Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 90 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 12:51 pm 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11083
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
AgentDib wrote:
I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:01 pm 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:41 pm
Posts: 468
Location: Ventura, CA
Tech Worlds wrote:
kearly wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:
All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


Nah, you just cherish being the bit of grit in the oyster on every topic. I'm still waiting for the pearls. Many of us have our own opinions, so you might as well not try to read other peoples' minds. MR was better than Coleman in the preseason and he was much better last season than Coleman has been this season. According to PFF, Coleman's DVOA is -3.1, which is bad. MR's was 3.0 last year.

MR is an upgrade. He's not a world beater. Crucially, no one said he is.

So far this season, the optimists are winning in a landslide.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:09 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8830
Location: Granite Falls, WA
formido wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:
kearly wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:
All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


Nah, you just cherish being the bit of grit in the oyster on every topic. I'm still waiting for the pearls. Many of us have our own opinions, so you might as well not try to read other peoples' minds. MR was better than Coleman in the preseason and he was much better last season than Coleman has been this season. According to PFF, Coleman's DVOA is -3.1, which is bad. MR's was 3.0 last year.

MR is an upgrade. He's not a world beater. Crucially, no one said he is.

So far this season, the optimists are winning in a landslide.


You sir are obviously the exception. Congratulations for a job well done.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:16 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:03 pm
Posts: 279
In fairness to O'Neil, technically Coleman did beat out MRob...which isn't a huge accomplishment as I could have beat out MRob by default of being in the hospital.

2 things...I'd caution a seamless transition. Not only has MRob been out of the loop in terms of practice, but he's also not going to be the same physically for a few months.

Last thing, O'Neil is a huge tool. It's sad that Brock has this clown as a side kick on what could be a really top notch radio program. But hey, good for O'Neil.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:28 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:47 am
Posts: 523
scakfan wrote:
ivotuk wrote:
O'Neill is an ass kisser and I get so tired of his faked laugh that he makes overly loud. He has some occasional good points but then he gets arrogant and says the stupidest isht! He even overrides Brock sometimes which is completely ignorant.

Danny is very knowledgeable, but he needs to tone it down some with his "volume."

And to say Coleman outperformed Robinson on the field appears to be an attempt to kiss up to Pete and John, but it's far from reality. Someone as smart as Mr. O'Neill should know that "outperforming" someone, or something means a head to head competition under similar conditions.



I used to listen to Brock and Salk but with Danny there it is just unbearable. His extended GIRLEY giggle belongs on an Ophra Winfrey show. For someone whom probable never owned a set of cleats he sure is given a lot of leeway in providing his opinion. I think all in all KJR is much more informative and entertaining. Especially SOFTTY!

:13:
Danny's laugh is sooooo annoying and his attempts at being funning are awkward/nerdy. Sometimes it seems like Brock is annoyed with Danny and wants to grab him by the neck to choke him out.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:32 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm
Posts: 3181
CANHawk wrote:
AgentDib wrote:
I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.


This is what happens when you cherry pick stats. How about looking at our rushing average out of....say, I formation ? Or how about comparing every formation with a FB. Take out the rushes from Wilson. You'd have a better idea how Coleman is doing, and it's not good. It affects Lynch; he doesn't trust his blocking, even when it's there. Some teams figured it out and clogged the cut back lanes, which ended up with lower rushing totals.

What Kearly said was that "very important pieces were being left ouf of the playbook". We were leaving the fullback on the sidelines, running 3 WRs, spreading the defense out, and running Lynch out of single set back. Anyone notice that we haven't been wearing teams out in the 4th quarter with our run game ? I formation has a lot to do with that; you beat up people a hell of a lot more with a FB than spreading the defense out and finding lanes that way. It's a finesse way to run, and people honestly have to admit that Carroll definately doesn't want to be a finesse team.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:11 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:12 pm
Posts: 1121
Location: The Rain Forest
Aros wrote:
You simply cannot put a price on having Lynch's trust. Thank God MRob is back!


Trust. Something he hasn't had this season wrt fullbacks.

