggest weaknesses were penalties (over 1000 yards given up on both offense AND defense, the only team to do so) and a crappy offense putting the D on the field regularly (last in yards per game, second last in 3rd down conversions, 3rd last in points scored).

The three-and-outs are coming because Wilson refuses to throw interceptions. I just summed up the Seahawks offense.

Russell Wilson is conservative and has simply started meeting more teams who know how to keep him in the pocket. We have to recognize just how much of Wilson's success has come from him leaving the pocket and either running for a first down or hitting a scrambling WR open downfield. It's a huge chunk. In the last month or so, he hasn't had much of that. Defenses have given him only his pocket. And when he's in anything but a broad, wide-open pocket, he's not going to perform as well.

BECAUSE HE'S SHORT.

Yeah, I'm goin' there. What we have right now is how Russell Wilson is probably always going to be. He's short. He can't see over his offensive line. It's going to make sideline strikes and swing throws more comfortable for him, slants and crosses more dicey, and work between the hashes flat-out dangerous. It's no surprise to me that the game plan is distributed accordingly. He's also very conservative. He doesn't make "2004/2006 Hasselbeck throws" into double coverage. It just never happens. The tight ends won't be there because Pete (not Bevell) is constantly looking for the big play and thus has play-action as a huge component of the playbook, which means few TEs and RBs being released for outlet routes and instead getting kept in to block.

Combine all these factors and you have a QB who's feast-or-famine, maddeningly conservative, constantly making his O-line look bad by not getting the ball out, and has his worst brought out by defensive front sevens with the ability to keep him in the pocket. Why do you think we traded for a short, frail receiver known mostly for his prowess in swing passes and YAC? Percy Harvin is an answer to Wilson's height. He gives his QB, and thus the offense, breathing room.

We can upgrade at guard a bit perhaps, and get that big-bodied WR who can make automatic red-zone catches on any ball thrown his way. But after this year, I don't see much more room for upgrade. QB is the bottleneck of offensive talent; his abilities always dictate the playbook. Leave Bevell alone. Wilson's conservatism and limited vision requires his O-line to block for eight seconds regularly. Leave the O-line alone. Our receivers could be improved in the height and red-zone department, but they still have to be seen by the passer. Leave the WR's alone.

This is Russell Wilson; this is what we have in him. I think we'd better start getting used to it. And from the 26-9 record he's posted so far, I think we're pretty well off.