I am hoping he is now in full game shape but I was at CES all week and haven't heard a thing.

Coach said in interview earlier in the week Lynch just keeps looking better as the days go by.

He is going to be much better, the guy needed to get a couple preseason games in, take some hits and get his legs moving with the play call. Lynch is the one thing that could really change the outlook of this game.

loafoftatupu wrote:He is going to be much better, the guy needed to get a couple preseason games in, take some hits and get his legs moving with the play call. Lynch is the one thing that could really change the outlook of this game.

He is going to be much better ?

loafoftatupu wrote:He is going to be much better, the guy needed to get a couple preseason games in, take some hits and get his legs moving with the play call. Lynch is the one thing that could really change the outlook of this game.

Unfortunately you are right but the change might not be in a good way.

I look forward to seeing play, he is good friends with Aaron and I am sure would love to have the last word in their match ups in the NFL team to team.

just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

Holy $h!t Eeyore. Give it a rest.

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

nothing we have shown in the weeks since Carson went down has indicated we can run the ball, nobody is stacking the box on us expecting Homer and Beast to have massive days. Most teams would be game planning on Russ, maybe your 3 year old granddaughter can explain to you the realities of our current situation and how game plans adjust

Lynch looked like a Boss this week.

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

Hey man, you should take a walk, and not come back. Go Hawks!

With our O-line problems, I'm gonna go wtih "run blocking is generally easier than pass blocking" and agree for the most part.

I don't expect 150 yards rushing, but if we can get to 75-90 yds or so, the play action might start to work. Trying to get Russ 3 seconds in the passing game will be a challenge. I'll expect a lot of rollouts.

I don't expect miracles from Beast Mode. He'll play hard, of course, but if he get 65 yards we should probably be happy. And if Homer can get to the edge, maybe he can make some people miss with his quicks.

GeekHawk wrote:Holy $h!t Eeyore. Give it a rest.

We keep hoping......

907Hawk wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

Hey man, you should take a walk, and not come back.

We keep hoping....

Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

I think the biggest takeaway here, and the thing that frustrated me in Dallas last year, is that Seattle needs to do better at making adjustments when they see what the defense is giving them.

nIdahoSeahawk wrote:

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

I think the biggest takeaway here, and the thing that frustrated me in Dallas last year, is that Seattle needs to do better at making adjustments when they see what the defense is giving them.

That I cannot argue. Pete has even said they stayed with the run too long in the Dallas game. However, Seattle dropped back 40 times last week and ran 17. They took what the defense gave them. If GB gives them the run, which Philly did not, the first time we gain 1 yard the screaming about "Pete ball" will immediately begin on our Gameday Forum and Seahawks twitter.

flmmkrz wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

nothing we have shown in the weeks since Carson went down has indicated we can run the ball, nobody is stacking the box on us expecting Homer and Beast to have massive days.⁷ Most teams would be game planning on Russ, maybe your 3 year old granddaughter can explain to you the realities of our current situation and how game plans adjust

My point was, I will explain again, against the eagles we did not come out with a plan for Wilson to do what he did. He was forced to do it because PCs original and normal game plan of run at all cost and throw long was not working. Now if you think that PC ever had a game plan from start to finish built around Wilson as the main focal point I still have that land and If you think we have a chance in hell if winning based on the old run at all cost throw long with our # 4 rb, and 2 guys off the street and 2-3 missing starting oline that land is still available.

As most teams game planning on Wilson ahh duh he is the best player on offense and the only one who scares the other team. The problem is game planning to stop him and stopping him are 2 different things if we are running Wilson's offense. So you are clear what I mean by Wilson's offense it is the changing tempo, layered routes quick passing offense. Oh and my granddaughter understood so you should too.

907Hawk wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

Hey man, you should take a walk, and not come back. Go Hawks!

Hey I heard that one in 3rd grade.

sutz wrote:With our O-line problems, I'm gonna go wtih "run blocking is generally easier than pass blocking" and agree for the most part.