_________________
"We walked our (pedestrian) ass to the Super Bowl"
Angry Doug
"We're looking for grit"
Pete Carroll
"We got grit. That's it."
Earl Thomas.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:20 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am
Posts: 6373
Tech Worlds wrote:
kearly wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:
All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


I have my own set of eyes and a brain (some would argue otherwise) and I've seen too many times where Coleman would merely just get in the way of a pass rusher. As fast and athletic as these guys are, they can recover and attack RW and Lynch in a split second.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:21 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:40 pm
Posts: 1310
TwilightError wrote:
He just makes provocative comments as part of his profession. MikeRob is an ox!


Part of the radio business...nay...all of the radio biz is entertainment. It looks like Danny boy is learning lessons from Skip Bayless. If you're an old or overweight white guy, pretend as though you're down with the kids, then take insane positions in order to excite the viewers either in anger or agreement. It's a proven recipe for success, as you've seen with Mr Skip who has been in the biz for generations and still has a career. I don't fault them particularly. It's what they do to survive. Can you imagine Danny boy playing the hip hop angle if he was on TV, lol? No way. A 45 year old 250 lb white guy regurgitating hip hop lines? What about grandpa skip, how does a 75 year old have a show on ESPN?

It's obvious to any and all that Mrob was "beat out" due to the fact that he was owed 2.5 mil. The Hawks made a financial decision. And I agree with the decision. But the guy was not beat out by Coleman at any time for football reasons.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:22 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am
Posts: 2742
Rocket wrote:
Aros wrote:
You simply cannot put a price on having Lynch's trust. Thank God MRob is back!


Trust. Something he hasn't had this season wrt fullbacks.


Correct me if I'm wrong never heard anyone discuss whether or not Lynch "trusts" his FB until Kearly said it in his Random Thoughts.
Kind of goes along with Tech World's point if that's where people picked it up.

That being said, it doesn't affect whether it's true or not.

_________________
Give me some damn skittles...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:31 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10046
Tech Worlds wrote:
kearly wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:
All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


I let Kip pick out what I'm going to wear, but when it comes to football I do my own thinking. And I thought Coleman was pretty bad.
I like you pointing out groupthink. Like you said, it doesn't make it wrong.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:36 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am
Posts: 2291
It's funny that the Hawks get so much love and respect right now that people have to find things like this to get worked up over.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:37 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8830
Location: Granite Falls, WA
Scottemojo wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:
kearly wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:
All of Mr Robinson's blocks better be pancakes because you all have really built him up to the stuff of legend.


This isn't about Mike Rob being Chuck Norris. It's about Derrick Coleman being Steve Urkell, for the first six games, at least.

Everyone that watched Coleman closely agreed that he was hurting the offense by being out there. The coaches obviously agreed, because Coleman's role was being reduced in every successive game, meaning that very important parts of our playbook were going away with him.

He did play very well in the Cardinals game before his injury, but I thought even at the end of the preseason that Seattle would be nuts to keep Coleman, much less ditch Mike Rob for him. Based on what we've learned this week, they didn't have a choice.

On that note, Danny O'Neil is a moron for thinking the Coleman swap was in any way based upon on-field performance. He's a nice guy, but his football knowledge is far weaker than Huard's and as a result he has to rely on clichés and talking points way too much.


Honesty kearly I do not believe that most people on this board watched Coleman closely at all. They are merely parroting what you say.

Not that you are incorrect in your assessment.

This guy has quickly became Paul Bunion.


I let Kip pick out what I'm going to wear, but when it comes to football I do my own thinking. And I thought Coleman was pretty bad.
I like you pointing out groupthink. Like you said, it doesn't make it wrong.


You know I know you ain't one of the sheep brother.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:37 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:40 pm
Posts: 1310
Basis4day wrote:
Rocket wrote:
Aros wrote:
You simply cannot put a price on having Lynch's trust. Thank God MRob is back!


Trust. Something he hasn't had this season wrt fullbacks.


Correct me if I'm wrong never heard anyone discuss whether or not Lynch "trusts" his FB until Kearly said it in his Random Thoughts.
Kind of goes along with Tech World's point if that's where people picked it up.

That being said, it doesn't affect whether it's true or not.


