Carol's Monday Press Conference (with synopsis)

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • pehawk wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:Minnesota will try to smoke screen Harvin all damn day.


    I have a feeling that'll be okay in this game. Play tight, press coverage, trust the ability of your DB's and LB's to tackle, and DONT respect Ponder's arm. Even Ponder doesn't respect his arm.

    I am a bit more concerned out our suddenly gashable rush D going against Peterson.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11323
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Scottemojo wrote:Minnesota will try to smoke screen Harvin all damn day.


    We'll need to key in on him. Wagner and KJ both have the speed to stop him from gashing us too badly, but I worry about him on 3rd down unless we can get a good rush going and mess up Ponder's rhythm. The 12th man will help, as they always do.
    Colt 45 and two zig zags.
    User avatar
    peachesenregalia
    * NET Starfish *
     
    Posts: 11041
    Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:29 am
    Location: Helm's Deep


  • Harvin on a shallow crossing pattern has been a great 3rd down play for Minny this year as well. We do not have one player who can hip pocket him, and Tru will be dead meat single covering Harvin.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11323
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Scottemojo wrote:Harvin on a shallow crossing pattern has been a great 3rd down play for Minny this year as well. We do not have one player who can hip pocket him, and Tru will be dead meat single covering Harvin.


    Thomas could, but we can't afford to move him up that high.
    Colt 45 and two zig zags.
    User avatar
    peachesenregalia
    * NET Starfish *
     
    Posts: 11041
    Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:29 am
    Location: Helm's Deep


  • The fact that they ARE doing something different on third down is idiotic. I think they defend the pass fine from their base run defense when teams randomly try to pass on what would seem obvious running downs. We switch personnel for third and long and the defense gets burned at like a 75% clip. Why not just stay with the base D on a third down sometime and see what happens. For hell's sake. I'd try it. I'm sure 99% of you would.
    Image
    R.I.P. Dad. I miss you. You will never be forgotten
    1/12/39 - 8/7/08
    User avatar
    SharkHawk
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 3883
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am


  • SharkHawk wrote:The fact that they ARE doing something different on third down is idiotic. I think they defend the pass fine from their base run defense when teams randomly try to pass on what would seem obvious running downs. We switch personnel for third and long and the defense gets burned at like a 75% clip. Why not just stay with the base D on a third down sometime and see what happens. For hell's sake. I'd try it. I'm sure 99% of you would.


    It just reminds me so much of those infamous "prevent defenses" (yes I know they are different). Why change what's worked for something that doesn't? If something is working, go with it until they can beat you.

    I liken it to a team running 5-6 yards every play, almost never being stopped, then when the other team is expecting you to pass with 4 minutes to go in a 2 point game, you actually pass the ball. Sometimes I believe NFL coaches can outthink themselves
    Image

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 14169
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • I think they out think themselves all the time. I'm sort of over the top though. I'm one of those that believe that the move away from punting entirely is a smart thing based on the studies that have been done. I see the value in punting..... in order to keep your job. But I also see the value in not punting because of the statistical probability of winning more games as the studies have shown by increased opportunities to score and how punting itself is just a remnant of a bygone era where "field position" was more important and teams weren't even throwing the ball.
    Image
    R.I.P. Dad. I miss you. You will never be forgotten
    1/12/39 - 8/7/08
    User avatar
    SharkHawk
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 3883
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am


  • SharkHawk wrote:I think they out think themselves all the time. I'm sort of over the top though. I'm one of those that believe that the move away from punting entirely is a smart thing based on the studies that have been done. I see the value in punting..... in order to keep your job. But I also see the value in not punting because of the statistical probability of winning more games as the studies have shown by increased opportunities to score and how punting itself is just a remnant of a bygone era where "field position" was more important and teams weren't even throwing the ball.



    Perhaps we both saw the same program. The one I saw featured a coach (HS?) as well as some math guy from Chicago University. There was a definite formula in place but the coach almost never punted and he also onside kicked like EVERY opportunity. It was nuts. The guy had like 12 different formations. His team won state champs...repeatedly.

    But the math on not punting was incredible. I think they showed that you should never punt if outside of your own 40. We have a great punter, which sort've changes things abit, but how many times do you see a ball punted into the endzone and consequently netting like 10 yds?

    OTOH, I also see benefit in punting on 3rd down. Some may recall Elway doing it frequently. 3rd and 25? Screw it....line up in shotgun formation, take the snap and boot it deep with no return man awaiting the punt. The Chicago math guy wouldn't dig it but...
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5802
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0


  • What happened to Robinson and Obo? This is the first thing i'm hearing of it.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18623
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • kidhawk wrote:Why change what's worked for something that doesn't? If something is working, go with it until they can beat you.

    If something works, go with it until the play before they beat you. This is not a minor difference in philosophy. At issue is whether you use the same strategy regardless of situation, or if you attempt to optimize your strategy based on the situation.

    I agree that coaches can outsmart themselves, but you would need to have a vanishingly small opinion of your coaching staff if you wanted to hamstring them with the same defense regardless of score differential.
    "Check out my 2012 NFL Draft Grades. I just gave the worst grade ever to Seattle." - WalterFootball.com
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2225
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • They thought Stafford would throw more down the field, and were a bit surprised at how much he used the quick underneath passes instead of the big plays you generally see from the Lions.


    In other words, he got outcoached by Linehan... him being "surprised" doesn't give me much confidence in Pete's or his staff's ability to anticipate what an opposing team is going to do each week. It's like he employs a "wait and see" approach and then reacts to it, only when it's too late, instead of being steps ahead of the opponent. For a defensive coach, I expect more.
    User avatar
    hoxrox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1344
    Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 5:29 pm




It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 8:32 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information