Article: Rawls was real deal in 2015

(short) FG article that discusses Rawls numbers against base defenses as opposed to nickel/dime as it compares to the rest of the league.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/seahawks-anal ... stats-2015

Rawls' 5.8 yards per carry against base defenses was tops in the league among backs who carried the ball more than 45 times. Of his 147 attempts, 67 percent came when the defense had fewer than five defensive backs on the field (14th highest). Obviously super effective as a rookie, slow recovery from a broken ankle is all that could slow Rawls' emergence into a superstar in 2016.

Click to expand...

The dude is really exciting, and he definitely showed that he isn't a complete flash in the pan. That said, I'm glad to see the team appears to want to add competition and depth at the position. He's young, and the last thing he needs is to think the position of lead back will just be handed to him.

MysterMatt":fpoigycp said:

The dude is really exciting, and he definitely showed that he isn't a complete flash in the pan. That said, I'm glad to see the team appears to want to add competition and depth at the position. He's young, and the last thing he needs is to think the position of lead back will just be handed to him.

Click to expand...

Completely agree.

MysterMatt":24e7fbcr said:

The dude is really exciting, and he definitely showed that he isn't a complete flash in the pan. That said, I'm glad to see the team appears to want to add competition and depth at the position. He's young, and the last thing he needs is to think the position of lead back will just be handed to him.

Click to expand...

Agreed. We've seen enough of Rawls against different defenses, and against some good defenses (Cincy, Pitt run defense) to know he's the real deal.

I get the competition aspect, but it would be nice to add a quality veteran guy. If we could get Forte at the right price, he'd be a great mentor for Rawls, and it would be a shot at a ring for a veteran that's just always been a good guy and deserves it.

On the first clip they use as an example (69yrd run against Bengals), you can see the Wilson effect. The DE is frozen watching Wilson and Rawls doesn't have to worry about him breaking inside when he cuts back. Okung can also ignore the DE and occupy a LB. It wasn't even a read-option. Just the threat of Wilson on a boot or scramble freaks out defenses.

lobohawk":nysd3wvr said:

On the first clip they use as an example (69yrd run against Bengals), you can see the Wilson effect. The DE is frozen watching Wilson and Rawls doesn't have to worry about him breaking inside when he cuts back. Okung can also ignore the DE and occupy a LB. It wasn't even a read-option. Just the threat of Wilson on a boot or scramble freaks out defenses.

Click to expand...

True, but he had some yards in other situations, too. The key thing is that he has the moves/strength to take advantage of situations like you described and maximize his yardage. Looking forward to seeing him work full time.

Oh, and yeah, I don't think anybody is thinking to ignore the position in FA and draft. Always want to have young up and coming RBs in the stable.

Hawks46":xbayvrxz said:

MysterMatt":xbayvrxz said:

The dude is really exciting, and he definitely showed that he isn't a complete flash in the pan. That said, I'm glad to see the team appears to want to add competition and depth at the position. He's young, and the last thing he needs is to think the position of lead back will just be handed to him.

Click to expand...

Agreed. We've seen enough of Rawls against different defenses, and against some good defenses (Cincy, Pitt run defense) to know he's the real deal.

I get the competition aspect, but it would be nice to add a quality veteran guy. If we could get Forte at the right price, he'd be a great mentor for Rawls, and it would be a shot at a ring for a veteran that's just always been a good guy and deserves it.

Click to expand...

I believe that Lynch was "Mentor" enough for 'Big Bawls Rawls', though I do agree with the idea of having another 'Change Of Pace' Back to help Rawls carry the load.
I believe that the focus of the Seahawks Coaching should be on revamping the O-Line for better Pass Protection, because it was obvious that Rawls was getting some impressive numbers while running up behind a misfiring & erratic O-Line, that wasn't really getting the job done on either facet in the first half of last Season.
I don't think Pete wants to abandon his run first mindset, but he is going to have to tweak things so as to take advantage of all that Russell Wilson ADDS to the overall Offensive scheme, and I think the Running game will benefit from having a more prolific Passing game.
I think that Rawls style of running, will match up almost perfectly, with Russell Wilsons' skillset.

My only concern about Rawls is that he makes it back to 100% in the beginning of the 2016 season.

sutz":ki395ypv said:

lobohawk":ki395ypv said:

On the first clip they use as an example (69yrd run against Bengals), you can see the Wilson effect. The DE is frozen watching Wilson and Rawls doesn't have to worry about him breaking inside when he cuts back. Okung can also ignore the DE and occupy a LB. It wasn't even a read-option. Just the threat of Wilson on a boot or scramble freaks out defenses.

Click to expand...

True, but he had some yards in other situations, too. The key thing is that he has the moves/strength to take advantage of situations like you described and maximize his yardage. Looking forward to seeing him work full time.

Oh, and yeah, I don't think anybody is thinking to ignore the position in FA and draft. Always want to have young up and coming RBs in the stable.

Click to expand...

If it came across that I thought less of Rawls because of that aspect, that wasn't my intent. As you said, he took what they gave and made them pay. Just thought it was interesting to see again Wilson's impact, even when they weren't trying to trick the D.