You and Mr Tech world are using cheap shots with no evidence. You're assuming that everyone that disagrees with Danny boy is the same, ie they don't have their own thoughts and are following in herd like manner behind this Kearly fella. Secondly, you're reading minds as if you somehow have insight into people's motives. Not one person, but everyone who disagrees with Danny boy. They are all the same and since they disagree with you and Danny boy they don't have their own thoughts.

I wish I could think up this wildly smart tactic...oh wait, someone defined it thousands of years ago...it's called an ad hominem attack. You don't debate the argument but their motives, you don't argue the point you attack their character.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:41 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10046
I don't remember one great play from Mike Rob in the pre season. I remember several from Coleman. I could be really dumb, and I certainly wasn't as practices, but Coleman had a good pre-season.

Not every good pre season performance is an indicator of things to come.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:50 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 am
Posts: 463
RolandDeschain wrote:
CANHawk wrote:
That's right bitch. CANHawk can NOT be defined. He is too amazing to be defined by normal words. You'd need several pictures and at least one instance of improper touching to be able to define CANHawk...

Adding your own entries into Urban Dictionary makes you a tool. 8)


Clearly you didn't click on the link


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:51 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 990
Location: Tonasket, WA to Temecula, CA
Here's an idea... Ask Beast.

According to Robinson in his presser they spoke EVERY day.

That doesn't sound like someone who was "moving on" and fully embracing the "next man up" mentality.

There's something to be said about close working relationships in life as well as in sports... sometimes maybe "that guy" isn't necessarily the best at his job anymore... but maybe that guy's best asset is that he brings out the best in others.

I think a big key to this teams success is that maybe the Seahawks are excelling right now (or at least trying hard) to meld that fine line between running a business and creating a "TEAM". This situation with Robinson is an excellent example of that effort which goes far beyond Robinson going out on Monday and pancaking every LB that trys to lay a finger on his running back...

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:07 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9831
Tech Worlds wrote:
You know I know you ain't one of the sheep brother.


FWIW, I actually appreciate your "sheep" comments Tech. That's not accusing anyone of being a sheep, it's just that like you, I'd prefer people to think for themselves. It is one of the bigger reasons I've scaled back in the past month.

Scottemojo wrote:
I don't remember one great play from Mike Rob in the pre season. I remember several from Coleman. I could be really dumb, and I certainly wasn't as practices, but Coleman had a good pre-season.

Not every good pre season performance is an indicator of things to come.


In the preseason, I thought Coleman looked terrific as a possession receiver out of the backfield. Then in the last two preseason games I actually watched his run blocking closely, and it was every bit as bad as we've come to know it in regular season play. Though oddly enough, his run blocking performance in the season opener was actually very good, and PFF agreed with me giving Coleman a very high score for that game. Between then and the Cardinals game, he was a mess. Probably a learning curve thing. His progress in the Cardinals game left me genuinely optimistic about his future.

I do believe in the preseason as an indicator. It indicates correctly more often than it does not. But it does seem like we've seen a lot of players recently who were strikingly different in the preseason vs. regular season. In particular, JeanPierre and Turbin. Back in 2011, it was T-Jack and Golden Tate.


Last edited by kearly on Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:10 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9831
AgentDib wrote:
I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


IMO, Coleman was a problem for the first six games. He was getting blown up by LBs, whiffing on blocks, and even when he didn't mess up, Lynch wouldn't trust it half the time. That's based on the eyeball test and watching the game closely.

But the stats verify as well. We had, what, 6.0 yards per carry last season after the read option switch last year? I didn't expect 6.0 over a full season in 2013, but a drop to 4.5 is what I would consider to be substantial. And though I can't confirm, the eyeball test leads me to believe that drop is coming mostly from I-formation plays, which we have been miserable on for most of the season.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:21 pm 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11083
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
Hawks46 wrote:
CANHawk wrote:
AgentDib wrote:
I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.


This is what happens when you cherry pick stats. How about looking at our rushing average out of....say, I formation ? Or how about comparing every formation with a FB. Take out the rushes from Wilson. You'd have a better idea how Coleman is doing, and it's not good. It affects Lynch; he doesn't trust his blocking, even when it's there. Some teams figured it out and clogged the cut back lanes, which ended up with lower rushing totals.

