Decline of Offense? Why?

[Uppercut]

Seems like the offense was on a role at the end of 2012, scoring many points easily and looking loose. Through 2013, 2014, and 2015 it just seems to get tighter, less imaginative, and predictable. Why? Many of the same players are here. I know the O line is a problem but it just seems to be a drip drip drip downhill. Our D will have to hold teams in 2015 under 10 points a game to have a chance to win by scores of 13-10 ectc. Heck we even scored more and enough in first two games now its alot worse,

[kalibane]

Two factors. No one knew how to handle the Read-Option in 2012 so that inflated the offensive output a little bit. Mainly the offensive line has just gotten worse each successive year. And now this year so far the wheels have just fallen off.

There is a domino effect. We know that when Wilson has time to set up in the pocket he can make plays down the field. On half the drop backs this year he simply doesn't have time to set up. He's always had a tendency to hold the ball a little too long because of his improvisational ability, but now that he's under pressure almost every drop back, when he holds the ball too long and takes a sack it makes it much worse. The biggest issue though is the line is so bad right now they can't open up holes in the run game. So instead of 2nd and 4 or even 2nd and 7. We're looking at 2nd and 9 or 2nd 12. It leaves the offense consistently in 3rd and long and the opposing team doesn't even have to worry about the run and can just all out pass rush which further exacerbates the poor pass blocking.

Everything builds on everything else. And even when the line has a good series and they pick up a first down or two they can't consistently block so the drives end prematurely.

[SalmonBB]

If you look at our offense over the last few years, they almost always start slow at the beginning of the year.

I actually liked what I saw out of our offense against the Lions. I think the Lions were playing very good defense. What I liked especially was that our offense opened the playbook. They ran RW. They let RW break out of the pocket and improvise. They mixed the run and the pass. They weren't predictable. And you know what, they actually moved the ball. They didn't score a lot, but they made first downs. The thing that got 'em were RW's fumbles ... rather uncharacteristic for him. Not sure about Graham ... but I'm not someone who thinks he'll be our salvation if only we'd get him the ball more. Our offense's key to success is just to keep getting better each game ... this year as in the previous few. I think this O-Line has good makings, and they don't need some big shift around to screw 'em up more ... they'll be fine.

Yeah, the defense saved us this last game. But the offense also gave them a chance to breathe. It's not just about the points. Give me a few series and some time on the field, and I call that a successful offensive outing. Problem comes when we have a bunch of 3 and outs.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

[jshawaii22]

No one knew how to handle the Read-Option in 2012 so that inflated the offensive output a little bit

Bingo --- that is reason #1. Watch the defensive ends or outside LB's sit and wait for Russell, instead of making moves. Many people of knowledge pointed out t hat it was only time before it wouldn't work, and more with RGIII, but then Russell made it work to perfection, until the D's figured out how to stop it. You contain him and collapse the pocket and he's dead meat. The more negative film, the more the other D's prepare.

js

[Seahawks4Ever]

Yet Pete and Darrell seem to be oblivious that the Read Option is not working any more but keep going to it.

I watched those Field Gull videos on that other thread and it was appalling how bad Britt and Sweezy was. Britt survived as a RT because we had RB's and TE's chip blocking to help him, now there is nobody helping him and he is a real liability. In fact, with such totally bad play by our OG's our Tackles look equally as bad. I really really miss how Walter and Hutch used to work together along with Toebeck.

It is really asinine to trade away Unger when we had NO viable option on the roster. We also gave up again our #1 pick. We have wasted just about every #1 pick since Bruce Irvin!

We also let James Carpenter go and again, with no real replacement it was a STUPID move.

John and Pete sign Wilson to a huge contract and then tell him he now has to run for his life even more!

[Futureite]

Your pass O has always been predicated off of the run. It's a playaction, splash play O that would slowly break a team down by pounding the ball and then open up the flood gates with a couple deep balls. I saw this in more games than I can count. The score may be 10-3 Hawks at half, 17-6 end of the third and final score is 36-13. Once those teams got down, your D would force turnovers, give the O a short field and it's lights out.

