Game within the game predictions for SEA vs GB

[Hasselbeck]

Who's going to cover Randall Cobb?

I think you will see a lot Sherman on Cobb. Hopefully Simon can go as his size would matchup well with Jones or Adams.

If it's Shead/Burley as the 3rd .. well.. yikes.

 

[ptisme]

Who's going to cover Randall Cobb?

I think you will see a lot Sherman on Cobb. Hopefully Simon can go as his size would matchup well with Jones or Adams.

If it's Shead/Burley as the 3rd .. well.. yikes.

Is Sherman best suited to play Cobb inside? I thought he was best outside?

 

[Hasselbeck]

Who's going to cover Randall Cobb?

I think you will see a lot Sherman on Cobb. Hopefully Simon can go as his size would matchup well with Jones or Adams.

If it's Shead/Burley as the 3rd .. well.. yikes.

Is Sherman best suited to play Cobb inside? I thought he was best outside?

He is, but the Kam thing has our secondary all out of whack... and our production from our nickel corners has been brutal since Lane went down in the Super Bowl. Against the Rams, Sherman slid inside to cover the slot on passing downs and Shead played outside.

Only other option for the nickel corner would be Tye Smith, but putting a rookie out there against the best QB in football seems like a losing proposition.

I think Richard Rodgers could be a bigger problem for the defense than Cobb. Which sounds funny, but Kam was our TE eliminator and Jared Cook ate us alive last week.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Nobody, including Green Bay, has a D-Line like the Rams'. Bevell pretty much conceded the game before it started by playing an almost effeminate game against that D-line. He sacrificed a lot of concepts and basically left Wilson to the wolves. But they'll both be able to do a lot more against the Packers. Expect to see a few more read-option, a few more designed rollouts, some more work on the short passing game, and yes, some more deep shots. Maybe even one or two of Wilson's trademark "run-around-for-ten-seconds-and-OH-MY-GOD-DID-YOU-SEE-THAT" plays.

And if our back seven can show us that last week was an aberration, Seattle might just have a chance to keep it close. I do know that our linebackers are better than what we saw against the Rams. I'm hoping that what we saw isn't a loss of confidence because of Kam being gone, and I'm also hoping it's not Kris Richard being green, because that's not quickly fixed.

The encouraging thing is that Pete always seems to have Rodgers' number. He has never gotten much done against our defense. A pick and a splash ST play might just tip us over the edge.

It's the defense I'm most worried about.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Here's hoping Frank does a Lambeau leap after feasting on Rodgers for a sack and fumble return for six!!

 

[Siouxhawk]

Nobody, including Green Bay, has a D-Line like the Rams'. Bevell pretty much conceded the game before it started by playing an almost effeminate game against that D-line. He sacrificed a lot of concepts and basically left Wilson to the wolves. But they'll both be able to do a lot more against the Packers. Expect to see a few more read-option, a few more designed rollouts, some more work on the short passing game, and yes, some more deep shots. Maybe even one or two of Wilson's trademark "run-around-for-ten-seconds-and-OH-MY-GOD-DID-YOU-SEE-THAT" plays.

And if our back seven can show us that last week was an aberration, Seattle might just have a chance to keep it close. I do know that our linebackers are better than what we saw against the Rams. I'm hoping that what we saw isn't a loss of confidence because of Kam being gone, and I'm also hoping it's not Kris Richard being green, because that's not quickly fixed.

The encouraging thing is that Pete always seems to have Rodgers' number. He has never gotten much done against our defense. A pick and a splash ST play might just tip us over the edge.

It's the defense I'm most worried about.

Kind of hard to take you seriously when you use phrases such as "he pretty much conceded the game before it started" and playing an "effeminate" game.
You may be trying to make a point with such dramatic and unrealistic phrasing, but that would be about it.

 

[Hasselbeck]

And if our back seven can show us that last week was an aberration, Seattle might just have a chance to keep it close. I do know that our linebackers are better than what we saw against the Rams. I'm hoping that what we saw isn't a loss of confidence because of Kam being gone, and I'm also hoping it's not Kris Richard being green, because that's not quickly fixed.

I agree with your whole post, but this point .. I think I side with Sherman on it. The defense just didn't execute. So many missed tackles, they didn't play their zones deep enough (maybe that's related to Kam since he apparently is paramount in getting guys in the right spots), and so forth. Fortunately that can all be fixed.. I think maybe the team was distracted by the Kam thing and coupled that with maybe not taking the Rams very seriously on offense. The game on Sunday reminded me a lot of their game in Indy a couple years ago in how the defense played.

I don't think it's Richard, because our defense is a lot like the Patriots in that.. sure they have an assistant calling plays and serving as defacto defensive coordinator.. but it's Pete Carroll's defense, just like in New England.. it's Bill Belichick's defense.

If they clean up the tackling and play more inspired football.. there's no reason why they can't beat the Packers on Sunday Night.

