7 games 31 sacks

[RiverDog]

Was it my imagination, or did they have Wilson drop back further this last games than in previous games?
I seem to remember him in the shotgun and taking another 5 or 7 step drop upon occasion.
That might help give him more time and room until the OL starts protecting more consistently.

I remember an announcer in the SC game mentioning how deep he got on bootlegs, but not on his standard 7 step drop. Especially given his height, Russell could really benefit from a deeper drop.

[Hawktawk]

An interesting question. I do not know the intricacies of quarterback drops, but supposedly the deeper drop gives receivers more time to run routes, and more time for the quarterback to scan the field, but it also seems to me that it gives the onrushing linemen more time to attack the QB. With a weak pass protection, this could be a boon for the defenses. The QB is stepping backward, which is slower than the DE (or whoever) is able to generate, so some of the advantage is negated.

Personally, I would like to see more quick release passes from Russell, to keep defenses at bay, which would make his longer developing plays more effective. But, what can I say, I am old and slow.

The beautiful dime Russ dropped on Lockette last game came from a 10 yard drop. So did the killer dagger in the "you mad bro" 2012 game vs NE. Also the OT dagger to Kearse in the NFC title game last season. Russ loves the deep ball off the deep drop off of play action and he is very effective. I dont know why they dont call it more often. Its the short routes out of a 3 step drop that give him problems in part due to his lack of height. See SB 49 as exhibit A. Not that he is horrible at them but he is tied with Aaron Rogers for the highest completion percentage of balls thrown over 20 yards in the air and the Hawks need to play to that strength.

[RiverDog]

The beautiful dime Russ dropped on Lockette last game came from a 10 yard drop. So did the killer dagger in the "you mad bro" 2012 game vs NE. Also the OT dagger to Kearse in the NFC title game last season. Russ loves the deep ball off the deep drop off of play action and he is very effective. I dont know why they dont call it more often. Its the short routes out of a 3 step drop that give him problems in part due to his lack of height. See SB 49 as exhibit A. Not that he is horrible at them but he is tied with Aaron Rogers for the highest completion percentage of balls thrown over 20 yards in the air and the Hawks need to play to that strength.

The issue here is Russell's vision, and as you noted, it seems a lot better when he's well beyond a 7 step drop depth. But I don't think the really short drop, the 3 step drop, is as much a problem for him because it's so quick that the DL hasn't had a chance to get vertical after their initial charge like they do on a 5 or 7 step drop. And if you're referring to the infamous last play of SB 49, that wasn't a 3 step drop, he was in a shotgun.

But I agree with your point, that Russell seems to excel when he's deep in the pocket, and as much as the Kool Aiders hate to admit it, his height does hinder his field vision when he's in the pocket and the deeper drops tend to negate that somewhat and that we need to "play to that strength."

To OBS's comment about the pass rush on a deeper drop, he has a good point in that the deeper drop puts a lot more pressure on our OT as the shallower angle required for a speed rushing DE increases their ability to maneuver. They can't simply push them to the outside like they can when the QB steps up into the pocket on a 7 step drop. But IMO the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, and I'd like to see Russell further back in the pocket more often.

[Hawktawk]

The issue here is Russell's vision, and as you noted, it seems a lot better when he's well beyond a 7 step drop depth. But I don't think the really short drop, the 3 step drop, is as much a problem for him because it's so quick that the DL hasn't had a chance to get vertical after their initial charge like they do on a 5 or 7 step drop. And if you're referring to the infamous last play of SB 49, that wasn't a 3 step drop, he was in a shotgun.

But I agree with your point, that Russell seems to excel when he's deep in the pocket, and as much as the Kool Aiders hate to admit it, his height does hinder his field vision when he's in the pocket and the deeper drops tend to negate that somewhat and that we need to "play to that strength."

To OBS's comment about the pass rush on a deeper drop, he has a good point in that the deeper drop puts a lot more pressure on our OT as the shallower angle required for a speed rushing DE increases their ability to maneuver. They can't simply push them to the outside like they can when the QB steps up into the pocket on a 7 step drop. But IMO the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, and I'd like to see Russell further back in the pocket more often.

Its unquestionable that a 6'5" qb has an advantage in seeing the field over a sub 6' player, although both have to climb the pocket and find throwing lanes.. But its interesting that Wilsons real strength as a passer is the deep routes, deep seam routes and out patterns, much like Drew Brees. Wilsons mobility, arm strength and accuracy is amazing and more than compensates for his lack of height but Id still like to see them take more shots with the excellent weapons they have now.