Aside from the Bears game, this is no longer happening. The reason, IMO, is that the run game is not what it was - at least not yet. The way your D is playing, if the run game gets going I'd not be surprised to see more blowouts and scores in the mid 30's. Until then though I don't think it's an O that has the horses to put up points outside of that formula.

[Zorn76]

Before you can have an OL gel, you first need players that are worth gellin'.
And this combo isn't worthy of that investment.

The conversion process that involves DL switching to become OL is a tall order for anybody, and clearly this philosophy ain't working. If it was, then other teams would follow, given how much of a copy cat league the NFL is. Instead, we've become an example of how Not to build an offensive line. 40+ sacks surrendered on average the last 2 yrs says so, along with the fact that RW is on pace to be dumped over 70 times this season.

It's beyond frustrating how we've whiffed so badly, both with drafting for this position, and the continued stubbornness by sticking with a philosophy that's a joke.

For a coaching staff that has done a remarkable job otherwise, it's baffling to say the least.

[RiverDog]

Before you can have an OL gel, you first need players that are worth gellin'.
And this combo isn't worthy of that investment.

The conversion process that involves DL switching to become OL is a tall order for anybody, and clearly this philosophy ain't working. If it was, then other teams would follow, given how much of a copy cat league the NFL is. Instead, we've become an example of how Not to build an offensive line. 40+ sacks surrendered on average the last 2 yrs says so, along with the fact that RW is on pace to be dumped over 70 times this season.

It's beyond frustrating how we've whiffed so badly, both with drafting for this position, and the continued stubbornness by sticking with a philosophy that's a joke.

[u]For a coaching staff that has done a remarkable job otherwise, it's baffling to say the least.[u/]

The OL is most definitely Pete's Achilles heel, and it's the root cause of the question posed in the OP. You can't complain about an average of 12 wins over the past 3 seasons including two SB appearances with one Lombardi, but nevertheless, it's starting to look like Pete's penchant for discounting the importance of the OL is finally catching up with him/us. I haven't felt this pessimistic since the 2011 season.

[Distant Relative]

I think 1 problem is they are trying to hard to appease a non blocking Pre Madonna TE. Another problem is they traded a Pro Bowl Center for said Pre Madonna TE.

[NorthHawk]

I don't get the impression is Graham is a prima donna. I think he's just a tall WR playing the TE position and should be used as such.
Unfortunately pass patterns require time to develop, so his opportunities are limited and he's in an Offense that doesn't want to throw much if they don't have to.

[HumanCockroach]

While I don't like the loss of Unger, he was hurt a TON in the 3 of the last 4 seasons ( only one season with over 14 regular season games played ). Maybe they felt that he was injury prone, and couldn't stay on the field. I'm not entirely sure 4 games is enough to judge whether it was a good move or not yet.

[Uppercut]

Now its the decline of the defense!

[SalmonBB]

Well when your offense decides to play the clock instead of playing the game with over a quarter of football left - right after a defensive touchdown - yeah ... the defense is gonna' decline in almost any game. Doesn't mean they're a bad defense.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

[SalmonBB]

No one knew how to handle the Read-Option in 2012 so that inflated the offensive output a little bit

Bingo --- that is reason #1. Watch the defensive ends or outside LB's sit and wait for Russell, instead of making moves. Many people of knowledge pointed out t hat it was only time before it wouldn't work, and more with RGIII, but then Russell made it work to perfection, until the D's figured out how to stop it. You contain him and collapse the pocket and he's dead meat. The more negative film, the more the other D's prepare.

js

Really?!?!?!

The read option ceased to exist throughout the playoffs, the Super Bowl, and the first two games of this season. It wasn't until we reintroduced it that our offense started moving the ball again. And we're hardly running it "all the time" even now. We might form what looks like a read option, but it isn't truly one unless the QB holds onto the ball from time to time.