 

[Atradees]

Run Run Run....Though the Packers likely have been workin on it. (stoppin the run) since their last poor performance.

Good old fashion control the clock.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I predict Collinsworth will have a sore chin after this game. I mean, he is going to be watching Lord Rodgers play football.

 

[drcool]

Cobb catches a innocuous 4 yard slant and out of nowhere #37 comes flying in and FLATTENS Cobb jarring the ball loose which the Seahawks recover. As they are clearing up the pile of players and carnage a train whistle plays over the loudspeakers "Whoooo Whoooo!!! All Aboard!!!!!" and #37 stands up, rips off his jersey to reveal.... #31!!! Jim Ross, who just so happens to be doing guest commentary goes into full JR mode... "Wait a minute... is that?? No, it can't be... Good God almighty!!! Its Kam Chancellor! The Kamtrack is back!!!"

Oh wait... that's just what happened in my dream.

In reality I expect to see a fairly similar offensive plan as we saw on Sunday with a few more shots downfield. Seattle wants to control the clock as much as they can and keep Aaron Rodgers off the field. Lots of Marshawn, lots of short passes with Graham getting a bit more involved.

 

[strat1080]

I think Seattle will use the play-action a lot and go deep in this game. I expect a 60 yard plus TD for Lockett

I am worried that we will see Rodgers under pressure several times and go ah they just about had him but instead he completed 10-15 yard passes and sure most of them will be on 3rd downs

The question is whether or not Wilson will have the protection to go deep. Don't forget this Packers Front 7 gave Wilson fits in the playoffs last year and got to Romo 4 times the game before behind the best OL in the NFL. They didn't lose any pass rushers from that Front 7. The Packers may not always be a good run defense but they always bank on being able to get pressure on the QB.

 

[strat1080]

Nobody, including Green Bay, has a D-Line like the Rams'. Bevell pretty much conceded the game before it started by playing an almost effeminate game against that D-line. He sacrificed a lot of concepts and basically left Wilson to the wolves. But they'll both be able to do a lot more against the Packers. Expect to see a few more read-option, a few more designed rollouts, some more work on the short passing game, and yes, some more deep shots. Maybe even one or two of Wilson's trademark "run-around-for-ten-seconds-and-OH-MY-GOD-DID-YOU-SEE-THAT" plays.

And if our back seven can show us that last week was an aberration, Seattle might just have a chance to keep it close. I do know that our linebackers are better than what we saw against the Rams. I'm hoping that what we saw isn't a loss of confidence because of Kam being gone, and I'm also hoping it's not Kris Richard being green, because that's not quickly fixed.

The encouraging thing is that Pete always seems to have Rodgers' number. He has never gotten much done against our defense. A pick and a splash ST play might just tip us over the edge.

It's the defense I'm most worried about.

Did you even watch the NFC Championship Game? Green Bay had 9 sacks in their two playoff games last year including 5 against Wilson. While they have a mediocre run defense they have consistently been able to apply pressure to QBs over the last few years. That is their MO. That is what they try to do and what they draft to do. They sacked Romo 4 times behind the best OL in the NFL. Very few teams were able to get pressure on Romo last year. That Packers Front 7 had Wilson running for his life and picked him off 4 times. I mean seriously. Did you not watch the playoff game?

I agree. St Louis has a tremendous defensive front. But I don't think its the best defensive front in the NFL. I'd take the Jets and Bills and a few other teams defensive front over St Louis. Green Bay had more sacks last year than St Louis did. I think you are just trying to be an optimist and pretend like Seattle doesn't have OL problems. I agree they aren't going to look that bad every week but don't forget that this Packers defensive front harassed Russell Wilson and handed him the worst statistical game of his career. If you have a good OL you shouldn't be giving up 6 sacks to anybody. St Louis isn't going to have 96 ( their current average extrapolated over 16 games) sacks this year. Some teams are going to neutralize their pass rush.

 

[JAGHAWK]

Reading through the Packers forum and seeing their fans just as weary of a win as we are, I'm genuinely shocked. I guess they are lot more humble than I ever gave them credit for. Seems as though this game could go either way. Russ and Lynch need to work the Packers defense into the ground. They will try to exploit our weaknesses the same way. Whoever does a better job of that will win this game. Still calling a Seahawks W!

 

[StoneCold]

I think last weeks defensive performance can be chalked up to "too many changing parts". New players, old players playing in different positions, new DC and of course missing Kam. It will take them time to gel. Plenty of talent, but it has to work together and that takes playing time in real games. Similar things can be said of our offense. Will they gel this Sunday? I don't know.

If the defense gets it together we win easily, but I don't expect it to happen all at once so what I truly expect is a wild, high scoring game by both teams. We will run almost at will on offense and Rodgers will have a big day passing.

Final score:
Hawks 37 - GB 34
SC

 

[ptisme]

Who's going to cover Randall Cobb?

I think you will see a lot Sherman on Cobb. Hopefully Simon can go as his size would matchup well with Jones or Adams.

