were in trouble

Official Seahawks Forum, for the 12th man, by the 12th man.

were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Fri Nov 17, 2017 5:37 pm

It appears that PC said and I quote ""We are going to run the football this week. We are going to run the heck out of it" If true we are in big trouble, I mean really, we are going to do the heck out of something we have proven we cant do, knowing it takes away from what we can do.
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby Largent80 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:00 pm

Classic bait and switch. However, what do they have to lose at this point?
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1745
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Tex-ass

Re: were in trouble

Postby RiverDog » Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:10 pm

That's an odd statement by Pete, but I'll believe it when I see it.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:18 pm

Largent80 wrote:Classic bait and switch. However, what do they have to lose at this point?


I hope your right but we can win if you run uptempo, we cant if we "run the heck out of the ball"
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby HawkDawg » Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:58 pm

Sounds like he's sticking to his old playbook and philosophy, his winning formula. Defense > Run > Pass. It worked great when he had a team set up to do just that. Now with a somewhat broken defense, a very broken LOB and a very, very broken running game, what's the guy going to do? Experiment this late in the season or stick to his roots? I'm hoping this game doesn't come down to Wilson (yet again) and the price you pay for buying a Ferrari without having a nice garage to put it in (the very, very, very broken O-Line).

But hey, he's a sharp coach and does know how to win, completely transformed our team and took us to two SB's...so I'm hoping he's not off his rocker quite yet. A breakthrough running game is overdue, this might be our sleeper moment.
HawkDawg
Legacy
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 2:20 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby Stream Hawk » Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:15 pm

Do you mean “we’re” in trouble? Just kidding ha ha.

This has been the most insane season; really the last two seasons. So again we can’t run the ball. I don’t get it, and I really do think if this continues T. cable has to go. Obviously.

But I like that Pete is still trying to run it. I think this game is our last chance - on Monday night football and at home. Rawls needs to get his s*** together or he’s out. And Lacy what the F? So bring in Mike Davis, sure that’s a reach but it’s worth a shot. We have some talent so go get it!

Go Hawks!!!
Stream Hawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:08 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby Aseahawkfan » Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:18 pm

If we can't run the ball, defense will get strung out. I hope they do work harder to run the ball. Main hope in the playoffs to account for Sherm being out is going to be maintaining possession and grinding teams down.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 7327
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:06 pm

HawkDawg wrote:Sounds like he's sticking to his old playbook and philosophy, his winning formula. Defense > Run > Pass. It worked great when he had a team set up to do just that. Now with a somewhat broken defense, a very broken LOB and a very, very broken running game, what's the guy going to do? Experiment this late in the season or stick to his roots? I'm hoping this game doesn't come down to Wilson (yet again) and the price you pay for buying a Ferrari without having a nice garage to put it in (the very, very, very broken O-Line).

But hey, he's a sharp coach and does know how to win, completely transformed our team and took us to two SB's...so I'm hoping he's not off his rocker quite yet. A breakthrough running game is overdue, this might be our sleeper moment.


What is he suppose to do? Run what has worked every time they ran it. Run uptempo, from start to finish.
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:07 pm

Stream Hawk wrote:Do you mean “we’re” in trouble? Just kidding ha ha.

This has been the most insane season; really the last two seasons. So again we can’t run the ball. I don’t get it, and I really do think if this continues T. cable has to go. Obviously.

But I like that Pete is still trying to run it. I think this game is our last chance - on Monday night football and at home. Rawls needs to get his s*** together or he’s out. And Lacy what the F? So bring in Mike Davis, sure that’s a reach but it’s worth a shot. We have some talent so go get it!

Go Hawks!!!



so run the ball no matter what even if it costs us the game. Wow
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:10 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:If we can't run the ball, defense will get strung out. I hope they do work harder to run the ball. Main hope in the playoffs to account for Sherm being out is going to be maintaining possession and grinding teams down.


so a couple of things, 1 we can eat up the clock in uptempo and in fact usually own the TOP running it. That said if we stick to the run and go 3 and out, which is what has happened when we have the defense gets strung out. So let's run and grind the clock, but we cant run, and you are forgetting we need to score also, something we do almost a twill in uptempo.

Let me see people want to go with what has not worked over what has. Wow
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby idhawkman » Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:42 pm

Wow, I can't believe how healthy Atlanta is.

I would really like to have Brown and Kam back for this game at a minimum. Wilhoite would be next then Jarran Reed and finally Joke-L.

That's what it looks like as the IR list. Everyone else was FP today. We really need Brown and Kam though.
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 3012
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby The POPE » Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:47 pm

The truth is somewhere in the middle. Thus far the Hawks have shown little to no ability to run the ball. The defense has shown even when healthy that they wear down with too many three and outs. So let’s go up tempo all the time and put a fractured defense back out on the field with even less time between 3 and outs. Up temp works fine in certain situations, but by no means is a good alternative for an entire game, Might as well see if Chip Kelly has some free time. Up tempo can and does work in certain situations, but this is the NFL and good D coordinators will adjust and shut it down.
User avatar
The POPE
Legacy
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 12:46 pm

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:32 am

idhawkman wrote:Wow, I can't believe how healthy Atlanta is.