I don't expect 150 yards rushing, but if we can get to 75-90 yds or so, the play action might start to work. Trying to get Russ 3 seconds in the passing game will be a challenge. I'll expect a lot of rollouts.

I don't expect miracles from Beast Mode. He'll play hard, of course, but if he get 65 yards we should probably be happy. And if Homer can get to the edge, maybe he can make some people miss with his quicks.

Hence the quick passing attack.

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

Congrats " the hawks will only win if they piut the ball in Wilson's hands" paraprased and said by Warner, cower, Sanders and about 40 others and ai could not have said it better myself.

nIdahoSeahawk wrote:

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

I think the biggest takeaway here, and the thing that frustrated me in Dallas last year, is that Seattle needs to do better at making adjustments when they see what the defense is giving them.

Agreed on adjustments luckily they didn't wait so long last game

John63 wrote:

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

Congrats " the hawks will only win if they pit tje ball on Wilson's hands" paraprashed and said hy Warner, cower, Sanders and about 40 others Md I could not have said it better myself.

Hmmm I bet all 40 of them or close to it said Baltimore would win today and take the whole thing, why I hate group think and the party line, intangibles and heart, a team that thought showing up was all they needed to do versus a hungry team that had been questioned and wrote off.

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

nothing we have shown in the weeks since Carson went down has indicated we can run the ball, nobody is stacking the box on us expecting Homer and Beast to have massive days.⁷ Most teams would be game planning on Russ, maybe your 3 year old granddaughter can explain to you the realities of our current situation and how game plans adjust

My point was, I will explain again, against the eagles we did not come out with a plan for Wilson to do what he did. He was forced to do it because PCs original and normal game plan of run at all cost and throw long was not working. Now if you think that PC ever had a game plan from start to finish built around Wilson as the main focal point I still have that land and If you think we have a chance in hell if winning based on the old run at all cost throw long with our # 4 rb, and 2 guys off the street and 2-3 missing starting oline that land is still available.

As most teams game planning on Wilson ahh duh he is the best player on offense and the only one who scares the other team. The problem is game planning to stop him and stopping him are 2 different things if we are running Wilson's offense. So you are clear what I mean by Wilson's offense it is the changing tempo, layered routes quick passing offense. Oh and my granddaughter understood so you should too.

Our first 10 plays were half run, half pass. After that it was largely pass. They had a fine gameplan.

Also, layered routes aren't quick-developing plays. I think I've pointed that out before and you just ignored me, but I figured I'd throw it in there again.

chris98251 wrote:

John63 wrote:

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

Congrats " the hawks will only win if they pit tje ball on Wilson's hands" paraprashed and said hy Warner, cower, Sanders and about 40 others Md I could not have said it better myself.

Hmmm I bet all 40 of them or close to it said Baltimore would win today and take the whole thing, why I hate group think and the party line, intangibles and heart, a team that thought showing up was all they needed to do versus a hungry team that had been questioned and wrote off.

Well know but it is probably the same % as the 2 the other poster said we will run to win. Which was my point.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:

John63 wrote:

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

nothing we have shown in the weeks since Carson went down has indicated we can run the ball, nobody is stacking the box on us expecting Homer and Beast to have massive days.⁷ Most teams would be game planning on Russ, maybe your 3 year old granddaughter can explain to you the realities of our current situation and how game plans adjust

My point was, I will explain again, against the eagles we did not come out with a plan for Wilson to do what he did. He was forced to do it because PCs original and normal game plan of run at all cost and throw long was not working. Now if you think that PC ever had a game plan from start to finish built around Wilson as the main focal point I still have that land and If you think we have a chance in hell if winning based on the old run at all cost throw long with our # 4 rb, and 2 guys off the street and 2-3 missing starting oline that land is still available.

