Seahawks Redzone

[Own The West]

So, what do we do differently next year since it's a given that we're going to have the same personnel?

Bevell will still be calling the same plays he did in 2011.
Wilson will still be holding on to the ball too long waiting for an open receiver.
The OL will still be learning on the job.
Our RBs will still be adequate, but not intimidating.
We will still be a finesse team in a smashmouth division.

Is Butler's pick going to be the end of our SB window or are we going to step up?

 

[West TX Hawk]

Siouxhawk .[/quote]
So what's best for the organization?[/quote]

Honestly, healing-both literally and figuratively.

The physical injuries heal up over the offseason-Wilson, Earl and Tyler will be ready to go. But the team's core need to find an inner hunger and drive that perhaps hasn't been there the last couple years. The in-fighting needs to stop. There needs to be a brotherhood and sense of unity that used to be there. They were truly soldiers before, warriors fighting for each other to prove the entire nation wrong.

For the coaching aspect, we all have to accept that Pete is never going to fire Cable or Bevell or Richard. As much as many of us want a little shakeup, it's not going to ever happen. So for Pete to instill the same confidence in his system, he needs to at least adapt and evolve his offensive and defensive philosophies. We're no longer overpowering our opponents. We do not dominate in physicality and athleticism that we once did. We can no longer just line up our basic 4-3, cover 2 and expect our D to win it for us. Our O just doesn't fool anyone and situational awareness and RZ strategy needs to change.

More importantly, Pete needs to find a way to truly heal a team that's been on an emotional roller coaster the past 4 years. Many commented that Pete looked drained at the end of the year. He needs to instill a fire back in the team. And for the sake of our QB's health and everyone's sanity, draft some real tackles and revamp the OL.

I certainly concur with you this is the finest Seahawk era ever. Let's just hope there's a chance at another SB run but some changes will have to be made. Our existing team and system won't get us there as is.

 

[Siouxhawk]

We have some common ground. For instance, I agree we need to find a leader or two in the locker room to rekindle that warrior-like mentality that so fired us up in 2013 and 2014. These leaders will have to convey that at all costs we protect the team as they are our brothers while regenerating that us-against-the-world mentality. Earl, Kam and Cliff on defense and maybe Britt on offense could definitely provide that veteran leadership, but they gotta wanta take that responsibility on.

Although I disagree with you on needing a coaching shakeup -- because I put my belief in the strong bond of continuity and I actually see our staff as being one of the best in the league -- we can't have anymore of that business of not being on the same page in pass coverage assignments and blocking techniques and discipline. Bevell and Carl Smith have to get Russ coached up to anticipate and have confidence in our receivers' route running abilities so that the throw can be made before a guy like Richardson comes out of his break.

Pete's basic to the core philosophies aren't going to change and maybe that's a good thing. It's not just about being a rah-rah type. He treats people with respect and dignity and let's them all have a voice. He empowers them while keeping things loose and that's an environment everyone wants to be around. It's Googleesque.

On the field, we need to refind a way to get turnovers and get off the field quicker. I'd like to see more rotation on the DLine to keep Bennett and Avril fresh. I have a good feeling going forward about our run game on offense. Of course that will be predicted by improved line play, an area I believe we'll start to see dividends on.

Get everyone healthy and we'll all be bunking at Uncle Si's place for next year's Super Bowl.

 

[hawknation2017]

Were you at practice so that you can refute that?

Were you? He was the worst receiver on the roster -- if you can even call him that, since he was mostly on the team for special teams purposes.

But keep beating that dead horse. Because I'm sure Doug Baldwin, despite all of his experience in the red zone, would have attacked the ball in the same manner.

You need to understand the NFL better, because that's not how it works. You call a play number and the personnel package is already built into the play. The determination to have Ricardo in there was set well before the fact. Maybe you could make a switch during a timeout, but we didn't take one there.

This post does not support your argument in any way. I think you know that too. So why write it? To distract people with utter nonsense in order to protect your sacred cow.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Were you at practice so that you can refute that?

Were you? He was the worst receiver on the roster -- if you can even call him that, since he was mostly on the team for special teams purposes.

But keep beating that dead horse. Because I'm sure Doug Baldwin, despite all of his experience in the red zone, would have attacked the ball in the same manner.

You need to understand the NFL better, because that's not how it works. You call a play number and the personnel package is already built into the play. The determination to have Ricardo in there was set well before the fact. Maybe you could make a switch during a timeout, but we didn't take one there.