[RiverDog]

Its unquestionable that a 6'5" qb has an advantage in seeing the field over a sub 6' player, although both have to climb the pocket and find throwing lanes.. But its interesting that Wilsons real strength as a passer is the deep routes, deep seam routes and out patterns, much like Drew Brees. Wilsons mobility, arm strength and accuracy is amazing and more than compensates for his lack of height but Id still like to see them take more shots with the excellent weapons they have now.

You and me might think it's unquestionable, but there are some that say his height makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.

And I agree with you, I'd like to see him take a few more shots downfield. Russell doesn't have an elephant gun arm like Kaepernick or Newton, but he has what I would call an excellent arm and gets the ball out there plenty deep enough and with more than adequate velocity, shows better touch on the deep ball than the two aforementioned quarterbacks.

[burrrton]

You and me might think it's unquestionable, but there are some that say his height makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.

I doubt anybody would argue he sees the field just as well as a 6'4" QB- most of my defense is that the difference between RW at 5'11" and a "six foot" QB would be within the margin of error.

And I think I'm vindicated in that- his stats from within the pocket are as good as any QB in the league that doesn't already have space being cleared in Canton for him.

[Hawktawk]

And I agree with you, I'd like to see him take a few more shots downfield. Russell doesn't have an elephant gun arm like Kaepernick or Newton, but he has what I would call an excellent arm and gets the ball out there plenty deep enough and with more than adequate velocity, shows better touch on the deep ball than the two aforementioned quarterbacks.[/quote]

The bazooka is all Newton and Kap can throw.
Actually I don't doubt for one minute Wilson has as strong an arm as the other 2 guys or pretty much anyone in the league. The balls he throws deep have plenty of velocity albeit with an incredible amount of arc. The 3 I mentioned were amazing but in 2013 at AZ I saw him flip the ball over his shoulder on the same trajectory 50+ yards to Rice for a TD while running at a dead sprint away from the line of scrimmage under extreme duress. Russ has one of the most beautiful deep balls in the game. He can also smoke an out route, back shoulder, whatever. As you say he has touch.

[c_hawkbob]

Looking at other years we also have struggled in letting Wilson get sacked, but no where near as bad as this year. I took the stats for each respective year and posted the stats for number times sacked, rank, and sack per drop back to pass (#sacked/(pass attempt+#sacked)):

2014:
Wilson was sacked 42 times (ranked 6th worst), sacked ~8.5%

2013:
Wilson was sacked 44 times (tied 3rd worst), sacked ~9.75%
(in sack totals this year he was tied with Matt Ryan, but Ryans sack% was only ~6.33%)

2012:
Wilson was sacked 33 times (12th worst), sacked ~7.74%

2011:
Jackson was sacked 42 times (2nd worst), sacked ~8.53%


Now this year so far through 7 games we have:

Wilson sacked 31 times (Worst in NFL), sacked ~13.2%, on pace for 71 sacks this season.

Now undoubtedly, having BeastMode Back should help a lot but these numbers are ridiculous. One other thing to consider though is that in general there appears to be much more sacks so far this season than usual. Maybe if I'm bored later I will determine an adjustment metric (perhaps how many times Wilson is sacked as a league percentage of all sacks or something). Now I'm going to start prepping dinner and get ready for TNF.

*all stats can be found on http://www.nfl.com/stats/player except for the sack percentage, as I explained previously how these rates were determined.

Just wanted to say welcome aboard Em-B, you look like a nice addition to the forum.

[Zorn76]

Nice post, Emerald.

The sacks are at a ridiculous rate, and we're on pace to break the 40+ we've seen that last couple seasons in just 3 more games.

It's tiresome, but the F.O. needs to keep drafting for the position until there is some semblance of a line. It's the biggest factor that will keep us from either making or going far in the playoffs this year.

[savvyman]

Seattle's offensive line ranks 30th in the NFL in pass protection and last in run blocking according to Pro Football Focus.

Does not get much worse than that.


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25358628/agents-take-megaton-to-the-panthers-and-six-other-bold-trade-hypotheticals

[HumanCockroach]

You were saying?

[NorthHawk]

It was horrible and unbecoming of a team that expects to challenge for a championship.

[RiverDog]

You were saying?

I wouldn't pass judgment on our OL, pro or con, based on their performance in 3 or 4 games. The line has played well recently, thanks in no small part to a legitimate running threat that kept defenses guessing. But now, with our top 2 running backs injured, we're either going to have to hope someone is going to step up and fill the void at running back or we'll have to survive being a more predictable passing team, which is going to put more pressure on our OL.

