HawkShack.com

by **RiverDog** » Mon Sep 19, 2016 5:22 pm

Pick one:

1. Russell's ankle was hurt.

2. The offensive line needs time to gel.

3. We always play poorly against the Rams.

4. We started out slow last year, don't you remember?

5. It was really hot in SoCal yesterday.

6. 1-1 is a disaster!

by **Vegaseahawk** » Mon Sep 19, 2016 5:26 pm

#4
I think this writer read your post before he wrote this article
http://www.fieldgulls.com/2016/9/18/12963480/seahawks-recap-rams-reasons-not-worried-tyler-lockett-russell-wilson-la

by **HumanCockroach** » Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:11 pm

It's never "one thing" when out comes to losing a football game.

by **RiverDog** » Mon Sep 19, 2016 10:53 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:It's never "one thing" when out comes to losing a football game.

Perhaps I should have titled it "Favorite Excuse Thread."

by **c_hawkbob** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:02 am

There should be a "7- all of the above" option.

by **burrrton** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:09 am

(1) 40%
(2) 50% (it's 5 guys playing new positions- growing pains are inevitable)
(3) 8% (they obviously present us problems)
(4) 1%
(5) 1%
(6) 108%

by **c_hawkbob** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:13 am

burrrton wrote:(1) 40%
(2) 50% (it's 5 guys playing new positions- growing pains are inevitable)
(3) 8% (they obviously present us problems)
(4) 1%
(5) 1%
(6) 108%

I like it.

by **Hawk Sista** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:49 am

The combo of RWs ankle and the O-line not gelling is what I'd assign collective points toward. Either one of those situations change and the other is gone, better or masked.

by **Hawkstar** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 8:03 am

While were making excuses or selecting an excuse, I would add Offensive Scheme or Play Calling. Pete likes to line em up and beat the other man. We can get away with that on D, where we have an advantage in nearly every position. Flip sides, and we're really outclassed on O in several positions. Simply lining up and trying to beat the other guy with vanilla play calling isn't going to cut it with our current talent level up front. We weren't trying to fool anybody and they were better than us.

by **Hawktawk** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 11:41 am

everyone in the stadium expected Rawls up the gut to the tune of 3rd and 20 on 2 run plays. I would have gone play action and gone vertical on the first play. Russ does it as well as anyone in the league. Hindsight is 20-20.

by **NorthHawk** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:35 pm

There are differences between reasons and excuses.

In competition, someone wins and someone loses and when you dissect what happened, you find reasons for failures. Excuses imply something out of your control went wrong.
The fact is their DL played better than our OL and as a result we couldn't effectively run the ball and that was the difference in the game.
The question is can our problems up front be fixed in time for the next game?
Perhaps we can against other opponents, but it's still a big question mark. At this point we don't know if it's a matter of "gelling" or simply not being good enough.
If you look at our OL, I think it's better overall inside than last year, but weaker on the edges and I think they can get better.

So when you add together ineffective run blocking and a restricted mobility QB when your Offense is based on running the ball and a mobile QB, there isn't much left to examine.

by **Oly** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 1:04 pm

NorthHawk wrote:There are differences between reasons and excuses.

In competition, someone wins and someone loses and when you dissect what happened, you find reasons for failures. Excuses imply something out of your control went wrong.
The fact is their DL played better than our OL and as a result we couldn't effectively run the ball and that was the difference in the game.
The question is can our problems up front be fixed in time for the next game?
Perhaps we can against other opponents, but it's still a big question mark. At this point we don't know if it's a matter of "gelling" or simply not being good enough.
If you look at our OL, I think it's better overall inside than last year, but weaker on the edges and I think they can get better.

So when you add together ineffective run blocking and a restricted mobility QB when your Offense is based on running the ball and a mobile QB, there isn't much left to examine.

All of this.

by **Hawktawk** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:03 pm

We are few days from the 9ers coming to town. They absolutely throttled the team that just throttled the Hawks. I know it means nothing until the clock strikes 00:00 on Sunday but the Hawks better figure out a way to get to 2-1 vs this opponent or my perspective on this season may have a major readjustment.

by **Hawk Sista** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 5:16 pm

NorthHawk wrote:There are differences between reasons and excuses.