As most teams game planning on Wilson ahh duh he is the best player on offense and the only one who scares the other team. The problem is game planning to stop him and stopping him are 2 different things if we are running Wilson's offense. So you are clear what I mean by Wilson's offense it is the changing tempo, layered routes quick passing offense. Oh and my granddaughter understood so you should too.

Our first 10 plays were half run, half pass. After that it was largely pass. They had a fine gameplan.

Also, layered routes aren't quick-developing plays. I think I've pointed that out before and you just ignored me, but I figured I'd throw it in there again.

Ahh layered routes can be quick developing depending on the routes. Given at least one is a short or a quick slant that would provide a quick pass now wouldn't it. So let's see a quick slant on one side , a 5- 7 yard down and In on the other side with a 10- 15 yard post, and a RB leaking out in the flat. Hmm we have a quick pass ability as well as layered what a concept something they did a lot last game though the routes changed of course but I am sure you get the idea.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:

John63 wrote:

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

nothing we have shown in the weeks since Carson went down has indicated we can run the ball, nobody is stacking the box on us expecting Homer and Beast to have massive days.⁷ Most teams would be game planning on Russ, maybe your 3 year old granddaughter can explain to you the realities of our current situation and how game plans adjust

My point was, I will explain again, against the eagles we did not come out with a plan for Wilson to do what he did. He was forced to do it because PCs original and normal game plan of run at all cost and throw long was not working. Now if you think that PC ever had a game plan from start to finish built around Wilson as the main focal point I still have that land and If you think we have a chance in hell if winning based on the old run at all cost throw long with our # 4 rb, and 2 guys off the street and 2-3 missing starting oline that land is still available.

As most teams game planning on Wilson ahh duh he is the best player on offense and the only one who scares the other team. The problem is game planning to stop him and stopping him are 2 different things if we are running Wilson's offense. So you are clear what I mean by Wilson's offense it is the changing tempo, layered routes quick passing offense. Oh and my granddaughter understood so you should too.

Our first 10 plays were half run, half pass. After that it was largely pass. They had a fine gameplan.

Also, layered routes aren't quick-developing plays. I think I've pointed that out before and you just ignored me, but I figured I'd throw it in there again.

you're better off explaining it to his granddaughter so she can explain it to him, she seems to be his go to for information

John63 wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:
nothing we have shown in the weeks since Carson went down has indicated we can run the ball, nobody is stacking the box on us expecting Homer and Beast to have massive days.⁷ Most teams would be game planning on Russ, maybe your 3 year old granddaughter can explain to you the realities of our current situation and how game plans adjust

My point was, I will explain again, against the eagles we did not come out with a plan for Wilson to do what he did. He was forced to do it because PCs original and normal game plan of run at all cost and throw long was not working. Now if you think that PC ever had a game plan from start to finish built around Wilson as the main focal point I still have that land and If you think we have a chance in hell if winning based on the old run at all cost throw long with our # 4 rb, and 2 guys off the street and 2-3 missing starting oline that land is still available.

As most teams game planning on Wilson ahh duh he is the best player on offense and the only one who scares the other team. The problem is game planning to stop him and stopping him are 2 different things if we are running Wilson's offense. So you are clear what I mean by Wilson's offense it is the changing tempo, layered routes quick passing offense. Oh and my granddaughter understood so you should too.

Our first 10 plays were half run, half pass. After that it was largely pass. They had a fine gameplan.

Also, layered routes aren't quick-developing plays. I think I've pointed that out before and you just ignored me, but I figured I'd throw it in there again.

Ahh layered routes can be quick developing depending on the routes. Given at least one is a short or a quick slant that would provide a quick pass now wouldn't it. So let's see a quick slant on one side , a 5- 7 yard down and In on the other side with a 10- 15 yard post, and a RB leaking out in the flat. Hmm we have a quick pass ability as well as layered what a concept something they did a lot last game though the routes changed of course but I am sure you get the idea.