DOn't blame this on the Read Option. And don't blame it on the O-Line. And don't demand that RW needs to play like Peyton Manning in a clean pocket. Just demand that the O-Coordinator play 4 quarters of Seahawk football ... including the Read Option.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

[NorthHawk]

Pete's post game press conference said that they didn't change the plays in the 4th. Adapting to what stops working seems to have been a problem today.

[Hawk Sista]

I think 1 problem is they are trying to hard to appease a non blocking Pre Madonna TE. Another problem is they traded a Pro Bowl Center for said Pre Madonna TE.

A. It's prima donna, not pre-Madonna. You have to go back to Zorn-Largent to get to the pre-Madonna era.
B. Unger was gone anyway. He was out 8 games last year and we won all 8. He was not coming back this year so instead of waiving him, we got a 4th for him.
C. If the Jimmy situation doesn't improve, we can have the discussion of whether or not he was worth a 1st. It's too early now. Today, I'd rather have Evan Mathis and drafted an o-lineman in the 1st. But the data sample is not sufficient for me to say that yet. But you cannot talk about Unger for Graham because Unger was outta here anyway. That is a fact.

[RiverDog]

A. It's prima donna, not pre-Madonna. You have to go back to Zorn-Largent to get to the pre-Madonna era.
B. Unger was gone anyway. He was out 8 games last year and we won all 8. He was not coming back this year so instead of waiving him, we got a 4th for him.
C. If the Jimmy situation doesn't improve, we can have the discussion of whether or not he was worth a 1st. It's too early now. Today, I'd rather have Evan Mathis and drafted an o-lineman in the 1st. But the data sample is not sufficient for me to say that yet. But you cannot talk about Unger for Graham because Unger was outta here anyway. That is a fact.

Zorn to Largent was a little earlier than Madonna. Krieg to Largent maybe.

Russell isn't putting the ball where Graham can take advantage of his height. He throws the ball too much on a straight line trajectory. Today on the red zone pick, he tried to put it just over his shoulder when he should have put a little more air under it and let him elevate. That way, if Graham can't catch it, the ball flies harmlessly out the back of the end zone.

For a number of reasons, the Graham trade just isn't working out. Yes, Unger was hurt a lot, but we can't rid our roster of every player that has the injury bug. We do not know how to incorporate a tall, pass catching tight end into our offense, Graham is a horrible blocker on a run first team that has its problems on the OL, and our quarterback doesn't seem to know how to throw a pass to a basketball-type player that has a distinct height advantage over every defensive back in the league. And it should would have been nice to have had that #1 pick. Perhaps we could have found a center that could have mentored behind Unger.

[Uppercut]

I can cut the D a little slack as they had to be out there much longer and sort of looked spent late in Q-4. Not sure if it was hot there or not either.

As far as graham it sounded good but the teams flirtations with the glamour players seem to flop. Maybe we just need to keep an ugly hard hitting team with little flash like the ones that did well the past two seasons.

[kalibane]

Seconded. I wasn't really on board with the Jimmy Graham thing but watching the games it's pretty clear to me that Graham actually isn't the problem. It's part of why I'm over Bevell as well.

Take for instance that while Harvin is not blowing the doors off the league, Greg Roman doesn't seem to have too hard of a time getting Harvin involved. I'm really starting to think that Bevell just has a hard time integrating talent into the offense. He can't find a middle ground between forcing the ball outside the rhythm of the offense and taking advantage of the matchup opportunities these players offer.

It seems like every time they actually throw to Graham he reminds me of why he's special. Whether it's just how he attacks the ball or his effort after the catch. The offensive line issues muddle the issue somewhat but I just can't wrap my head around why they are having trouble integrating Graham. I don't expect him to catch 110 balls but it shouldn't be hard to get him 70-80 regardless of our run philosophy.

