bestfightstory
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2009
- Messages
- 8,568
- Reaction score
- 2
jammerhawk":4esfopw8 said:
I'm gonna say:
Carolina
San Fran
Detroit
St Louis
In whatever order you want. They all will be quality this season.
Stop Making Excuses for the O-Line it was BAD
- Thread starter falcongoggles
- Start date
I'm gonna say:
Carolina
San Fran
Detroit
St Louis
In whatever order you want. They all will be quality this season.
I see that you can be in control of a game even when you're down 4 points in the 4th quarter, tied for more than 17 minutes of it, and never leading by more than one possession. The Niners were one 4th-down incompletion away from giving the ball back to the Packers on their 36 with more than 2 minutes to go only up by 3, so spare the "in control" narrative.hawkfannj":3v314ait said:
hawkfannj
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,771
- Reaction score
- 160
Obviously you saw a different gamePerfundle":2ovf47wi said:
A different game than the imaginary one that you must have seen? I'll agree with that.hawkfannj":qwxzmhyz said:
Did Green Bay not go up 28-24 with 8:26 left in the 4th quarter?
Did San Francisco not have a 4th and 2 on the Green Bay 36 with 2:42 left in the 4th quarter, up 31-28?
Did San Francisco lead by more than 7 points at any point in the game?
Disagreeing with opinions is one thing. Disagreeing with cold hard facts is something else.
Oh, but you're right that I got the time tied wrong. I forgot about the start of the game, so in fact they were tied for 29 minutes and 18 seconds. Add in the 2:29 that SF was behind and you've got more than half the game when SF wasn't even ahead. Quite in control, they were.
OP
OP
falcongoggles
Active member
bestfightstory":2d6aye4k said:
Amen and hence the OP. Based on your rankings we will face 5 strong front 7s this season with 4 of them having conference implications. You would think we would pay the same amount of attention the o-line in the offseason as we did the d-line so at make sure RW makes it 16 games this year.
SouthSoundHawk
New member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
- Messages
- 2,262
- Reaction score
- 0
I can't stop looking at the Texans in Week Four...
That line, lead by Watt is going to cause fits if Seattle doesn't have this fixed by...right now.
The Texans were a little suspect against the run last season, so over the next few weeks we'll see if they've improved. If not, that might just be the window Seattle will have to crash through to win that game.
Still, that Defensive line is no joke.
That line, lead by Watt is going to cause fits if Seattle doesn't have this fixed by...right now.
The Texans were a little suspect against the run last season, so over the next few weeks we'll see if they've improved. If not, that might just be the window Seattle will have to crash through to win that game.
Still, that Defensive line is no joke.
keasley45
Well-known member
Here's what i think i think, and what i think i thought i saw... as it relates to the poor o-line performance and 'poor' showing in general.
1. Confidence - Seahawks 0, Carolina 1. The Seahawks have none when it comes to their own ability to win a 10am start. The players feel it, the coaches know it and i believe the coaches, particularly on offense, cooked up a conservative gameplan that limited opportunities for mental errors / lapses and miscommunication. This would explain why we did very little in the way of audibles to counter carolina's shifts and seeming recognition of what we were running. I think it may have been a case of ' if we execute, we have a chance at success despite what the D might be doing...' rather than running the more exotic stuff that might have a higher reward, but carries greater risk. One or two mental lapses on the road, on opening day, with a bullseye on your back, in a game you are supposed to win, can turn things south in a hurry. To me, it was the same approach we employed last year when we lacked confidence in our rookie QB. Call it conservative, execute and slug it out to a win.... a counter-puncher's philosophy. Trouble is, success is all predicated on execution, which is already compromised by the brain farts that tend to occur at 10am and... Exhibit 2.