There's also the matter of our first 9 games, in which our OL play was absolutely horrid, and was one of if not the primary reason for our 4-5 record over that stretch of time. It remains to be seen how much damage those 9 games did to our ultimate goal of getting back to the SB.

[kalibane]

As I said in another topic I hope that I am wrong about the line gelling into a better unit. At the same time, I still take issue with how you characterized the issues with the team and how blame should be doled out.

Care to recant what you had been saying about the defensive performance in the first half of the year considering they are now 13 games into the year and rank 2nd in total defense and 3rd in points allowed?

[HumanCockroach]

I never once lambasted the defense, so I have nothing to recant. ( though I DID lambast Williams, and surprise the guy was cut. Is that what you are talking about?)

Just like the line did exactly as I said it would, and the "help" I said it needed came ( though it came four weeks to late IMHO) not sure why it took them that long to adjust.

[HumanCockroach]

Actually RD it's been more like good play for 6 or 7 games. Took a couple games for the rest of the offense to catch up. The Line has been playing "well" since the Dallas game. Though it is now clicking on all cylinders.

[RiverDog]

Actually RD it's been more like good play for 6 or 7 games. Took a couple games for the rest of the offense to catch up. The Line has been playing "well" since the Dallas game. Though it is now clicking on all cylinders.

OK, I can handle that, not that it changes my point.

[HumanCockroach]

It was horrible and unbecoming of a team that expects to challenge for a championship.

And now? Exactly. "Instant" success is an illusion, and has NEVER worked in the NFL. You can't have "sustained" success as you have eluded to, without growing pains from young players, nor can you accomplish it by over paying for older, mediocre free agents at every turn.

[NorthHawk]

We came within a win for us and a win for 2 other teams of not competing for a playoff spot because in a large part our OL.
We left our future up to other teams.
That's not the performance that a championship aspiring team, one that has been to 2 previous Super Bowls should have to worry about.
Struggle a little? Not a problem, every team does.
Lose games because they couldn't produce a single 1st down in the entire 4th Quarter? Completely unacceptable.
We're just really fortunate that other teams aren't talented enough or have injury problems to continue to play well.

That the OL is doing well now doesn't excuse the horrible performance of the first half of the year and we should be still in contention for HFA or a Division crown.
That's what teams that are establishing a dynasty do.

[HumanCockroach]

How exactly did we "leave it up to other teams"? Last I checked Seattle is in a position to win 10 or 11 games, you can paint that into something it's not, but 10-11 wins IS a playoff team 98% of the time, and has zero to do with other teams failings, the same as if they won 12 last season.

Using your own reasoning, Seattle didn't belong in the SB last season or the one before, as it was "other" teams failings that allowed them to get there.

And FYI last season they were in the SAME boat, or have you forgotten already that after losing to KC they were .500. In FACT 3 of the last 4 seasons they have been in that boat... You're starting to sound like the National Media that wrote Seattle off every season, except THEY have figured it out, and didn't do it this year. Shame on you.

[RiverDog]

That the OL is doing well now doesn't excuse the horrible performance of the first half of the year and we should be still in contention for HFA or a Division crown.

My point precisely, which is why I refuse to eat crow or admit that I was full of it simply because the OL is now performing at a satisfactory level. Some of you folks can go turn handspring because we're now 8-5 after having been 4-5,and that's fine. But don't be such a revisionist historian to completely forget about those first 9 games. It's not as if they didn't happen.

It's a 16 game regular season, not 7, and that 4-5 start could very well come back to bite us in the arse, especially now that we've lost both our running backs to injury. It's not like 2013 where we were able to lose 2 of our last 4 and still end up with HFA. That 4-5 start robbed us of our margin for error. We have to win 2 of our last 3 or it might be a cold January.

[HumanCockroach]

Good Lord. In one sentence you say it is a 16 game season, and then go on to discuss a part of the season. You want "revisionists" history, take a gander at every single thread for the first two months of this season. The consensus wasn't simply that the line was "playing poorly" it was that the " players were garbage, Carroll, Schneider, Cable and the rest couldn't find talent or develop it". These players, the SAME ones that have been performing at a top five level for a month and a half were talentless, boobs that shouldn't have even been allowed on the football field ( ANY field of one were to read through the comments in literally dozens of threads).