He should be elevating the offense. His blocking is terrible but we knew that. The only other beef that I have with him is his scramble drill effort. Other than that I just don't get it. Lack of production seems to be on Bevell not knowing what the hell to do and Wilson not trusting him the way he should.

[Futureite]

I don't understand the Bevel complaints. How does anyone know he is not calling plays for Graham? Graham wasn't going to do what he did in N.O or even close, and that's to be expected. N.O is a pass first team and they run an exotic pass scheme. They are continually in the top 3 in pass O yr in and yr out. They created all kinds of mismatches with numerous players which freed Graham up. Seatlle does not have the players or the system to do that, so this should not be a surprise.

Also, RW has to develop chemistry with Graham. It's important to protect the ball and RW is great at doing that, but you have to throw to Graham when he is covered. I lost count of the times the Saints killed us even when we had a great D that blanketed or even double teamed him. Great QBs have to put it up for their playmakers at times, and right now RW is not doing that. My guess is because to do so is not within what Carroll wants out of his QB or his team. It's not the Hawks way.

We had this debate many times over stats V Ws. This is exactly why only a handful of QBs are truly "elite". They can play pass first, avoid turnovers and their team can still post a high win %. It's just not as easy as "throwing more" or getting more opps. It looks as though Carroll has engrained in RW a certain way to play. Changing OCs ain't gonna do a thing to alter that, IMO.

[NorthHawk]

Future, they have been trying to make Graham into a blocking TE where at times he has been responsible for the DE.
I think that says a lot about how they perceive their Offensive talent. If they wanted a blocking TE, they should have gone after someone else.

As far as the OL goes, they haven't been much help to date, but aren't the real issue with getting Graham involved.
It's more about not using his special talents and wanting him to be something he's not.
Maybe they will get past that because he could become a big part of helping the Offense produce.

[kalibane]

I don't understand the Bevel complaints.

Explain this to me Future. Personnel: 3 WRs 1 TE 1 RB. Formation: Shotgun Empty Set 5 wide (so both RB and TE were split out). Play Call: Primary read TE up the seam.

Bevell took Jimmy Graham off the field to call this play and sent in Luke Willson. This isn't the only head scratching decision by Bevell just one of the better examples. Do you still not understand?

The whole point of Jimmy Graham is it doesn't matter that the defense is always watching him and that if he's one on one he's open. So absolutely Russell Wilson (in my mind) shares blame for not taking advantage of Graham's unique skill set. But running offense or not. The decision to keep Graham in for blocking on 50% of his snaps... decisions like the play I just outlined above make ZERO sense. If you plan on keeping Graham in to block half the time or plan on taking him off the field on passing plays where the TE is the primary read and Graham is fresh, you simply shouldn't be trading for Jimmy Graham.

I would say that even on running plays Graham would often be of more value split out, taking a safety or LB out of the box than staying in and failing miserably at blocking. Would you agree or no?

[Seahawks4Ever]

The problem isn't Bevell, the problem is Pete because Pete keeps the moron Bevell around.

We all know that Pete doesn't know Squat about the offense, that is hard to fathom because a very good defense coach should understand offensive schemes in order to defeat them.

Another thing is Pete's conservative philosophy. When you play to not lose, you will LOSE. It is simple as that but Pete is too stubborn to admit it, probably because he did have success for two seasons running. But it did cost us that play off game against Atlanta and it cost us the Super Bowl last season when we desperately needed one more TD to put away the Pats and we had nothing but 3 and outs, Hmm, just like yesterday.

There have been successful Head coaches that won Super Bowls but eventually got fired. Brian Billick is one and so is Mike Shanahan. Pete has had his success and if he keeps this up one day he will be fired and the team will be back where it was when he arrived, MEDIOCRE.

[Futureite]

Future, they have been trying to make Graham into a blocking TE where at times he has been responsible for the DE.
I think that says a lot about how they perceive their Offensive talent. If they wanted a blocking TE, they should have gone after someone else.