2.Conditioning - Seahawks 0, Carolina 1. Nobody experiences the effects of playing in the heat more than the big heavies. This can be mitigated against - for a while - by crafty playcalling, extreme confidence and aggression (particularly the kind you get when you've been told all week that the trendy pick to win the SB is going to come in and stomp you on opening day... and that that same trendy pick is the team you thought you should have beat last year in your house ). Carolina was amped. We lacked confidence, were conservative, hot, and out of shape. Having one guy out of sync or out of sorts on the o-line against an angry team with a chip on its shoulder that's coming after you on every down can turn things quickly and make you look bad. We got winded pretty quick (particularly Carp) which effected not only what we called, but also how we executed ... and probably to a certain extent, what we put in the playbook this week to begin with. It didnt take a genius to look at the tape of the last preseason game to see that Carpenter was going to be a liability going into yesterday. I think our surge in the 4th qtr was less about us turning it up than it was about them losing the aggression and adrenaline they were running on all day, realizing that even as well as they played, they weren't going to break us and that we were in all likelihood going to walk out with a W. So, when they lost their edge and started gasping for air like we were all day, the playing field was first leveled, and then tilted in our favor as we gained a second wind from the boost of confidence we got in taking the lead and then holding it.
3. Strategy - Seahawks 1, 49ers 0. Might be the conspiracy theorist in me but i cant help but to think that in addition to playing it safe to limit errors and secure an important week 1, road win, Pete was also looking ahead to this week at home, against the 49ers. If i was the coach, i certainly would be. Its obvious that the 9ers have the inside track to win the division and again represent the NFC in the SB. Somehow the schedulers saw fit to give them all of their most difficult opponents at home, where we have to play them on the road. How that can happen when they were SB runners up, i dont know, but that's a topic for another time. Anyway, i think a good bit of the vanilla, uninspiring play was Pete playing his cards close, not trying to show too much. There's SO much riding on the this week and as much as i hate Harbaugh, the guy is a good coach and would try to exploit any info he got from our film. We basically got a win without giving the 9ers anything of value. Also, Pete knows that we have to win 4 road contests to hopefully lock up the division (assuming one of them is against the 9ers and we have the same success at home that we had last year). So, play to win. If its boring, no matter. If its ugly, so what? Get the W... 3 more to go. Might sound like an odd way of looking at the season, but when you have a team that is as dominant at home as we are, it really comes down to going .500 on the road to win the division and hopefully lock up the bye. Having a defense as stout as ours allows you the flexibility to think this way. I also tend to believe the coaching staff might have been concerned that carolina might be able to exploit the fact that we were missing key players on defense. I think that had they been able to drum up more than 7 points, we might have seen a slightly more aggressive offensive display. But thankfully, it never came to that.
Final score ->> Carolina 2, Seattle 0 - and we still won
Bigger picture -> 49ers 0, Seattle 1 - going into a huge game on Sunday night
So, as far as the O-line goes, i think it came down to a number of factors that had to do more with the team and the gravity of the situation than any flaw on our o-line that didn't already exist. That being said, Carpenter's play was a factor, and a big one given his importance along the line. I think the play calling was intentionally vanilla, recognizing we had the superior team and talent and the ability to 'counter-punch' our way to a win - safest way to deal with our 10am demons and an opponent who is out for blood and conditioned to play in the heat. Finally, i think some of what we saw was a result of Pete intentionally avoiding anything in our playbook that would tip off the 9ers as to our approach for Sunday night. It might sound like a stretch to some, but i think the last point is a major one. This season comes down to beating the 9ers at home and winning 4 road games (minimum) - holding ground at home being assumed. Of those games, Carolina, Houston, Indy, Atlanta and the Giants (5 of the 8) are 10am starts. Of that list, Carolina was THE must win. As it stands, the W puts us at a very reasonable 9 wins, again, assuming we hold serve at home. Add in road victories at Arizona and St Louis (both late starts) and we are at 11 wins. The entire 2013 season then essentially comes down to Houston, Indy, Atlanta and the Giants. If we split those 10am starts, even if we lose to the 9ers at their place, we still finish at... wait for it, 13 - 3. Going undefeated at home is VERY doable. Of all of our home opponents this year, I only see the Saints as a real threat.
The 9ers on the other hand have only two 10am starts, @ the Bucs and Jags. Not likely they'll have trouble there. Granted, anything can happen on Sunday, but their only potential road L's include vs us, @ the Redskins and @ the Saints. They do get the Panthers,Texans, us and the Falcons at home, so there's a reasonable chance they drop one or two there, or when the Colts come to visit, but other than that there isnt a whole lot there to stop them.. So, say we beat them at home and they lose to either the Redskins or the Saints + drop one to either us, Panthers (not likely), the Texans, or Falcons at home. That leaves them at 13-3. Its hard to envision them being a whole lot worse, although the Rams seem to play them well. Us getting to 13-3 was a lot harder without the W yesterday... just not the same margin for error.