What Kearly said was that "very important pieces were being left ouf of the playbook". We were leaving the fullback on the sidelines, running 3 WRs, spreading the defense out, and running Lynch out of single set back. Anyone notice that we haven't been wearing teams out in the 4th quarter with our run game ? I formation has a lot to do with that; you beat up people a hell of a lot more with a FB than spreading the defense out and finding lanes that way. It's a finesse way to run, and people honestly have to admit that Carroll definately doesn't want to be a finesse team.


How am I cherry picking stats? And what the hell does Russell Wilson's rushing total have to do with Marshawn personally being on pace to put up 1,300 individual rushing yards this year? He has 578 yards through 7 games in 2013, 578/7=82.6YPG. 82.6x16 games=1,322 yard pace for the 2013 season. Show me what I cherry picked...

No, I think you missed my point that Marshawn Lynch is perfectly capable of being a feature back that puts up 1,000+ yards a season without Mike Robinson. At no point did I specifically mention I formation when I said that. To hear some around here talk, you'd think Marshawn incapable of putting on his own shoes or feeding himself without Michael Robinson there to help and I call bullshit. Marshawn is a fricken BEAST.

You make a good point about I Form contributing to beating teams up in the first 3 quarters and I totally agree with that. But you're also forgetting to factor in the fact we're playing with 2 back up tackles (one of whom is a pro bowler and the other a bad mutha trucka) and had 2 games without our All Pro center. You don't think THAT might ALSO be a contributing factor in why we're not beating teams up in the 4th? And I'm the one cherry picking...

Look, I hope Mike's return has as big of an impact on that part of our identity as many here seem to think it will be. If he's healthy and he's the same guy he was at the end of last year, then he will absolutely be an improvement over the deaf blind mute. But Tech's right; people are putting this one guy on way too high of a pedestil. Setting expectations for one guy as high as people are only sets us up for dissapointment...

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Last edited by CANHawk on Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:22 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:58 pm
Posts: 448
Location: Hong Kong
Danny, good writer, funny, good insight and Brock, Danny and Tom have a great time working with each other.


Some poeple in this thread need to be better in life


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:25 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am
Posts: 3092
I wasn't that high on Coleman from the beginning, even after Week 1 when people seemed to be sold on him as the long-term answer. I'm pretty sure I said as much multiple times, but I won't go out of my way to prove it.

The truth, however, is in the numbers. We were using Mike Rob on approximately 30% of the snaps last season. Coleman's usage has dropped to around 10-20% over the last few weeks. We're using him about as much as we're using Kellen Davis right now. Marshawn's YPC is also down around 4.1; it was 5.0 last season. Admittedly, his 2012 numbers got a boost in the last quarter of 2012 when we were devastating teams with the read-option that no one seemed prepared for.

With all that said, I don't necessarily expect our run game to explode just because Mike Rob is back. I wish he had been healthy at the start of the season, so he'd be on the same page with everyone in terms of scheme and conditioning. Right now, I'm mostly expecting things to stay fairly level on that front (no appreciable drop-off or gain from Coleman-to-MRob). It's definitely good that we have him, though. I'm one who believes the I-formation is an important part of the overall offense even if the gains from those plays seem relatively minimal. The impact of those plays shows up at the end of the game.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:30 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9831
I look at it this way CANHawk, if you had a great OL but just 1 very important player goes down and is replaced by someone who is a disaster, the whole OL suddenly looks much worse as a result. Even though it's just one guy!

Similarly, the running game is built off of five plus blockers all executing their assignments, and if just one guy screws up, the play probably goes nowhere. Coleman screwed up often, and it ruined a ton of plays where there was good run blocking otherwise. He's just one guy, but he was sabotaging our run game out of certain formations the way that Tom Ashworth used to sabotage our pass protection.

In other words, this isn't about celebration a "Paul Bunyan" type acquisition. It's about finding a solution to a nagging problem that had been one of thing bigger things to hold our offense back early in the season.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:33 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9831
Smellyman wrote:
Danny, good writer, funny, good insight and Brock, Danny and Tom have a great time working with each other.

Some poeple in this thread need to be better in life


Ironically, I read this comment in my head using Skip Bailess voice.