As far as the OL goes, they haven't been much help to date, but aren't the real issue with getting Graham involved.
It's more about not using his special talents and wanting him to be something he's not.
Maybe they will get past that because he could become a big part of helping the Offense produce.

I agree 100% with this. That is why IMO (just my opinion), he was not a good fit schematically to begin with. Remember when the Hawks bullied him and even said before the playoff game "Who's Jimmy?" They knew they could disrupt his rhythm and prevent him from playing his game by being physical with him. Now they are asking him to play that style of ball 24/7, and it's not what he's geared to do.

To utilize his skill set, Bevel/Carroll would really have to deviate from what they want this team to be. They'd have to install some 3 and 4 WR sets, split him out and let him play like a WR at times. That's where he generates the true mismatches. Sometimes it's just tough to incorporate a skill set into a scheme. Just look at the Eagle's struggles to get Murray involved.

[Futureite]

Kalibane;

Well I agree with you to a point. I don't know why they'd pull Graham out for a set with multiple receivers. The only logical explanation to me is that throwing downfield does not fit what Carroll wants to do very often. Consider this, which I have posted since 2012:

Your Oline runs a huge split. The WR sets often spread sideline to sideline. This creates a great deal of space for your skill players to do what they do best; make people miss or explode in space. Both RW and Lynch have unique talents in this respect. You run a zone blocking scheme with read option concepts built in and it gave defenses fits for several years because of the unique athletic talents of both of those guys. So to answer your question, it's not necessarily a bad idea schematically to put Luke Wilson into that set and run the read option. He runs a 4.5, is very athletic, and maybe he's just a better blocker than Graham in space. These concepts are what your entire O is predicated on.

To me, this all goes back to what I've said before. It's very hard for any QB to be trained a certain way - to have a team concept instilled in the entire organization that is based on protecting the ball, playing physical and beating an opponent down - and then to change course midstream. I've always said, it took guys like Brees, Brady etc years of throwing, making mistakes, playing pass first to learn how to do that. Now you are asking RW to do that after years of Carroll preaching ball security, asking him to run read option when the O struggles, etc. It'd be tough for ANY QB to make that transition. It's as tough for him as it is for Graham to incorporate a physical style of play into his game.

Now - and again, just my opinion - could they open the game up and let RW "throw him open"? In my limited knowledge of NFL football, I've always thought that was a great idea. It use to drive me nuts when the 49ers had TO and Garcia would not take at least one or two shots downfield when he was covered. He's covered? So what. He earned his living by making catches when he was covered. This is what Aaron Rodgers has learned to do with guys like James Jones, and this is why so many other players look elite when they play with him. Hawks should absolutely do this with Graham a couple times a game.

So, all in all I guess we agree on some or most of this. Good thing for you guys is that you are still in the thick of the race and have been in every game. Even if Hawks are a Wild Card team this year, they still have a legit shot of getting back to the SB.

[Anthony]

to me the biggest issue is the play design, as Brock Huard tweeted on 80% of the pass plays the Cincy defenders were running the routes better than our guys, Then add to that the risk aversion nature of the way PC wants this played and the fact they go into prevent defense and offense when they get a lead and then think you can just turn on being aggressive and turn it off at will. We went prevent and thats why we lost. The really weird part is Wilson is on pace for a career year, over 388 yards, over 20 tds, over 70% complt about 100 qb rating, 7.95 ypa and another 633 in rushing. To me what I think has change dis they reigned in the leash on Wilson even more, my guess is because of the oline and defense not being there yet.

[kalibane]

Future,

The play we are talking about was not a read option. It was a straight pass play, there was no RB in the back field, the RB was split out wide as a receiver, he didn't even motion out. Graham came on the field for one play which was a run call. Then Bevell took him off the field so he could go five wide and throw a pass down the seam to the TE. There is no logic behind that. It makes ZERO sense. And whether it's a play like that or the play in the Super Bowl where the primary read is the WR at the bottom of the depth chart who runs the worst patterns, Bevell's decision making has left a lot to be desired, in the last year or so especially.