I really think yesterday was a 'play safe for the W' proposition. It was simply too big a game given the context of the season. Its an approach we might see repeated again when we see Houston, Indy, Atlanta and the Giants later this year. If so, thats fine with me, as long as we get out with a W.
1. Confidence - Seahawks 0, Carolina 1. The Seahawks have none when it comes to their own ability to win a 10am start. The players feel it, the coaches know it and i believe the coaches, particularly on offense, cooked up a conservative gameplan that limited opportunities for mental errors / lapses and miscommunication. This would explain why we did very little in the way of audibles to counter carolina's shifts and seeming recognition of what we were running. I think it may have been a case of ' if we execute, we have a chance at success despite what the D might be doing...' rather than running the more exotic stuff that might have a higher reward, but carries greater risk. One or two mental lapses on the road, on opening day, with a bullseye on your back, in a game you are supposed to win, can turn things south in a hurry. To me, it was the same approach we employed last year when we lacked confidence in our rookie QB. Call it conservative, execute and slug it out to a win.... a counter-puncher's philosophy. Trouble is, success is all predicated on execution, which is already compromised by the brain farts that tend to occur at 10am and... Exhibit 2.
2.Conditioning - Seahawks 0, Carolina 1. Nobody experiences the effects of playing in the heat more than the big heavies. This can be mitigated against - for a while - by crafty playcalling, extreme confidence and aggression (particularly the kind you get when you've been told all week that the trendy pick to win the SB is going to come in and stomp you on opening day... and that that same trendy pick is the team you thought you should have beat last year in your house ). Carolina was amped. We lacked confidence, were conservative, hot, and out of shape. Having one guy out of sync or out of sorts on the o-line against an angry team with a chip on its shoulder that's coming after you on every down can turn things quickly and make you look bad. We got winded pretty quick (particularly Carp) which effected not only what we called, but also how we executed ... and probably to a certain extent, what we put in the playbook this week to begin with. It didnt take a genius to look at the tape of the last preseason game to see that Carpenter was going to be a liability going into yesterday. I think our surge in the 4th qtr was less about us turning it up than it was about them losing the aggression and adrenaline they were running on all day, realizing that even as well as they played, they weren't going to break us and that we were in all likelihood going to walk out with a W. So, when they lost their edge and started gasping for air like we were all day, the playing field was first leveled, and then tilted in our favor as we gained a second wind from the boost of confidence we got in taking the lead and then holding it.
3. Strategy - Seahawks 1, 49ers 0. Might be the conspiracy theorist in me but i cant help but to think that in addition to playing it safe to limit errors and secure an important week 1, road win, Pete was also looking ahead to this week at home, against the 49ers. If i was the coach, i certainly would be. Its obvious that the 9ers have the inside track to win the division and again represent the NFC in the SB. Somehow the schedulers saw fit to give them all of their most difficult opponents at home, where we have to play them on the road. How that can happen when they were SB runners up, i dont know, but that's a topic for another time. Anyway, i think a good bit of the vanilla, uninspiring play was Pete playing his cards close, not trying to show too much. There's SO much riding on the this week and as much as i hate Harbaugh, the guy is a good coach and would try to exploit any info he got from our film. We basically got a win without giving the 9ers anything of value. Also, Pete knows that we have to win 4 road contests to hopefully lock up the division (assuming one of them is against the 9ers and we have the same success at home that we had last year). So, play to win. If its boring, no matter. If its ugly, so what? Get the W... 3 more to go. Might sound like an odd way of looking at the season, but when you have a team that is as dominant at home as we are, it really comes down to going .500 on the road to win the division and hopefully lock up the bye. Having a defense as stout as ours allows you the flexibility to think this way. I also tend to believe the coaching staff might have been concerned that carolina might be able to exploit the fact that we were missing key players on defense. I think that had they been able to drum up more than 7 points, we might have seen a slightly more aggressive offensive display. But thankfully, it never came to that.