This post does not support your argument in any way. I think you know that too. So why write it? To distract people with utter nonsense in order to protect your sacred cow.

I answered your question. You were bewildered as to why Ricardo was in and I told you.

 

[NFSeahawks]

Okay first things first. Well for one you cannot actually exclude Bevel as he calls the plays.

Wilsons compt% in the red zone is not good, as the post states. However is efficiency % is very very good at 72%. Wilson was 15th in attempts in the redzone but was sacked the most in the league in the redzone. I know that Dilfer said he held onto the ball to long when there were small windows, I have seen this, but the question is, is that Wilsons choice or PC adversity to TOs, something we may never know. Then comes the oline well enough said they suck. Suffice it to say there are numerous reason why they struggle, Bevel, Rw, Oline, PC. As the writer says at the end it is pretty much everyone.

Throw the ball away, he was doing it a ton in his first two years in the league and then you barely saw it at all this year.

Not super related but Russell Wilson definitely acts like he's a celebrity now, his body language and other things kinda irk me, especially on some of his facebook live vids. I honestly think he's having a hard time balancing all the things going on in his life and I don't expect that to get much better sadly.

I hope I'm wrong though, really.

 

[NFSeahawks]

The players we had in for the topic of discussion easily could have made that work if executed properly, which is the tonic of every successful play. In fact, the personnel group was likely the same that had been in there practicing that particular package for 2 weeks.

If Ricardo gets to that spot a split second quicker, it's a touchdown. It's as simple as that.

Doesn't matter... it wasn't our strongest play call or using our best players to their strengths. It was a bad call and cost the team a Super Bowl. There really is no debate here.

You can breakdown why the play didn't work, but the fact is it asked role players to do important things in the biggest moment of the biggest game, and our QB to do something that's not his biggest attribute.

Bad. call.

And it's easy with 20/20 hindsight to say it wouldn't work and cost us 49, but Marshawn could have fumbled as well and you'd have the same end result and second guessing.

And as I said, the players in on that play were likely the ones practicing it for 2 weeks or longer leading up to the game. So all the coaches were in on it and knew what was coming. Only a brief hesitation by Ricardo off his break and a fantastic play by Butler in his coming-out party prevented a touchdown.

This speculation is based on what? We saw a receiver 5th on the depth chart do something a player 5th on the depth chart would do to justify that place on the depth chart in one of the most pivotal plays of the game. Yes, there were other plays that could have sealed the deal - those plays warrant introspection in themselves and detailing what went wrong and room for improvement. They are not excuses for an instance of the OC being seemingly agnostic towards the relative talents between his WR personnel.

The Seahawks coaching staff aren't infallible, they make mistakes like everyone else. They happened to make a gaffe in this case. By not taking ownership of that gaffe and assigning blame to the 5th WR who made hay on special teams, they stunted a huge learning opportunity and they continue to make little gaffes like this along the way in this vein. Like not directly addressing RW to Kearse despite it being a net negative all year long.

In some ways, I don't care if that the play itself failed, nothing to be done but learn from it. I don't feel they learned from it. And as long as you put everything on execution without any reference to the coaching staff putting players in the best position to execute to their ability, you'll just continue down this path of vacuous excuses for why Seahawks players can't get it done. It's a team game, start acting like coaches are part of the team.

Very well said, as in most thread I started reading from like the middle of the page 2, lol.

Petes philosophy doesn't work because he doesn't include the coaches, it's b.s.

 

[hawknation2017]

Were you? He was the worst receiver on the roster -- if you can even call him that, since he was mostly on the team for special teams purposes.

But keep beating that dead horse. Because I'm sure Doug Baldwin, despite all of his experience in the red zone, would have attacked the ball in the same manner.

You need to understand the NFL better, because that's not how it works. You call a play number and the personnel package is already built into the play. The determination to have Ricardo in there was set well before the fact. Maybe you could make a switch during a timeout, but we didn't take one there.

This post does not support your argument in any way. I think you know that too. So why write it? To distract people with utter nonsense in order to protect your sacred cow.

I answered your question. You were bewildered as to why Ricardo was in and I told you.

Apparently, your willingness to distort (for the sake of protecting Bev) extends to the fabrication of blatant lies.

Because Ricardo Lockette was NOT on the field for the previous play:


Lockette entered the field specifically for this play, replacing fullback Will Tukuafu from the previous play.

