Another loss where the Hawks ran at will

[Seahawk Sailor]

they gashed us on the run. we stuff them and we win.

not hating on our defense, just telling the truth.

Yep. But we did run at will too. And one can just as easily argue we catch even a couple of key balls and we win handily.

 

[pehawk]

Did we really "run at will" this game? Either way, give the hawks those 4 dropped pases and I guarentee you you're not making this post.

Yes, the Hawks did run at will. And, if the Hawks had caught those, chances are I wouldn't have made the post. But, THE POINT WAS HOW ODD IT IS TO RUN SO WELL AAAANNNNDDDD LOSE.

If you cant read, dont post. Or, get your husband to sound it out for you.

Maybe on first and second down, but I don't think that when it mattered the Hawks were able to get what they wanted done. When you say "run at will" are you just talking about yards per rush or our total for the game (on the groudn)?

Anyway you look at it. Its very telling the Hawks have lost 2 games, where they rushed WELL. That means something's wrong, the identity of this team is running the ball, yet 2 times it hasn't worked.

It's odd.

 

[endzorn]

Seems to me the offense will run down a team's throat until they are on the fringe of field goal range and then the playcalling shifts away from the I-formation and power sets into a lot of single back (which we do not run well out of) and empty back shotgun and we trip over our own feet.

Running back screens have to become part of the offense...have to...have to, have to. Those WR screens are good for nothing. Wilson will take a lot of blame for the second half, but San Fran brought pressure and it was getting home so Bevell went max-protect in passing situations and sent three into routes. The few times they showed the endzone angle our three WRs were covered way too tight for Wilson to make a throw. A couple RB screens would ease the blitzing, possibly grab some chunk yardage.

When you run the ball like we are capable of running then you cannot outsmart yourself when points are at a premium.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

I think the difference is in the details:

We run the ball.

We can only run the ball.

In games where we do the former, we win. In games where we do the latter, we lose.

 

[pehawk]

Seems to me the offense will run down a team's throat until they are on the fringe of field goal range and then the playcalling shifts away from the I-formation and power sets into a lot of single back (which we do not run well out of) and empty back shotgun and we trip over our own feet.

Running back screens have to become part of the offense...have to...have to, have to. Those WR screens are good for nothing. Wilson will take a lot of blame for the second half, but San Fran brought pressure and it was getting home so Bevell went max-protect in passing situations and sent three into routes. The few times they showed the endzone angle our three WRs were covered way too tight for Wilson to make a throw. A couple RB screens would ease the blitzing, possibly grab some chunk yardage.

When you run the ball like we are capable of running then you cannot outsmart yourself when points are at a premium.

Thank you, endzorn. Even though it makes me angry, knowing why im angry helps.

 

[Beer Hawk]

Seems to me the offense will run down a team's throat until they are on the fringe of field goal range and then the playcalling shifts away from the I-formation and power sets into a lot of single back (which we do not run well out of) and empty back shotgun and we trip over our own feet.

Running back screens have to become part of the offense...have to...have to, have to. Those WR screens are good for nothing. Wilson will take a lot of blame for the second half, but San Fran brought pressure and it was getting home so Bevell went max-protect in passing situations and sent three into routes. The few times they showed the endzone angle our three WRs were covered way too tight for Wilson to make a throw. A couple RB screens would ease the blitzing, possibly grab some chunk yardage.

When you run the ball like we are capable of running then you cannot outsmart yourself when points are at a premium.

Thank you, endzorn. Even though it makes me angry, knowing why im angry helps.

Kealy: Where art thou?

What was our rushing yardage on 3rd down? It's completely conceivable that we could have amassed 100andwhatever yards on 1st and 2nd down because we were playing a considerably better defense that was able to shut us down when it mattered. I am drunk, and MAY be totally ignorant, but "run at will" is not a title I think our running game was able to earn tonight.

As much as that hurts...

 

[HawkWow]

I have no idea (yet) of our yrds after contact, but I know there was an assload. I don't call that running at will. This running game we have is not as good as some here believe. Lynch works his sack off and that's why we gain yards on the ground. Contact is almost always immediate...you call that running at will?

SF ran at will in the second half. Huge gashes that let the lesser Gore look like the superstar he no longer is. IF Lynch ran through those truck sized holes SF made in our line, he would have topped 200. You see Gore falling to the ground to avoid contact after a nice run? Lynch probably would have scored on that same carry.

The sky is not falling and we have a real good, real young team. IF that is the best SF had to offer us tonite at their house....we will have our day with them. We need receivers, better playcaling and a road grader on the O-line. It's not amazing we lost. We got our runs on 1st and 2nd and the line couldn't get the yards when it mattered most. No, we didn't run at will and we typically don't. That's what pisses me off with Pete. He wants power football and fancies us as some smash mouth offense when in reality, only Lynch plays smashmouth and he can't do it all on his own.

 

[kf3339]

This teams offense just reminds me too much of my alma mater Fresno State under Pat Hill. He was an O-Line coach with the Patriots before hired to be the head coach.

He would each year build a great O-line and running game. Every year we could run the ball on pretty much any team. But we were so inconsistent in our passing attack that we could only win if we could keep the score down. That didn't happen much because our defense was usually bad.

So we had some good years, but nothing that really was what I consider a great year. We never won our league championship under Hill. We never made a major bowl game under Hill. We had a few memorable wins, but that was really it.

I do know that PC remarked how he was so impressed with how the Raiders steamrolled us in 2010 with their run game and how he wanted the same thing. I hope he just realizes that we do need a much better passing attack to even have a chance at a great season in this league. This is no blame on Wilson or the WR's/TE's. Just a comment about how similar our situation looks to my alma mater under Hill.

 

[manders2600]

You see Gore falling to the ground to avoid contact after a nice run? Lynch probably would have scored on that same carry.

I assume you are talking about Gore's last play in the game, before being sidelined and eventually going into the locker-room for X-Rays due to bruised ribs.

He sustained the injury two plays previously, came out for one play, then came back in and broke off a 22-yard run, going to the ground to protect himself. I thought it was pretty impressive, myself.

 

[bellingerga]

Love Wilson. But he lacks a short and intermediate passing game. Can learn a thing or two from smith and gore...

And, Alex Smith couldn't see over his line to hit ends. Right?

Uggh - this board really sucks at time.

Yeah I'm just not buying that it's all Wilsons fault.