Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Luke Willson added to 53 - FIVE Tight Ends????

The Original Seattle Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute for Seahawks Talk, News, Rumors, Trades, and Analytics. LANGUAGE: PG-13
  • Field Gulls report

    Maybe those suggesting a sandbagging strategy are right?

    Is PC/Schotty going to open up the offense and start actually using the TE's?

    Do they have a "playoffs" gameplan they've been practicing?
    renofox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1442
    Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:20 pm
    Location: Reno, NV


  • Short passing game and pounding the Rock, please.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17116
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.
    hoxrox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1733
    Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:29 pm


  • Perhaps Olsen is not really ready? He might have come back too soon. Plantar fascia injuries can be tricky.
    sutz
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 21630
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:41 am
    Location: Kent, WA


  • We have the spot and Luuuuukkkke ol'd double L. Is what we call a GLUE guy. Love having him on the roster for the push.
    gowazzu02
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1879
    Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 10:32 am


  • hoxrox wrote:Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.


    Reed was a limited participant in practice today. Both he and Adams were so that's moving in the positive direction for his chances to play on Saturday.

    Back to the topic, I can see Willson as a lead blocker (H-back or fullback) for Carson/Penny/Hyde. So in a way it makes sense.
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7955
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Maybe we'll see some of those heavy packages we use to see with Fant?
    Polk738
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 534
    Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 7:04 pm


  • hoxrox wrote:Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.


    Snacks didn't want to be here. He asked for his release and the Seahawks granted his request.

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3688
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:38 pm


  • Chapow wrote:
    hoxrox wrote:Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.


    Snacks didn't want to be here. He asked for his release and the Seahawks granted his request.

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


    Let’s not revise history. He made that request AFTER the Seahawks decided they were not going to have him Active for game day. We were already thin at DT and to make that call was stupid at the time, and still stupid today. He was scoring a 80+ as a run stopper on PFF and you have to find a way to get that player on the field. This wasn’t Snacks, this was Pete Carroll’s doing.
    ludakrishna
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1704
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 10:40 am
    Location: Washington DC


  • hawkfan68 wrote:
    hoxrox wrote:Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.


    Reed was a limited participant in practice today. Both he and Adams were so that's moving in the positive direction for his chances to play on Saturday.

    Back to the topic, I can see Willson as a lead blocker (H-back or fullback) for Carson/Penny/Hyde. So in a way it makes sense.


    Isn't Luke like 6'5" 220? its gonna be hard to block as a FB being that lanky.

    I was also dumbfounded when snacks wanted a release. all i can think of is him being a malcontent if he doesn't start "I want out" and Pete letting him go. wish he didn't go to the Packers though.
    Muzz
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 16
    Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 12:28 am


  • hawkfan68 wrote:
    hoxrox wrote:Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.


    Reed was a limited participant in practice today. Both he and Adams were so that's moving in the positive direction for his chances to play on Saturday.

    Back to the topic, I can see Willson as a lead blocker (H-back or fullback) for Carson/Penny/Hyde. So in a way it makes sense.


    That makes no sense to me at all. Why the hell do we still have Bellore on the team if we’re not going to use him at that position?
    ludakrishna
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1704
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 10:40 am
    Location: Washington DC


  • ludakrishna wrote:
    hawkfan68 wrote:
    hoxrox wrote:Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.


    Reed was a limited participant in practice today. Both he and Adams were so that's moving in the positive direction for his chances to play on Saturday.

    Back to the topic, I can see Willson as a lead blocker (H-back or fullback) for Carson/Penny/Hyde. So in a way it makes sense.


    That makes no sense to me at all. Why the hell do we still have Bellore on the team if we’re not going to use him at that position?


    It makes sense. That's just the way PC operates. Bellore is a ST pro bowler. Thus he on the team. I think that PC believes that Willson is a better blocker than Bellore. He's played Bellore a few times at FB only to stop using him there on a regular basis. Now the playoffs are here and making a move to add Willson to the active roster because they are going up against Aaron Donald and the Rams DL. Why is Parkinson still on the active roster is the real question.
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7955
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • hoxrox wrote:Ehh would have preferred Snacks, especially if Jarran Reed is out. We lose to the Rams only if we can't shut down their running game.

    Another TE doesn't really make sense. I don't think they've been sandbagging, but would love to be wrong.


    Mone and poona better than reed in run stuffing. That's why they let go of snacks.
    jamescasey1124
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 732
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2020 12:36 am


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Short passing game and pounding the Rock, please.



    They would be really successful if they employed this.
    jamescasey1124
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 732
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2020 12:36 am


  • Willson is still considered fairly speedy for a TE that can fight for yardage and block well. The move might be to protect the position as the playoffs start because management found it more of a priority at this moment. When multi-tight ends are on the field Luke Willson is a solid option in the short passing game.
    loafoftatupu
    I'M JIMMY!
     
    Posts: 6375
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:17 pm
    Location: Lake Tapps, WA


  • Athletic tight end types tend to make for good ST coverage depth.
    Appyhawk
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 2009
    Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 8:43 pm
    Location: Ranch in Flint Hills of Kansas, formerly NW Montana.


  • My take on this move is, the Seahawks are going to run more twin TE sets. Be it for running or passing I'm not sure whitch one, it mite be to confuse their LBers and keep them guessing.

    Cheers
    Last edited by Chawker on Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
    Chawker
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3168
    Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:18 am
    Location: corner of 30th & plum.


  • Hedging a bet of Olsen being healthy or not, run game they may use two TE sets a lot more with a receiving TE on both edges and try to make the Rams honor the flat routes and not bull rush.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 34850
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Chawker wrote:My take on this move is, the Seahawks are going to run more twin TE sets. Be it for running or passing I'm not sure whitch one, it mite to confuse their LBers and keep them guessing.

    Cheers

    I kind of figure they might have in mind what NY did to us if the running game doesn't work early. Go heavy formations with 2/3/4 TE and run "goal line" plays down their throats. And I wouldn't wait til the 3d Qtr to do it, either.
    sutz
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 21630
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:41 am
    Location: Kent, WA




It is currently Wed Feb 24, 2021 10:43 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ SEATTLE SEAHAWKS FOOTBALL ]




Information
  • Who is online