Where is your intellectual honesty? You have none when it comes to Bev. In fact, the more you post nonsense, the more you make me dislike him.

 

[Siouxhawk]

You need to understand the NFL better, because that's not how it works. You call a play number and the personnel package is already built into the play. The determination to have Ricardo in there was set well before the fact. Maybe you could make a switch during a timeout, but we didn't take one there.

This post does not support your argument in any way. I think you know that too. So why write it? To distract people with utter nonsense in order to protect your sacred cow.

I answered your question. You were bewildered as to why Ricardo was in and I told you.

Apparently, your willingness to distort (for the sake of protecting Bev) extends to the fabrication of blatant lies.

Because Ricardo Lockette was NOT on the field for the previous play:


Lockette entered the field specifically for this play, replacing fullback Will Tukuafu from the previous play.

Where is your intellectual honesty? You have none when it comes to Bev. In fact, the more you post nonsense, the more you make me dislike him.[/quote]
Dude, what is your deal? I never wrote about the previous play. Read thoroughly before you write.

I was referring to personnel packages for specific plays. Those are set in advance.

 

[hawknation2017]

Dude, what is your deal? I never wrote about the previous play. Read thoroughly before you write.

I was referring to personnel packages for specific plays. Those are set in advance.

Just more obfuscation and nonsense. What does that have anything to do with why our worst WR was made the first read on that play? Bevell chose Lockette for that personnel package. That alone was a stupid decision. The stupidity was only compounded by the dialing up of that play in that situation.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Dude, what is your deal? I never wrote about the previous play. Read thoroughly before you write.

I was referring to personnel packages for specific plays. Those are set in advance.

Just more obfuscation and nonsense. What does that have anything to do with why our worst WR was made the first read on that play? Bevell chose Lockette for that personnel package. That alone was a stupid decision. The stupidity was only compounded by the dialing up of that play in that situation.

You don't just pick players off the sidelines. You seriously need to learn about how the NFL works before formulating these opinions. Personnel packages are installed well before game time.

 

[hawknation2017]

Dude, what is your deal? I never wrote about the previous play. Read thoroughly before you write.

I was referring to personnel packages for specific plays. Those are set in advance.

Just more obfuscation and nonsense. What does that have anything to do with why our worst WR was made the first read on that play? Bevell chose Lockette for that personnel package. That alone was a stupid decision. The stupidity was only compounded by the dialing up of that play in that situation.

You don't just pick players off the sidelines. You seriously need to learn about how the NFL works before formulating these opinions. Personnel packages are installed well before game time.

Now, I am not sure if you are being intentionally ignorant of the situation or not. Lockette was chosen for that personnel package when the play was designed. OK. That does not explain either why he was chosen for that play or why that play was called in that situation, knowing that Lockette would be the first read. Tell me you are not really this unobjective.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Tell me you are not really this unobjective.

He could tell you that, but lying is wrong.

 

[Anthony!]

Okay first things first. Well for one you cannot actually exclude Bevel as he calls the plays.

Wilsons compt% in the red zone is not good, as the post states. However is efficiency % is very very good at 72%. Wilson was 15th in attempts in the redzone but was sacked the most in the league in the redzone. I know that Dilfer said he held onto the ball to long when there were small windows, I have seen this, but the question is, is that Wilsons choice or PC adversity to TOs, something we may never know. Then comes the oline well enough said they suck. Suffice it to say there are numerous reason why they struggle, Bevel, Rw, Oline, PC. As the writer says at the end it is pretty much everyone.

Throw the ball away, he was doing it a ton in his first two years in the league and then you barely saw it at all this year.

Not super related but Russell Wilson definitely acts like he's a celebrity now, his body language and other things kinda irk me, especially on some of his facebook live vids. I honestly think he's having a hard time balancing all the things going on in his life and I don't expect that to get much better sadly.

I hope I'm wrong though, really.

I am going to ignore all the opinion based garbage about celebrity and body language. As to the throw the ball away again not always as easy as you would like to make it sound, first he needs to be outside the pocket, then throw it in the general direction of an eligible player or he needs to throw it out of the endzone. Then there is what down is it, if its 3rd down and we are well in field goal range why throw it away take a chance hold it a second longer and try to make a play, Worse case sack we still get the FG best case a TD. So not so simple.

 

[Anthony!]

Dude, what is your deal? I never wrote about the previous play. Read thoroughly before you write.

I was referring to personnel packages for specific plays. Those are set in advance.