Final score ->> Carolina 2, Seattle 0 - and we still won
Bigger picture -> 49ers 0, Seattle 1 - going into a huge game on Sunday night
So, as far as the O-line goes, i think it came down to a number of factors that had to do more with the team and the gravity of the situation than any flaw on our o-line that didn't already exist. That being said, Carpenter's play was a factor, and a big one given his importance along the line. I think the play calling was intentionally vanilla, recognizing we had the superior team and talent and the ability to 'counter-punch' our way to a win - safest way to deal with our 10am demons and an opponent who is out for blood and conditioned to play in the heat. Finally, i think some of what we saw was a result of Pete intentionally avoiding anything in our playbook that would tip off the 9ers as to our approach for Sunday night. It might sound like a stretch to some, but i think the last point is a major one. This season comes down to beating the 9ers at home and winning 4 road games (minimum) - holding ground at home being assumed. Of those games, Carolina, Houston, Indy, Atlanta and the Giants (5 of the 8) are 10am starts. Of that list, Carolina was THE must win. As it stands, the W puts us at a very reasonable 9 wins, again, assuming we hold serve at home. Add in road victories at Arizona and St Louis (both late starts) and we are at 11 wins. The entire 2013 season then essentially comes down to Houston, Indy, Atlanta and the Giants. If we split those 10am starts, even if we lose to the 9ers at their place, we still finish at... wait for it, 13 - 3. Going undefeated at home is VERY doable. Of all of our home opponents this year, I only see the Saints as a real threat.
The 9ers on the other hand have only two 10am starts, @ the Bucs and Jags. Not likely they'll have trouble there. Granted, anything can happen on Sunday, but their only potential road L's include vs us, @ the Redskins and @ the Saints. They do get the Panthers,Texans, us and the Falcons at home, so there's a reasonable chance they drop one or two there, or when the Colts come to visit, but other than that there isnt a whole lot there to stop them.. So, say we beat them at home and they lose to either the Redskins or the Saints + drop one to either us, Panthers (not likely), the Texans, or Falcons at home. That leaves them at 13-3. Its hard to envision them being a whole lot worse, although the Rams seem to play them well. Us getting to 13-3 was a lot harder without the W yesterday... just not the same margin for error.
I really think yesterday was a 'play safe for the W' proposition. It was simply too big a game given the context of the season. Its an approach we might see repeated again when we see Houston, Indy, Atlanta and the Giants later this year. If so, thats fine with me, as long as we get out with a W.
hawkfannj
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,771
- Reaction score
- 160
Come on man no reason to get heated . I guess we saw things differently .Perfundle":24a0tag7 said:
Sometime the score doesn't tell the whole story stats also lie abit . Kap over 400 yards boldin well look at those stats you go by those stats alone they killed them with a " run first qb" my point is stats and scores don't always tell the truth about a game and who was the dominant team . And IF IF IF IF we play like we did on Sunday we will lose
OP
OP
falcongoggles
Active member
I like the above explanation and I appreciate the long post and the effort exerted. However, the question stands, does no one see a continuing trend off bad pass-protection last year that carried over to this year? Considering we did very little to address the o-line in the offseason and we had the same problems last year that we faced on Sunday, I don't get why the "brain trust" is so adamant against admitting we have a problem. To boot, the pass protection problems from last year presented themselves at all hours (not just 10 am) and in all sorts of weather conditions (including indoors).
General Manager
New member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2011
- Messages
- 2,260
- Reaction score
- 0
First game on the road 10am start on the east coast against a front four that at the end of the year will be regarded as one of the best in the NFL . However Unger isn't the best center he's solid but can get pushed around at times, then there's Sweeney and Bruno.
seahawksTopGear
New member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2012
- Messages
- 195
- Reaction score
- 0
falcongoggles":14sa60rq said:
I truly hate posting to this thread because it bumps it to the top where it should not be. Still I am pissed off enough that I hope it will be worth it.
We do not have a problem in the offensive line. In fact I would argue that outside of overpaying for mcquistan (mostly because he backs up our left tackle) we are doing very freaking well considering the money we have sunk into it.