In competition, someone wins and someone loses and when you dissect what happened, you find reasons for failures. Excuses imply something out of your control went wrong.
The fact is their DL played better than our OL and as a result we couldn't effectively run the ball and that was the difference in the game.
The question is can our problems up front be fixed in time for the next game?
Perhaps we can against other opponents, but it's still a big question mark. At this point we don't know if it's a matter of "gelling" or simply not being good enough.
If you look at our OL, I think it's better overall inside than last year, but weaker on the edges and I think they can get better.

So when you add together ineffective run blocking and a restricted mobility QB when your Offense is based on running the ball and a mobile QB, there isn't much left to examine.

Basically, these points are the ones I have been making in various threads since the loss. If the Hawk's O-line were this bad w/ RW @ 100% - they can still make that engine go. Or if RW weren't quite 100% but the o-line were good, they could cammo his immobility to a much greater degree. Having both things true at once (and w/ Ifedi gone + Rawks, Baldwin, and Tyler dinged), it just isn't a good look. No way to put lipstick on that pig. I said in another thread that there is a difference between excuses and reasons.

I'm definitely not loving this O-Line presently, but predicted a rough start to the season until the bye week because of who we face at what stage of development. And... I personally would have tried to keep Okung (which is an unpopular sentiment in here, I know). But I also understand how PC and JS have built this team. This is one of the things will not change unless we start failing to make the playoffs or if one of the current O-linemen turn themselves into a perennial pro-bowler and they decide they are core enough to be worthy of the big pay day.

by **HumanCockroach** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 5:24 pm

I simply don't agree with the ineffective run blocking mantra. micheal has zero issue running behind that line ( currently sitting with a 5.4 yard per carry average)... Honestly, to me it seems as though Rawls is still finding his rhythm ( if they ARE run blocking poorly, then that opens a whole nest of serious concerns. Like, clearly Micheal not Rawls is the better back). If both backs were effective at the clip Micheal has been, there wouldn't be close to this perception of poor run blocking in the least.

by **Hawktawk** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:37 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:I simply don't agree with the ineffective run blocking mantra. micheal has zero issue running behind that line ( currently sitting with a 5.4 yard per carry average)... Honestly, to me it seems as though Rawls is still finding his rhythm ( if they ARE run blocking poorly, then that opens a whole nest of serious concerns. Like, clearly Micheal not Rawls is the better back). If both backs were effective at the clip Micheal has been, there wouldn't be close to this perception of poor run blocking in the least.

HC I completely agree with this^^^^Might I add maybe Rawls is looking for that tenth of a second he may be missing in the 40. I hope not. His carries were mainly in the dreadful first half.
But Micheal is finally looking like the guy who Seattle took in the second round. Hes a 235 lb stud with 4.5 speed and a fumble away from being one of the heros last weekend.

Right now he is unquestionably playing better than Rawls.

by **RiverDog** » Tue Sep 20, 2016 8:55 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:I simply don't agree with the ineffective run blocking mantra. micheal has zero issue running behind that line ( currently sitting with a 5.4 yard per carry average)... Honestly, to me it seems as though Rawls is still finding his rhythm ( if they ARE run blocking poorly, then that opens a whole nest of serious concerns. Like, clearly Micheal not Rawls is the better back). If both backs were effective at the clip Micheal has been, there wouldn't be close to this perception of poor run blocking in the least.

The problem with Michaels is ball security. You can see that he's really working on improving it, but it sure came back to bite us at the worst possible moment.

by **HumanCockroach** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:50 am

I'm not about to freak out about 1 fumble in the least 8 games. No matter how secure a back is with the football, they are going to fumble it, and if I recall correctly, that one fumble occurred on a pass short of the first down marker with a minute left in the game when he was attempting to get the necessary yardage with his back to the defense . Sometimes fighting for yardage is a pre cursor for fumbles.

Not an excuse, he's got to hold on to the ball. Just realistic expectations.

by **obiken** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:59 am

HumanCockroach wrote:I'm not about to freak out about 1 fumble in the least 8 games. No matter how secure a back is with the football, they are going to fumble it, and if I recall correctly, that one fumble occurred on a pass short of the first down marker with a minute left in the game when he was attempting to get the necessary yardage with his back to the defense . Sometimes fighting for yardage is a pre cursor for fumbles.

Not an excuse, he's got to hold on to the ball. Just realistic expectations.