Also Pete's philosophy is run heavy but when they do pass to attack down the field. So you're read is wrong. Pete wants chunk plays in the passing game.

[Futureite]

Future,

The play we are talking about was not a read option. It was a straight pass play, there was no RB in the back field, the RB was split out wide as a receiver, he didn't even motion out. Graham came on the field for one play which was a run call. Then Bevell took him off the field so he could go five wide and throw a pass down the seam to the TE. There is no logic behind that. It makes ZERO sense. And whether it's a play like that or the play in the Super Bowl where the primary read is the WR at the bottom of the depth chart who runs the worst patterns, Bevell's decision making has left a lot to be desired, in the last year or so especially.

Also Pete's philosophy is run heavy but when they do pass to attack down the field. So you're read is wrong. Pete wants chunk plays in the passing game.

I agree with you there. Maybe I didn't state what I wanted to clearly. Maybe Bevel is a problem. Seems like OC switches are what we all want when an O struggles, but there are usually other underlying problems. Carroll should probably invest in a true number 1 and let RW work with him for a full offseason if he wants his pass O to be more dynamic and something other than a big play, play action attack.

[Uppercut]

Hey, maybe Bevell will go to USC and solve a number of issues around here.

[kalibane]

To me it's not just because the offense is struggling. I think the main reason the offense is struggling is the offensive line is garbage, which is separate from Bevell. I'm not one of those guys, for instance who was all over Gus Bradley when the defense wasn't getting the job done under Mora and in the early transition year to Pete Carroll.

My issues with Bevell have to do with specific situational decision making and his ability to incorporate talent. Take the play call at the end of the Detroit game. 3rd and 2. Detroit was out of time outs. Even if you run and fail to pick up the first down Detroit has 50 seconds (minus however many seconds the punt play takes) with no timeouts to score. Bevell decides to call a pass play with a 7 step drop (even though Detroit was destroying the offensive line all 2nd half) and long developing patterns. Sure they converted the play but ONLY because Russell Wilson once again pulled a rabbit out of his hat by scrambling away from what would have been a sure sack against 90% of NFL QBs.

[Hawkstar]

Hey, maybe Bevell will go to USC and solve a number of issues around here.

I'll help him pack.

[NorthHawk]

To me it's not just because the offense is struggling. I think the main reason the offense is struggling is the offensive line is garbage, which is separate from Bevell. I'm not one of those guys, for instance who was all over Gus Bradley when the defense wasn't getting the job done under Mora and in the early transition year to Pete Carroll.

My issues with Bevell have to do with specific situational decision making and his ability to incorporate talent. Take the play call at the end of the Detroit game. 3rd and 2. Detroit was out of time outs. Even if you run and fail to pick up the first down Detroit has 50 seconds (minus however many seconds the punt play takes) with no timeouts to score. Bevell decides to call a pass play with a 7 step drop (even though Detroit was destroying the offensive line all 2nd half) and long developing patterns. Sure they converted the play but ONLY because Russell Wilson once again pulled a rabbit out of his hat by scrambling away from what would have been a sure sack against 90% of NFL QBs.

I was on the edge of the couch yelling NOOooooo, don't pass!
Good play by Wilson and Kearse (I think it was him), but it wasn't the highest % play at that time.
He almost outsmarted himself that time, like it seems he did in the Super Bowl.

That's why this is a little strange.
We have a conservative HC who wants to run and control the clock, but the OC calls a play that is a gamble when the smart play is to run down the clock.
I have trouble balancing the words about the style of play and the actions on the field at critical times. They don't mesh.
Maybe it's their way of breaking tendencies. That's the biggest rationalization that comes to mind.