Dude is amazing, but made of glass. Did you know he has never made it through a complete NFL season uninjured? Sure, if he could be trusted to be available for an entire season, he might be worth his salary, but I'm sure we can find someone who can produce almost as good, but give us a full season of production, for a lot less.

-bsd

Did I really need a sarc tag?

-bsd

lobohawk":1l7va8sq said:

sutz":1l7va8sq said:

lobohawk":1l7va8sq said:

On the first clip they use as an example (69yrd run against Bengals), you can see the Wilson effect. The DE is frozen watching Wilson and Rawls doesn't have to worry about him breaking inside when he cuts back. Okung can also ignore the DE and occupy a LB. It wasn't even a read-option. Just the threat of Wilson on a boot or scramble freaks out defenses.

Click to expand...

True, but he had some yards in other situations, too. The key thing is that he has the moves/strength to take advantage of situations like you described and maximize his yardage. Looking forward to seeing him work full time.

Oh, and yeah, I don't think anybody is thinking to ignore the position in FA and draft. Always want to have young up and coming RBs in the stable.

Click to expand...

If it came across that I thought less of Rawls because of that aspect, that wasn't my intent. As you said, he took what they gave and made them pay. Just thought it was interesting to see again Wilson's impact, even when they weren't trying to trick the D.

Click to expand...

It's all cool, bro. Hell, Marshawn took advantage of that, too. Doesn't make him less of a back, just like Rawls in the example you showed. As a team, we have numerous places where we have complementary pieces in play. We need to keep that going.

:th2thumbs:

bigskydoc":7wmz1dja said:

Did I really need a sarc tag?

-bsd

Click to expand...

Had me going for a second.

bigskydoc":emqxgpsr said:

Did I really need a sarc tag?

-bsd

Click to expand...

Wouldn't have hurt. :laugh: :rofl:

Similar posts have been written, and in earnest.

Last year Rawls was better than Lynch was in his prime.

If Rawls can duplicate his performance then we have actually improved over Lynch.

bjornanderson21":3k4ct80k said:

Last year Rawls was better than Lynch was in his prime.

If Rawls can duplicate his performance then we have actually improved over Lynch.

Click to expand...

Bit of a difference, Lynch was a number one pick, he was in Buffalo and defenses accounted for him from day one. Rawls had the benefit of being unsung, he had Wilson as a QB and it took a bit for teams to key on him being the real deal, he still performed really well but saying better then Lynch in his prime or comparing rookie seasons is a reach given the different situations.

chris98251":3ne0foxw said:

bjornanderson21":3ne0foxw said:

Last year Rawls was better than Lynch was in his prime.

If Rawls can duplicate his performance then we have actually improved over Lynch.

Click to expand...

Bit of a difference, Lynch was a number one pick, he was in Buffalo and defenses accounted for him from day one. Rawls had the benefit of being unsung, he had Wilson as a QB and it took a bit for teams to key on him being the real deal, he still performed really well but saying better then Lynch in his prime or comparing rookie seasons is a reach given the different situations.

Click to expand...

Hrm.. Gonna call BS on this.

Not like really bat-crap-crazy BS, but just a little BS.

It's legit to say Rawls was unheralded for the first few carries in any given game. After that, the DC is an idiot if he's not trying to shut that down. Granted we played a few soft teams in Rawls' run, but we also played some well-ranked defenses, and Rawls still put up really big numbers.

But realistically, if a guy is gashing you for 5+ per carry, you start to worry about him, regardless of what his press clippings were like prior to the game. When he puts up 200+ yards, that's a guy who succeeded regardless of the DC's plan to stop him.

bjornanderson21":1ku3guse said:

Last year Rawls was better than Lynch was in his prime.

Click to expand...

:shock:

KiwiHawk":1auizkai said:

chris98251":1auizkai said:

bjornanderson21":1auizkai said:

Last year Rawls was better than Lynch was in his prime.

If Rawls can duplicate his performance then we have actually improved over Lynch.

Click to expand...

Bit of a difference, Lynch was a number one pick, he was in Buffalo and defenses accounted for him from day one. Rawls had the benefit of being unsung, he had Wilson as a QB and it took a bit for teams to key on him being the real deal, he still performed really well but saying better then Lynch in his prime or comparing rookie seasons is a reach given the different situations.

Click to expand...

Hrm.. Gonna call BS on this.

Not like really bat-crap-crazy BS, but just a little BS.

It's legit to say Rawls was unheralded for the first few carries in any given game. After that, the DC is an idiot if he's not trying to shut that down. Granted we played a few soft teams in Rawls' run, but we also played some well-ranked defenses, and Rawls still put up really big numbers.

But realistically, if a guy is gashing you for 5+ per carry, you start to worry about him, regardless of what his press clippings were like prior to the game. When he puts up 200+ yards, that's a guy who succeeded regardless of the DC's plan to stop him.

Click to expand...

What I am saying is without Lynch most DC's would focus on stopping Wilson and then stopping the run whomever is the back, it took a while for teams to take Rawls as a serious back.

I don't know how physical Rawls is, but I'm pretty sure most teams would want to see Rawls any day over Lynch. Lynch was pain and brought a certain weariness to the other teams that had to face him. I didn't happen one day, it took several years and I'm sure in a couple of years, Rawls will have that same respect as The Beast.