"Having lots of routes in different parts of the field" is something that every offense does in every game on every play. Calling them "layered routes" is weird.

Also, posts aren't generally considered quick passing routes.

flmmkrz wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:
nothing we have shown in the weeks since Carson went down has indicated we can run the ball, nobody is stacking the box on us expecting Homer and Beast to have massive days.⁷ Most teams would be game planning on Russ, maybe your 3 year old granddaughter can explain to you the realities of our current situation and how game plans adjust

My point was, I will explain again, against the eagles we did not come out with a plan for Wilson to do what he did. He was forced to do it because PCs original and normal game plan of run at all cost and throw long was not working. Now if you think that PC ever had a game plan from start to finish built around Wilson as the main focal point I still have that land and If you think we have a chance in hell if winning based on the old run at all cost throw long with our # 4 rb, and 2 guys off the street and 2-3 missing starting oline that land is still available.

As most teams game planning on Wilson ahh duh he is the best player on offense and the only one who scares the other team. The problem is game planning to stop him and stopping him are 2 different things if we are running Wilson's offense. So you are clear what I mean by Wilson's offense it is the changing tempo, layered routes quick passing offense. Oh and my granddaughter understood so you should too.

Our first 10 plays were half run, half pass. After that it was largely pass. They had a fine gameplan.

Also, layered routes aren't quick-developing plays. I think I've pointed that out before and you just ignored me, but I figured I'd throw it in there again.

you're better off explaining it to his granddaughter so she can explain it to him, she seems to be his go to for information

Ahh there are some blissfully people on this forum.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

My point was, I will explain again, against the eagles we did not come out with a plan for Wilson to do what he did. He was forced to do it because PCs original and normal game plan of run at all cost and throw long was not working. Now if you think that PC ever had a game plan from start to finish built around Wilson as the main focal point I still have that land and If you think we have a chance in hell if winning based on the old run at all cost throw long with our # 4 rb, and 2 guys off the street and 2-3 missing starting oline that land is still available.

As most teams game planning on Wilson ahh duh he is the best player on offense and the only one who scares the other team. The problem is game planning to stop him and stopping him are 2 different things if we are running Wilson's offense. So you are clear what I mean by Wilson's offense it is the changing tempo, layered routes quick passing offense. Oh and my granddaughter understood so you should too.

Our first 10 plays were half run, half pass. After that it was largely pass. They had a fine gameplan.

Also, layered routes aren't quick-developing plays. I think I've pointed that out before and you just ignored me, but I figured I'd throw it in there again.

Ahh layered routes can be quick developing depending on the routes. Given at least one is a short or a quick slant that would provide a quick pass now wouldn't it. So let's see a quick slant on one side , a 5- 7 yard down and In on the other side with a 10- 15 yard post, and a RB leaking out in the flat. Hmm we have a quick pass ability as well as layered what a concept something they did a lot last game though the routes changed of course but I am sure you get the idea.

"Having lots of routes in different parts of the field" is something that every offense does in every game on every play. Calling them "layered routes" is weird.

Also, posts aren't generally considered quick passing routes.

And as usual you read what you wanted out of the post and missed the quick slant part, fyi as to the different routes etc and yet every game we have multitude receivers in the same area hmm. If you dont you don't understand the concept of layered routes well I just explained it but I kmow it does not for your narrative.

John63 wrote:

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:Hey John63:

..........the Packers will probably dare the Seahawks to run. (If they do) the Seahawks will have to prove they can, at least to a certain extent. Anyone who doesn’t like this needs to realize one point. A year ago some of you complained Seattle played into Dallas’ hands by running into a defensive wall determined to take away the running game. If the Packers are determined to take away the deep pass and contain Wilson’s scrambling in this game, wouldn’t aiming to throw into thick coverage over and over again be making the same mistake?

Quoted from Rob Staton because I couldn't have said it better myself

Congrats " the hawks will only win if they pit tje ball on Wilson's hands" paraprashed and said hy Warner, cower, Sanders and about 40 others Md I could not have said it better myself.