I would really like to have Brown and Kam back for this game at a minimum. Wilhoite would be next then Jarran Reed and finally Joke-L.

That's what it looks like as the IR list. Everyone else was FP today. We really need Brown and Kam though.


Yeah agreed, at least as of now they all have a chance to play
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:38 am

The POPE wrote:The truth is somewhere in the middle. Thus far the Hawks have shown little to no ability to run the ball. The defense has shown even when healthy that they wear down with too many three and outs. So let’s go up tempo all the time and put a fractured defense back out on the field with even less time between 3 and outs. Up temp works fine in certain situations, but by no means is a good alternative for an entire game, Might as well see if Chip Kelly has some free time. Up tempo can and does work in certain situations, but this is the NFL and good D coordinators will adjust and shut it down.



And yet in almost every game, we used it we win the time of possession, which means our defense is not on the field too much, FYI we used in 2015 for 7 of 8 games and they never figured it out as we went 6-1. FYI the Uptempo we run and what Chip ran is not the same thing at all. FYI we also have way fewer 3 and out using Uptempo. We also avg over 30 points a game when we use uptempo the whole game.

So let's see
win TOP check
Defense on the field less check
less 3 and outs check
score more check

enough said
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby c_hawkbob » Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:24 am

Anthony wrote:What is he suppose to do? Run what has worked every time they ran it. Run uptempo, from start to finish.


No, then we'd be back to the defense playing 40+ minutes every game. We're too injured on that side of the ball for that.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:32 am

Actually we win TOP most of the time when we go uptempi and we score, so the defense would not be on the field longer
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby RiverDog » Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:55 pm

c_hawkbob wrote:No, then we'd be back to the defense playing 40+ minutes every game (if we played up tempo). We're too injured on that side of the ball for that.


That's the downside of up tempo, and why Chip Kelly is no longer a coach in the NFL.

It works great when your offense can get first downs, but if they go 3-and-out like we do so often, it burns out your defense. We need to use is selectively, not as a mainstay of the offense.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:24 pm

RiverDog wrote:


That's the downside of up tempo, and why Chip Kelly is no longer a coach in the NFL.

It works great when your offense can get first downs, but if they go 3-and-out like we do so often, it burns out your defense. We need to use is selectively, not as a mainstay of the offense.


Wow let's make stuff up shall we. First what we run a nd snatch up ran are not the same. 2nd we go 3 and out way less in uptempi then the b.s. we normally run and we actually score a lot too. We act over 30 a game with uptempi being run all game and we wintime of possession as well so our defense is on the field less. But hey let's stick to what does not work and home oh defense can hold them till the 4tg qtr
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby c_hawkbob » Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:00 pm

RiverDog wrote:


That's the downside of up tempo, and why Chip Kelly is no longer a coach in the NFL.

It works great when your offense can get first downs, but if they go 3-and-out like we do so often, it burns out your defense. We need to use is selectively, not as a mainstay of the offense.

Anthony wrote:Wow let's make stuff up shall we. First what we run a nd snatch up ran are not the same. 2nd we go 3 and out way less in uptempi then the b.s. we normally run and we actually score a lot too. We act over 30 a game with uptempi being run all game and we wintime of possession as well so our defense is on the field less. But hey let's stick to what does not work and home oh defense can hold them till the 4tg qtr


If you're going to call someone a liar bring some stats to back up your position. Otherwise all you've got is a difference of opinion and the whole "your making stuff up" business is out of line.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 6941
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: Paducah Kentucky, 42001

Re: were in trouble

Postby RiverDog » Sat Nov 18, 2017 3:45 pm

Good call, Cbob. Anthony is making statements as if they are a fact. I don't think they keep stats regarding how many up tempo plays are ran vs. huddle up. If they do, I'd like to see them. Besides, there's different variations of up tempo, making it difficult to categorize. A team might just run a couple of plays quickly to prevent a defense from substituting on a 3rd and short vs. an entire series of up tempo, or maybe they just want to get a play off quickly to prevent a challenge. If you spike the ball to stop the clock, is that considered an up tempo play?

Bottom line is that although I agree that we need to change things up, I don't think going to a lot of up tempo is the answer. It might work against certain teams in certain situations, but if it's over used like Kelly did in Philly, it eventually it catches up with you, puts too pressure on the defense.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:38 pm

c_hawkbob wrote:
If you're going to call someone a liar bring some stats to back up your position. Otherwise all you've got is a difference of opinion and the whole "your making stuff up" business is out of line.