I am not freaking out either Human, but how many games can we lose that we were favored to win and still win the Division? Any team can make the playoffs. Having a legit chance at the title is a whole different drill. Sorry, I know we have had our differences, but I have learned a lot from you and all these guys in here. However, IF we lose to the 9ers, I am going to start officially freaking.

by **Agent 86** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 9:24 am

obiken wrote:I am not freaking out either Human, but how many games can we lose that we were favored to win and still win the Division? Any team can make the playoffs. Having a legit chance at the title is a whole different drill. Sorry, I know we have had our differences, but I have learned a lot from you and all these guys in here. However, IF we lose to the 9ers, I am going to start officially freaking.

If there is one thing this team has taught me in the last 4 years, as compared to the previous 30 years, it is to stop having an "if we lose" mentality. I have stopped thinking the worst going into games. I know that is how we all were conditioned for so many years, but if you still feel the same, then have at er. I would just recommend trying to think the opposite, and I think this team has done enough the last 4-5 years to warrant it.

The NFL has become a week to week business, no way you take last weeks performance of any team and use it to judge what will happen this week. You can take some things out of it, but it can't be your base. The 'Hawks just played a bad game on offence last week, and still almost came out with a win. Credit the Rams D for playing well and coming up with a timely turnover. It has so often happened the other way for us in recent years.

Plenty of players and coaches that can be better, and the beauty of it is they get a chance again this Sunday to do it.

by **I-5** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 1:52 pm

7) Play better football

by **c_hawkbob** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 3:22 pm

I-5 wrote:7) Play better football

That would be #1 on the 'Solutions' list.

by **HumanCockroach** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:07 pm

As of right now Seattle is exactly .0 games behind Arizona. Two years ago, they were 3 games behind with 5 to play, I will not "freak out" until Seattle is officially eliminated from playoff contention.

by **obiken** » Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:03 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:As of right now Seattle is exactly .0 games behind Arizona. Two years ago, they were 3 games behind with 5 to play, I will not "freak out" until Seattle is officially eliminated from playoff contention.

Playoffs is not the goal, its win the division, you are not going to win the NFC title unless you get at least one home game in the playoffs. 9-7 10-6 is not going to cut it.

by **Hawktawk** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 4:46 am

Seattle has to defend the home field this Sunday. They cannot afford to lose 2 of 3 games that looked like easy wins on the schedule. They have proven to have a Lazarus like ability to rise from the dead but someday that approach is going to fall short. It kind of did last season in a mud hole in Carolina....Its early but a few more bad losses its getting late...

by **obiken** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:31 am

Hawktawk wrote:Seattle has to defend the home field this Sunday. They cannot afford to lose 2 of 3 games that looked like easy wins on the schedule. They have proven to have a Lazarus like ability to rise from the dead but someday that approach is going to fall short. It kind of did last season in a mud hole in Carolina....Its early but a few more bad losses its getting late...

Thank you! kinda what I was saying. I dont see us coming out flat in this game.

by **HumanCockroach** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:59 am

The division isn't the goal with this team, SBs are. Seattle can indeed win on the road in the playoffs. Nothing I've seen the last four years refutes that.

by **Hawktawk** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:48 am

HumanCockroach wrote:The division isn't the goal with this team, SBs are. Seattle can indeed win on the road in the playoffs. Nothing I've seen the last four years refutes that.

I agree with that too. If any team can do it its Seattle who was a dreadful first half vs Carolina from advancing to face a Cardinals team they had thrashed back to the leather helmet era a few weeks earlier.

But the fact is that Seattle has reached the SB 3 times, all with HFA throughout. 2 of the games were still squeakers to put it mildly in a 3 point HFA league. Its never too early to be concerned about whiffing on games that will come back to haunt them later.

by **Hawk Sista** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:07 am

Hawktawk wrote:Seattle has to defend the home field this Sunday. They cannot afford to lose 2 of 3 games that looked like easy wins on the schedule. They have proven to have a Lazarus like ability to rise from the dead but someday that approach is going to fall short. It kind of did last season in a mud hole in Carolina....Its early but a few more bad losses its getting late...