[kalibane]

I'm fairly sure that's the reason. Trying to zig when they think you're going to zag. But too often with Bevell it manifests in going against what are by far your biggest strengths into an unnecessary level of weakness.

That's what the Super Bowl call boils down to. Okay you think they are loading up against the run so you want to pass and catch them off guard. Then why not give them a run look and force them to sell out. No instead you give them a pass look so the corner can just jump hard on the slant instead of worrying about Marshawn. There are so many things he could have done on that play (run or pass) that would have made far more sense (even from a gotcha play standpoint) than the play he dialed up. *sigh* It was such a risky play call in a situation where risk was completely unnecessary.

Like you said... he outsmarts himself.

[Hawktawk]

It really doesn't matter what style of offense a team likes to run. You have to have a few change ups in your arsenal. Frankly I loved the call to throw late vs Detroit to Ice the game.
Last Sunday late in the second half it seemed the success being had by Rawls was absolutely setting up the hay maker with an early down play action shot down the field but it just never happened. I guess they expected Rawls to rip off another 70 yarder. Thats a lot to ask for.
Obviously everyone on the staff knows their X's and O's. It seems to be the sense of feeling the pulse of the game that is lacking with this team so far this year.

[kalibane]

They took Rawls out of the game on the last couple of drives this week. Another decision I couldn't figure out. The play call against Detroit was horrible. Again, it's not because they called a pass. It's all about the context of the situation and the kind of pass play he called. I refuse to call it good just because he happened to work out this time.

A deep drop back against a defensive line that had been running roughshod over the offensive line all through the 2nd half makes no sense. It should have been a high percentage pass play to insure the clock keeps moving and Wilson doesn't lose too much yardage if protection breaks down. If Kearse doesn't make that catch, Detroit has 1:30 to pick up 30-40 yards for a game tying field goal. The important aspect of that play call wasn't that it was successful, it's how it was successful. It wasn't the play design that made it a success, it was a great play made by Wilson, outside of the design of the play.

Our whole offense is predicated on "playing it safe" for the most part and then your play caller picks the lowest percentage plays at the most crucial times in the games. It's not smart.

[Anthony]

They took Rawls out of the game on the last couple of drives this week. Another decision I couldn't figure out. The play call against Detroit was horrible. Again, it's not because they called a pass. It's all about the context of the situation and the kind of pass play he called. I refuse to call it good just because he happened to work out this time.

A deep drop back against a defensive line that had been running roughshod over the offensive line all through the 2nd half makes no sense. It should have been a high percentage pass play to insure the clock keeps moving and Wilson doesn't lose too much yardage if protection breaks down. If Kearse doesn't make that catch, Detroit has 1:30 to pick up 30-40 yards for a game tying field goal. The important aspect of that play call wasn't that it was successful, it's how it was successful. It wasn't the play design that made it a success, it was a great play made by Wilson, outside of the design of the play.

Our whole offense is predicated on "playing it safe" for the most part and then your play caller picks the lowest percentage plays at the most crucial times in the games. It's not smart.

Our offense is simple predictable play calling, keeping it safe and waiting for Wilson to make magic. Not a great offense and it is all on the OC and PC. If they just let the reigns totally off of Wilson we would be unstoppable. But they will not because PC still wants his defense to win the game with a lead in the 4th QTr. What is also interesting is how once the tip Int happed we went conservative. It appears one To by Wilson and they pull the strings, so is it any wonder he is hesitant to make a mistake. All that said the really weird part is Wilson is on pace for over 3800 yards (his most) over 20tds, over 70% compt, only 9 ints, over 100 Qb rating, and almost 700 yards rushing. All this despite the bad oline, bad play calling and design.