Some, remained consistent in their stance inn regards to this line, I'm not doing "hamsprings" about their success, as this is were I saw them getting eventually, so it was EXPECTED not dreamt about. The offense, and more specifically the OC and quarterback FINALLY figured it out, and are now helping that line grow, by implementing a RUDIMENTARY counter to the problems of a struggling, young line with chips, quicker throws, reads and routes ( things some of us pointed out in week ONE) the have allowed for historic success.

These things are BASIC principles that EVERY coach understands, as well as EVERY QB. Why it took them 9 ( well really 7)weeks to implement is beyond me, but it was there all along. The refusal to ADJUST cost them games, and that is across the board, from the top on down.

I pointed out the "open" receivers running crossing routes and digs in multiple threads, for multiple games, the throws weren't being delivered, that isn't on the line. Despite what people wanted to say about it, then AND now.

Ultimately it's a TEAM sport, and simply put, the line was used as a scapegoat for pretty much the entire season ( not to mention ALL of last season). The Line wasn't performing well until around the Cowboys game, that doesn't mean others were however, and that is something people STILL can't seem to grasp.

[RiverDog]

Good Lord. In one sentence you say it is a 16 game season, and then go on to discuss a part of the season. You want "revisionists" history, take a gander at every single thread for the first two months of this season. The consensus wasn't simply that the line was "playing poorly" it was that the " players were garbage, Carroll, Schneider, Cable and the rest couldn't find talent or develop it". These players, the SAME ones that have been performing at a top five level for a month and a half were talentless, boobs that shouldn't have even been allowed on the football field ( ANY field of one were to read through the comments in literally dozens of threads).

Some, remained consistent in their stance inn regards to this line, I'm not doing "hamsprings" about their success, as this is were I saw them getting eventually, so it was EXPECTED not dreamt about. The offense, and more specifically the OC and quarterback FINALLY figured it out, and are now helping that line grow, by implementing a RUDIMENTARY counter to the problems of a struggling, young line with chips, quicker throws, reads and routes ( things some of us pointed out in week ONE) the have allowed for historic success.

These things are BASIC principles that EVERY coach understands, as well as EVERY QB. Why it took them 9 ( well really 7)weeks to implement is beyond me, but it was there all along. The refusal to ADJUST cost them games, and that is across the board, from the top on down.

I pointed out the "open" receivers running crossing routes and digs in multiple threads, for multiple games, the throws weren't being delivered, that isn't on the line. Despite what people wanted to say about it, then AND now.

Ultimately it's a TEAM sport, and simply put, the line was used as a scapegoat for pretty much the entire season ( not to mention ALL of last season). The Line wasn't performing well until around the Cowboys game, that doesn't mean others were however, and that is something people STILL can't seem to grasp.

No, they are not the same ones. You're forgetting about the change at center, with Lewis replacing Nowack, arguably the most important position part of the line in a strategic sense, and that change coincided closely with the turnaround. If anything, we grossly underestimated the importance of that center position.

And FYI, I, too, pointed out the same thing you did, that Russell had open receivers at the 5-10 yard range but either couldn't see them or was looking for a bigger play. I saw the Cincy game from the upper level and saw him do it on several occasions. That game was particularily frustrating because we were protecting a lead and throwing the ball short for sure, safe completions to keep the clock running and move the sticks was exactly the thing we should have been doing.

IMO those two things, ie the change at center and Russell's throwing more quick, short passes, are the two biggest differences in the offensive line's performance as we see it now and the one we saw earlier. That doesn't mean that our bunch of bums suddenly turned into the Hogs, only that we have learned how to mitigate their deficiencies. IMO there are still huge opportunities to upgrade several of those positions along the OL.

[kalibane]

You never lambasted the defense HC? Really? Come on this is just getting ridiculous now. You never put the issues on Wilson, you never blamed the defense... Okay man. Okay.

[HumanCockroach]

Nope, I never put a thing on the defense ( other than Williams was awful and I would rather have Burley or Shead starting), in fact I defended them numerous times. As for SOME of the blame on Wilson, I absolutely DID. Pointing out how his refusal to throw the ball quickly ( hmmm) and take the open throws underneath ( hmmm) was contributing greatly to the lines problems. Damn, spot on all the way back in week one. And spot on. in weeks 2 through 7 as well. Just because you and others couldn't bring yourself to acknowledge it, or vocalize his poor play, doesn't mean it wasn't there and OBVIOUS.

Not sure who you are confusing me with ( my guess is Anthony, though he was also on your Wilson does no wrong, it's all the lines fault train as well so I'm not sure why you would, considering he was agreeing with you)

search.php?search_id=egosearch

Here's my "posts" feel free.