We have made the decision to go with a zone blocking scheme. The basis of this offensive line philosophy is that you avoid picking first round studs for your line and make do with mobile late picks. Then you train these guys to work as a unit that is greater than the sum of its parts.
This is a conscious decision by the FO and it started the moment they brought in Cable. The money and picks you would spend on oline goes to other parts of the team. Expect the team to keep picking ol late for at least as long as other teams are willing to reach for third round talent in the first fifteen picks of the draft like this year.
So yes, we did not bring in any fa help (andre the lazy was available for a mere 8 mil a year) because we need people who know the scheme. Saying that we should have brought in fa to compete is ignorant.
We got OL picks late as planned and they will be our cheap linemen of the future. There is a lot to gain in zigging when other teams zag.
Sarlacc83
Active member
falcongoggles":m3ucejln said:
This line was good enough that Lynch had 1600 yards last year. They also only 'allowed' 33 sacks (and some of those might have been Wilson's fault for holding the ball too long) while our QB tied the rookie record for NFL TD passes.
This complaining about not fixing the OL is awful hindsight complaining. Very few, if anyone, put starting OL as a position of need last off season, and for good reason. See above. I'd be willing to bet that in about 8 weeks, we'll be back to 2012 offensive level outputs. Hell, they might even mutilate the Niners next game.
seahawksTopGear":1rrkb2q9 said:
Actually the front office has a completely different philosophy than the one you described, thankfully.They spent 2 1st and a third on the OLine since Pete has taken over.Unfortunately 2 of them havent worked out as planned so far.I hope they keep investing and get the tough physically dominant line Pete wants.These guys will play better. Yesterday they didnt and its frustrating.
Marlin Man
New member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 380
- Reaction score
- 0
Not to worry guys- PETE decided that our OL must play the way it played so he could spring it on the 49er's this week---- LMAO
You guys are tooooooooooooooooooooooo much
You guys are tooooooooooooooooooooooo much
kearly
New member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 15,975
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm not saying we have elite pass protection, but I thought it looked mostly adequate since the start of 2012. They only teams that have truly given us problems were the Cardinals, Rams twice, and Redskins. 3 of those were on the road, and three of those games were against top 3 pass rushes last season. You always want to get better but I don't consider protection a glaring problem.
When Wilson was scrambling it was usually after he held the ball quite a while. Remember that Wilson held the ball longer than any other NFL QB last season with a some room to spare, and he's on pace to do that again. If he's running for his life, be sure to note how long it took before he started running. If the line gets him 4 seconds and he still has the ball in his hands, it's beyond their control at that point.
When Wilson was scrambling it was usually after he held the ball quite a while. Remember that Wilson held the ball longer than any other NFL QB last season with a some room to spare, and he's on pace to do that again. If he's running for his life, be sure to note how long it took before he started running. If the line gets him 4 seconds and he still has the ball in his hands, it's beyond their control at that point.
Cartire
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,580
- Reaction score
- 0
falcongoggles":fb962heq said:
No, I dont. And I have yet to see any real evidence besides one game (which you wont allow any excuses at all apparently, because to you, a solid line never ever ever has a bad day).
Heres a great question for you. Please name me a single active o-line that you think is right where it needs to be. And Ill show you at least one game (probably more) that that line had problems.
Im sorry, but if you wont allow any excuse (heat, time, road, opposing d-line skill) to be a factor, then I challenge you to find one team that has had this mystical perfect line that never breaks.
SouthSoundHawk
New member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
- Messages
- 2,262
- Reaction score
- 0
Marlin Man":3kmycb0z said:
No one said anything about that.
Thanks for contributing nothing.
Now bounce.
Yoonhawk
Member
SouthSoundHawk":mnz3vcu6 said:
Look at his post history...he's a troll.
seahawksTopGear":28huh0tl said:
Actually the front office has a completely different philosophy than the one you described, thankfully.They spent 2 1st and a third on the OLine since Pete has taken over.Unfortunately 2 of them havent worked out as planned so far.I hope they keep investing and get the tough physically dominant line Pete wants.These guys will play better. Yesterday they didnt and its frustrating.