Jesus. What? You could have said a lot of that better yourself.

John63 wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:
Our first 10 plays were half run, half pass. After that it was largely pass. They had a fine gameplan.

Also, layered routes aren't quick-developing plays. I think I've pointed that out before and you just ignored me, but I figured I'd throw it in there again.

Ahh layered routes can be quick developing depending on the routes. Given at least one is a short or a quick slant that would provide a quick pass now wouldn't it. So let's see a quick slant on one side , a 5- 7 yard down and In on the other side with a 10- 15 yard post, and a RB leaking out in the flat. Hmm we have a quick pass ability as well as layered what a concept something they did a lot last game though the routes changed of course but I am sure you get the idea.

"Having lots of routes in different parts of the field" is something that every offense does in every game on every play. Calling them "layered routes" is weird.

Also, posts aren't generally considered quick passing routes.

and yet every game we have multitude receivers in the same area hmm.

What kind of statement is this? Wow. "Multiple receivers in the same area." You have any more information on tendencies, like how often, in what situation, and what packages they're being run out of? Because I'd like to get off the Pop Warner level here.

Actually...never mind. You've successfully baited everyone into derailing yet another thread and I won't be indulging you any longer.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

John63 wrote:
Ahh layered routes can be quick developing depending on the routes. Given at least one is a short or a quick slant that would provide a quick pass now wouldn't it. So let's see a quick slant on one side , a 5- 7 yard down and In on the other side with a 10- 15 yard post, and a RB leaking out in the flat. Hmm we have a quick pass ability as well as layered what a concept something they did a lot last game though the routes changed of course but I am sure you get the idea.

"Having lots of routes in different parts of the field" is something that every offense does in every game on every play. Calling them "layered routes" is weird.

Also, posts aren't generally considered quick passing routes.

and yet every game we have multitude receivers in the same area hmm.

What kind of statement is this? Wow. "Multiple receivers in the same area." You have any more information on tendencies, like how often, in what situation, and what packages they're being run out of? Because I'd like to get off the Pop Warner level here.

Actually...never mind. You've successfully baited everyone into derailing yet another thread and I won't be indulging you any longer.

R I g h t I derailed it. Lol blissfull as the rest

Reminds me of a gnat buzzing ceaselessly around the ear.

No useful content.

Just that high frequency buzzzzzz.

Jville wrote:Reminds me of a gnat buzzing ceaselessly around the ear.

No useful content.

Just that high frequency buzzzzzz.

You just described 75% of the people on here.

John63 wrote:

907Hawk wrote:

John63 wrote:

flmmkrz wrote:just a gut feel but I think this is the week they unleash the beast. I don't think they thought the run game was going to get them anything vs the eagles, and the way Cox played it wouldn't have so they game planned around Russ and just threw the backs in to keep the eagles honest. I think this week with everybody expecting all the weight to fall on Russ's shoulders, we are gonna see a big breakout run game. I think we see more beast than we have and it is going to catch the pack unprepared.

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

Hey man, you should take a walk, and not come back. Go Hawks!

Hey I heard that one in 3rd grade.

Fair enough, your posts are trash and you sound senile, is the adult enough for you.

907Hawk wrote:

John63 wrote:

907Hawk wrote:

John63 wrote:

I have some land in Siberia I would like to sell you. Its PC everyone I cludung my 3 year old granddaughter knows he wants to run, we would not surprise anyone.

Hey man, you should take a walk, and not come back. Go Hawks!

Hey I heard that one in 3rd grade.

Fair enough, your posts are trash and you sound senile, is the adult enough for you.

Nope sounds like a 4th grader. Let me help you,

I don't enjoy or agree with your posts and feel you are not thinking right, however you have a right to your opinion.

Fyi I dont like or agree with much of what you post but that is your right.

Enough