OKay, well I already stated we avg over 30 points a game when we run uptempo all game, so there is that fact, when we ran the uptempo for the whole game we avg holding the ball for almost 32 minutes which is over half.
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby The POPE » Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:22 pm

[OKay, well I already stated we avg over 30 points a game when we run uptempo all game, so there is that fact, when we ran the uptempo for the whole game we avg holding the ball for almost 32 minutes which is over half.[/quote]

Could you please explain your definition of uptempo. is it quick huddle, call the play at the line or some other form of an uptempo offense? I cant remember the Hawks running any form of an uptempo offense for an entire game. The usual late 2nd qtr and 4th qtr comebacks are usually about the only time uptempo or hurry up is used. Your vast football knowledge and unending unsubstantiated claims are confusing me. It is what I say it is does not constitute a fact. Just the facts....Anthony

The Pope
User avatar
The POPE
Legacy
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 12:46 pm

Re: were in trouble

Postby Anthony » Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:06 pm

Old but Slow wrote:Not to break up a conversation of such geniality, but it is not all about running versus passing first and foremost, but what kind of plays, and the way they are run. For instance, the no-huddle can be hurry up or slow down. Don't huddle to hinder defensive subs, but then the QB can snap it quick, or run the clock down.

By saying "the kind of plays" I specifically refer to the read option. Running it a couple times a game doesn't cut it. Atlanta rushes the QB with Beasley and Claiborne, and they are formidable. Make them choose the option, which can slow them a step. In the meantime, it is usually a running play, which Pete likes, although Russ can throw from it as well.

The defense will be good. We will miss Kam and Richard, but Earl is back, and that is huge. And, now, back to your regular programming.


Some of what you say, is what we run when we run the uptempo. For us uptempo is about getting to the line quick, not hiking it quickly, although sometimes that happens as well. It is about getting to the line, giving plenty of time for RW to make calls, change the play or whatever, it also stops the defense for substitution and makes it hard for them to get set. Also our blocking changes in uptempo to a power blocking scheme which is way easier on the lineman. Also most of the time the plays are called at the line, or in a very short huddle.

All that said if we run out the old run on first, run on second thing we will lose. Use the uptempo and use the pass to set up the run. As to read option, this Atl defense is fats not sure I want Rw doing that, especially given the hit he just took.

Our version of uptempo is what we need to run, let's get a big lead and then we can go from there.
User avatar
Anthony
Legacy
 
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:50 am

Re: were in trouble

Postby obiken » Sun Nov 19, 2017 12:57 am

Run the ball? with what our good looks, with our OL? Good luck with that. We "might" make the Playoffs, but thats it. Losing one is killer, losing 2 off the back end we are done. It was actually a good year for what we had. I am not angry or depressed about it, this was sealed a long time ago. The toughest thing in sports is having the quality backups you need when front line players go down.
obiken
Legacy
 
Posts: 3962
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 4:50 pm
Location: Wilsonville, Oregon 97070

Re: were in trouble

Postby RiverDog » Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:56 am

Anthony wrote:OKay, well I already stated we avg over 30 points a game when we run uptempo all game, so there is that fact, when we ran the uptempo for the whole game we avg holding the ball for almost 32 minutes which is over half.


What fact? The fact that you said something? Let's see a link to a quote or a stat, otherwise all you are doing is venturing an unqualified opinion.

What is your definition of up tempo? Is it getting a play off within 20 seconds? 25 seconds? Do you even know what the average time it takes us to run a play this season compared to the league average? Or do you have some other standard, like not huddling up?

Once you've defined your terms, you need to show us in which games that we ran up tempo for the entire game. It's difficult to see how we can average 30 a game running up tempo for the entire game when we've only scored 30 points twice this year.

Start doing some homework and show us your numbers or drop this fabricated reference of yours to what you are calling "facts".
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 23995
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: were in trouble

Postby NorthHawk » Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:31 am

We've seen them go up tempo near the end of the 2nd Quarter and in the 4th and both have had some better success than earlier in the game.
Remember the stats thread that showed poor completion rates in the 1st Q and getting better in the 2nd? So there is some evidence of that.
However, it might be that the opposing Defenses go into a more prevent type as well nearing the end of the quarter. I haven't ruled that out, but I think they need to be a lot crisper out in and out of the huddle.
Snapping the ball on each play with 10 or more seconds left sets a tone of urgency which I think is sometimes lacking and since Bevell scripts the first 15 plays, they should know what play is coming
and be able to do it earlier.
Something needs to change to get us out of our early game funk and if they aren't going to be great play calls, maybe they can take the Defense a little by surprise.

I don't know if you caught the Steelers game last week, but they went no huddle in the 1st Quarter and the comment was they do that to get into a rhythm early. They're a different team than us, but it seemed to
work for them. Maybe it would help us, too.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 10617
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am


Return to Seahawks Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

cron