If it's Shead/Burley as the 3rd .. well.. yikes.

Is Sherman best suited to play Cobb inside? I thought he was best outside?

He is, but the Kam thing has our secondary all out of whack... and our production from our nickel corners has been brutal since Lane went down in the Super Bowl. Against the Rams, Sherman slid inside to cover the slot on passing downs and Shead played outside.

Only other option for the nickel corner would be Tye Smith, but putting a rookie out there against the best QB in football seems like a losing proposition.

I think Richard Rodgers could be a bigger problem for the defense than Cobb. Which sounds funny, but Kam was our TE eliminator and Jared Cook ate us alive last week.

So my line of thinking is this (and correct me if I'm wrong): If Sherman slides inside to cover the speedy little Cobb, that's not the type of receiver he excels at shutting down correct? Further, if you move him off the big receiver on the outside and move him inside, Rodgers can now attack both sides of the field correct? BTW, one on one against Adams with a CB not named Sherman is going to end bad for you guys. Here's the other thing: You can't keep both safeties back this game or Rodgers will kill you by just taking off with it... Something he couldn't do in the NFCCG. Put seven men in the box and Lacy will hammer it up the middle all night.... Also, I know Seattle is better up front in this meeting but I don't see them being able to pressure Rodgers much at Lambeau. The pass rush will be slowed by Rodger's hard counts and play is always a bit slower on grass. Not to mention GB has a top 5 Oline.... Thoughts?

 

[ptisme]

Nobody, including Green Bay, has a D-Line like the Rams'. Bevell pretty much conceded the game before it started by playing an almost effeminate game against that D-line. He sacrificed a lot of concepts and basically left Wilson to the wolves. But they'll both be able to do a lot more against the Packers. Expect to see a few more read-option, a few more designed rollouts, some more work on the short passing game, and yes, some more deep shots. Maybe even one or two of Wilson's trademark "run-around-for-ten-seconds-and-OH-MY-GOD-DID-YOU-SEE-THAT" plays.

And if our back seven can show us that last week was an aberration, Seattle might just have a chance to keep it close. I do know that our linebackers are better than what we saw against the Rams. I'm hoping that what we saw isn't a loss of confidence because of Kam being gone, and I'm also hoping it's not Kris Richard being green, because that's not quickly fixed.

The encouraging thing is that Pete always seems to have Rodgers' number. He has never gotten much done against our defense. A pick and a splash ST play might just tip us over the edge.

It's the defense I'm most worried about.

Couple points:
1. While GB has no where near the defense St. Louis has, the did put a heavy damper on Seattle for 50 some minutes up in Seattle till they went prevent.
2. While Pete has had Rodgers' number, those games were in Seattle... This offense is so much more dynamic at Lambeau where the crowd goes quiet before the snap and Rodgers can work over a defense. Also, your defense is missing Kam this time-I would assume that will make a difference?

 

[marko358]

What's the over/under at for Bennett being lined up in the neutral zone?

 

[ptisme]

And if our back seven can show us that last week was an aberration, Seattle might just have a chance to keep it close. I do know that our linebackers are better than what we saw against the Rams. I'm hoping that what we saw isn't a loss of confidence because of Kam being gone, and I'm also hoping it's not Kris Richard being green, because that's not quickly fixed.

I agree with your whole post, but this point .. I think I side with Sherman on it. The defense just didn't execute. So many missed tackles, they didn't play their zones deep enough (maybe that's related to Kam since he apparently is paramount in getting guys in the right spots), and so forth. Fortunately that can all be fixed.. I think maybe the team was distracted by the Kam thing and coupled that with maybe not taking the Rams very seriously on offense. The game on Sunday reminded me a lot of their game in Indy a couple years ago in how the defense played.

I don't think it's Richard, because our defense is a lot like the Patriots in that.. sure they have an assistant calling plays and serving as defacto defensive coordinator.. but it's Pete Carroll's defense, just like in New England.. it's Bill Belichick's defense.

If they clean up the tackling and play more inspired football.. there's no reason why they can't beat the Packers on Sunday Night.

You make a good point... But I think the distractions are every bit as present. Seems there may be some dissention I the locker room with how the organization is treating Kam... I could easily see Seattle folding if they get down early given the state of the locker room...

 

[StoneCold]

You make a good point... But I think the distractions are every bit as present. Seems there may be some dissention I the locker room with how the organization is treating Kam... I could easily see Seattle folding if they get down early given the state of the locker room...

Oh my, resorting to wishful thinking are we? Must be having doubts. :stirthepot:

 

[Milehighhawk]

You make a good point... But I think the distractions are every bit as present. Seems there may be some dissention I the locker room with how the organization is treating Kam... I could easily see Seattle folding if they get down early given the state of the locker room...

Oh my, resorting to wishful thinking are we? Must be having doubts. :stirthepot:

Yes I mean exactly like they folded down 2 scores with just over 3 minutes left in the game right? Right?