Just more obfuscation and nonsense. What does that have anything to do with why our worst WR was made the first read on that play? Bevell chose Lockette for that personnel package. That alone was a stupid decision. The stupidity was only compounded by the dialing up of that play in that situation.

Actually Lockette was not the first read he was the only read it was a one read timing pattern, it was not designed to go to anyone else. PC said that was a designed quick timing route. The fact that not only did Lockette come out of the break slow he ran the route wrong only proves his coach failed him, then add his coach threw him under the bus and never took any responsibility and then add he should not have been put in that situation by his coach. We had a big Wr who had gotten over 100 yards and as a result they were forced to put Browner on him, you would think that he would be in at the goal line if for no other reason than to keep browner out of the play. Then the Wr who is the target is your 5 WR, then your asking a smaller WR Kearse to block a bigger CB in Browner. There were so many things wrong with the design and calling of that play it was pathetic, and alot of that falls at the feet of the OC that is a fact deal with it.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Dude, what is your deal? I never wrote about the previous play. Read thoroughly before you write.

I was referring to personnel packages for specific plays. Those are set in advance.

Just more obfuscation and nonsense. What does that have anything to do with why our worst WR was made the first read on that play? Bevell chose Lockette for that personnel package. That alone was a stupid decision. The stupidity was only compounded by the dialing up of that play in that situation.

Actually Lockette was not the first read he was the only read it was a one read timing pattern, it was not designed to go to anyone else. PC said that was a designed quick timing route. The fact that not only did Lockette come out of the break slow he ran the route wrong only proves his coach failed him, then add his coach threw him under the bus and never took any responsibility and then add he should not have been put in that situation by his coach. We had a big Wr who had gotten over 100 yards and as a result they were forced to put Browner on him, you would think that he would be in at the goal line if for no other reason than to keep browner out of the play. Then the Wr who is the target is your 5 WR, then your asking a smaller WR Kearse to block a bigger CB in Browner. There were so many things wrong with the design and calling of that play it was pathetic, and alot of that falls at the feet of the OC that is a fact deal with it.

He didn't fail him and he didn't throw him under the bus. That is the proverbial making a mountain out of a molehill that gets perpetuated when those uninformed just repeat the myths. It's Fake News 101.
And why does everyone keep saying Lockette was the No. 5 receiver? I would say Matthews was more of the No. 5. By the way, it was the OC who drew up the play to Matthews before the half. Never hear any credit given for that.

The only fact of the matter was that we were inches away from scoring a touchdown on that play and the Patriots rookie corner made a career-changing play.

 

[erik2690]

Throw the ball away, he was doing it a ton in his first two years in the league and then you barely saw it at all this year.

Not super related but Russell Wilson definitely acts like he's a celebrity now, his body language and other things kinda irk me, especially on some of his facebook live vids. I honestly think he's having a hard time balancing all the things going on in his life and I don't expect that to get much better sadly.

I hope I'm wrong though, really.

The celebrity BS should really stop it makes you sound kinda silly. Dude filmed Entourage 2+ years ago and has always had tons of brand/commercial obligations. The only other thing you could mean is that he married a famous person, but I haven't seen Ciara dragging him to parties and clubs and being super "Hollywood". He seems to enjoy just being with his family mostly. The whole "balance" point you make doesn't seem to have any evidence either. No one last year even through team struggles was giving any hint he wasn't working hard. In fact the way he pushed through injuries seemed to take focus. So on the whole I don't really get this critique, but when you have to resort to being critical of "body language" it seems kinda weak.

 

[nash72]

So, yeah, our coaching staff is at least equal to what they have.

Yeah, not even close.

 

[Siouxhawk]

So, yeah, our coaching staff is at least equal to what they have.

Yeah, not even close.

One more Super Bowl appearance this decade than us qualifies as close to me. And we're 1-1 in actual head-to-head meetings, so of course we're on par.

 

[nash72]

So, yeah, our coaching staff is at least equal to what they have.

Yeah, not even close.

One more Super Bowl appearance this decade than us qualifies as close to me. And we're 1-1 in actual head-to-head meetings, so of course we're on par.

We compete with them because we have more talent than them, not better coaching. If we were without Russell Wilson for 4 straight games, I would practically guarantee we would lose all 4 of those games. New England has a better coaching staff straight across the board. Our coaching staff was so bad at one point, we actually gave the Patriots a superbowl ring. Remember that?