[RiverDog]

Our offense is simple predictable play calling, keeping it safe and waiting for Wilson to make magic. Not a great offense and it is all on the OC and PC. If they just let the reigns totally off of Wilson we would be unstoppable. But they will not because PC still wants his defense to win the game with a lead in the 4th QTr. What is also interesting is how once the tip Int happed we went conservative. It appears one To by Wilson and they pull the strings, so is it any wonder he is hesitant to make a mistake. All that said the really weird part is Wilson is on pace for over 3800 yards (his most) over 20tds, over 70% compt, only 9 ints, over 100 Qb rating, and almost 700 yards rushing. All this despite the bad oline, bad play calling and design.

Russell has to take his fair share of the blame, too. He can't seem to take advantage of Jimmy Graham's tool set, tries to thread the ball in over his shoulder and hit him in stride when he should be putting some air underneath it and making him go up and over his defenders. That red zone pick was a prime example. In addition, Russell isn't making good decisions on the read option. I don't know how many times Cincy had their DE's crashing on the RB and left the outside wide open yet he handed it off. He got called for a delay of game penalty when we had 3 TO's left. There were times when he didn't sense the pressure and step up into the pocket. A number of QB sacks we've surrendered this season is his fault for holding onto the ball too long. And he's turned the ball over a lot in recent games, going back to the NFCCG.

I couldn't give a rip about his stats, they don't tell the whole story. The only stat that's significant is the one that reads 2-3.

[c_hawkbob]

Russell has to take his fair share of the blame, too.

What in the world would make you think he doesn't?

[Anthony]

Russell has to take his fair share of the blame, too. He can't seem to take advantage of Jimmy Graham's tool set, tries to thread the ball in over his shoulder and hit him in stride when he should be putting some air underneath it and making him go up and over his defenders. That red zone pick was a prime example. In addition, Russell isn't making good decisions on the read option. I don't know how many times Cincy had their DE's crashing on the RB and left the outside wide open yet he handed it off. He got called for a delay of game penalty when we had 3 TO's left. There were times when he didn't sense the pressure and step up into the pocket. A number of QB sacks we've surrendered this season is his fault for holding onto the ball too long. And he's turned the ball over a lot in recent games, going back to the NFCCG.

I couldn't give a rip about his stats, they don't tell the whole story. The only stat that's significant is the one that reads 2-3.

were did I say Wilson should get some of the blame? I never did, All I said was he is having a pretty good year. He has made some mistakes like all QBs including Rodgers does, but he has not been 1 of the top 3 reasons we have lost 3 games. A lot of the things like handing it off when DEs crash you are assuming he had another option, they have said a lot of the runs that look like RO are not they are run plays. As to the sacks yes a few are on him and yet there are a lot more than did not happen because of him. As I said he has made some mistakes as all players do but he is not in the top 3 for reason we are 2-3.

[Hawktawk]

Russell has to take his fair share of the blame, too. He can't seem to take advantage of Jimmy Graham's tool set, tries to thread the ball in over his shoulder and hit him in stride when he should be putting some air underneath it and making him go up and over his defenders. That red zone pick was a prime example. In addition, Russell isn't making good decisions on the read option. I don't know how many times Cincy had their DE's crashing on the RB and left the outside wide open yet he handed it off. He got called for a delay of game penalty when we had 3 TO's left. There were times when he didn't sense the pressure and step up into the pocket. A number of QB sacks we've surrendered this season is his fault for holding onto the ball too long. And he's turned the ball over a lot in recent games, going back to the NFCCG.

I couldn't give a rip about his stats, they don't tell the whole story. The only stat that's significant is the one that reads 2-3.

Of the three picks Wilson has thrown the one last Sunday was the most devastating. He had Graham for a TD easy if he just gets a little air under it. Same sort of deal vs GB on the screen to Lynch. I dont know if he would have scored but he would have went a long ways. Russ seems to be trying to aim the ball through windows instead of shaping his throws like hes done his whole career. Yes he deserves a certain share of criticism and he has said it himself.I dont ever expect Wilson to be a David Carr esque shell shocked QB but I do wonder if the pounding is starting to wear on him a little.