Whoever thought either Ram game was an "easy" win hasn't been paying attention. The Rams play us tough every time. I think they win this Sunday, but they may well not.not panicking for awhile yet.

by **Hawktawk** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:19 am

Yeah sis but watching that Rams team vs the 9ers I truly felt that this would be the game we separated. healthy and without Jerome "boring" Boger mucking up the game we may well have. A loss this weekend would be bad. For one its my birthday. For 2 its time to quit whistling in the graveyard if they cant go 2-0 at home this Sunday...

by **Hawk Sista** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 1:43 pm

Well - I hope you have a nice birthday. My friends and I are headed to the game, so I too would be more disappointed than usual with a loss...+ I hate the Niners. All that said, I won't throw in the towel if we do lose. RW being hurt during the infancy of this o-line (w/ Ifedi out) doesn't help our cause much right now.

Everyone at work was chalking the Rams game up as a W after the 49er blowout. Those are not comparisons that should be made....the Rams simply play us tough and they out physicalled us in the trenches. Seeing who we had in the trenches vs. them, it was not a stretch to imagine things going south.

I think we will win Sunday on the backs of the D and the 12s in a clunker. Maybe 15 to 9 or some weird ish like that.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY

by **Hawktawk** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:37 pm

Thanks sis.
Enjoy the game. I sweated through the opener at the Clink like a drug mule going through customs and left for home penniless but it was a hell of a good time.
Play hard #12
GO SEAHAWKS!!!!!!!

by **Hawk Sista** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:35 pm

I sweated through the opener at the Clink like a drug mule going through customs

I love that one. I'll be sweating like a June bride in a Bakersfield inn on Sunday.

by **Hawktawk** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:42 pm

LOL I been to Bakersfield.....

by **Hawk Sista** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 11:04 pm

I mentioned this to my 83 year old mom tonight. She laughed so hard, I didn't really get it. She said she spent her first night as married woman in a Bakersfield inn. June 10th. All these years of using that line, I never knew. Maybe your dad was a drug mule? :lol:

by **obiken** » Thu Sep 22, 2016 11:36 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:The division isn't the goal with this team, SBs are. Seattle can indeed win on the road in the playoffs. Nothing I've seen the last four years refutes that.

A lot of the power of this team was getting home field at the 12 house. Winning all road games I just don't think that is doable. We saw that in the mud at Carolina last year.

by **Zorn76** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:21 am

HFA is Absolutely key, period.

We Can get to a SB without it, but it's definitely a tougher way to go.

Meanwhile, one game at a time.

Again, what really upset me about LA was our offensive game plan - calling plays as if we had an OL that was already gelling, and a QB that was 100%, which was far from the case. The ball has to get out of RW's as quick as possible - that's how you offset pressure - and it was working wonders for us the 2nd half of last season when we began implementing it.

Why get away from it now?

Stupid.

Can't take anybody lightly, not even SF. We need to score early and often, instead of letting yet another inferior opponent stick around all day, increasing their chances of an upset.

I do think we win this one by large margin (31-13), but you have to establish momentum in the 1st half to get there.

by **HumanCockroach** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 5:48 am

HFA is Absolutely key, period.

We Can get to a SB without it, but it's definitely a tougher way to go.

I'm not entirely sure how those two statements coincide.

I feel it's important, but key? Obviously it's a tougher road, but it is one that's been traveled ( IMHO Seattle is a better football team than the Giants or Packers who did it most recently) and I might point out that Seattle's record last season was identical on the road and at home...

by **NorthHawk** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:26 am

The 49ers traveled across the country and hung 27 on a pretty good Defense in Carolina.
If they are even half as successful coming here, the Offense has to get into gear or we're down 2 in our Division.

Up tempo, shorter passes, whatever we have to do to change it up. We won't tire out their Defense, but it might give us some momentum or rhythm.

by **RiverDog** » Fri Sep 23, 2016 4:14 pm

HumanCockroach wrote:I'm not entirely sure how those two statements coincide.

I feel it's important, but key? Obviously it's a tougher road, but it is one that's been traveled ( IMHO Seattle is a better football team than the Giants or Packers who did it most recently) and I might point out that Seattle's record last season was identical on the road and at home...

Going to the SB w/o HFA hasn't been done in this franchise's 40 year history. We have to the SB 3 times and on each occasion we did it by winning HFA...and we've only won HFA those 3 times that we went to the SB. So yes, I'd say that getting HFA is key, at least for us as we arguably have the biggest HFA in the league.

How many home playoff games have we lost? I can remember only 2 (Miami and St. Louis). Contrast that with our playoff record on the road.

HawkShack.com

Who is online