Tom Wassel is great. Funny, insightful, and IMO the sharpest mind of the three. Wouldn't mind one bit it becomes the Brock and Tom show down the road.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:34 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10046
@agentDib. break down the YPC from the plays where Coleman was on the field, not the overall YPC. Also, take Russell's yards and run attempts out of theat number, and you won't feel near as good.

I get the feeling that Rob is here for this year, but it will be Ware and Coleman next year, with Coleman being the backup plan for Rob if he gets hurt this year.

I love the Robinson move. I can't think of one on field negative, and he was money down the stretch and in the playoffs last year. It feels like one of those moves that might pay off big in a single post season moment where he does something a younger player wouldn't even consider.

I also thought it noteworthy that Clemons, before he had even signed, addressed him as captain. He has the respect of his team, not just Marshawn. Everything about this feels right.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:35 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10046
kearly wrote:
Smellyman wrote:
Danny, good writer, funny, good insight and Brock, Danny and Tom have a great time working with each other.

Some poeple in this thread need to be better in life


Ironically, I read this comment in my head using Skip Bailess voice.

Tom Wassel is great. Funny, insightful, and IMO the sharpest mind of the three. Wouldn't mind one bit it becomes the Brock and Tom show down the road.

BORING! BORING! BORING!

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:40 pm 
* 17Power Blogger *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11209
You could argue that Mike Robinson isn't a world-beater, if you wanted. But teams with Super Bowl aspirations aren't looking for a world-beater; they're just looking for the tiny extra inch or that one crucial play that pushes them over the top. Robinson is the kind of contributor who could provide that.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

Follow me on Twitter at @17power


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:41 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9831
Scottemojo wrote:
BORING! BORING! BORING!


Hey, I never said he was perfect. I'd still take his mannerisms over Danny's any day.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:49 pm 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10046
kearly wrote:
Scottemojo wrote:
BORING! BORING! BORING!


Hey, I never said he was perfect. I'd still take his mannerisms over Danny's any day.


I actually laugh every time I hear them play that "boring" sound clip. I think it's pretty funny. I may start using it on here.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:08 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:37 pm
Posts: 2539
Danny you S**t head, show me anytime this season when coleman was able to do this. It's usually the other way aruond.



Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:33 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 am
Posts: 463
I've actually had the same thought, I'd rather listen to Wassell than Danny O'Neill. O'Neill would be much better if he would ditch the stupid fake laugh, though.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:42 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:11 pm
Posts: 2345
What was Mike Rob's illness?

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:46 pm 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11083
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
Ebola

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:50 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8830
Location: Granite Falls, WA
Mersa

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 5:55 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am
Posts: 6373
Sturm wrote:
What was Mike Rob's illness?


Sars


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 5:59 pm 
* The Producer *
* The Producer *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 13452
Location: King In The North
AIDS 2

_________________
Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 6:35 pm 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11083
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
Zebulon Dak wrote:
AIDS 2

That's like SUPER aids...

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 6:38 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8830
Location: Granite Falls, WA
Chicken Pox

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 6:45 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:12 pm
Posts: 1400
Location: Seattle (From Spokane)
Scurvy

_________________
Tru2RedNGold25 wrote:
Us as Niners fan have every right to rep Niners all day everyday when we have the hardware to back it up do can u guys say that???


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:00 pm 
* NET Admin *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 2:37 pm
Posts: 993
Location: BFE, MT
I still miss Mack Strong.


Sturm wrote:
What was Mike Rob's illness?


From Seahawks re-sign Michael Robinson:


ESPN wrote:
Robinson said he had a reaction to an anti-inflammatory drug he was taking...

_________________
Image

GO HAWKS!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:33 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2064
Location: Marysville, WA
In a situation such as ours where two lineman are still out, who would you rather have as an extra blocker for Lynch or even in pass pro, a rookie or a vet? I know its much more complex than that but I think getting mrob back is pretty darn significant given our current situation.

_________________
Image Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 2:44 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm
Posts: 2266
CANHawk wrote:
Hawks46 wrote:
CANHawk wrote:
AgentDib wrote:
I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.


This is what happens when you cherry pick stats. How about looking at our rushing average out of....say, I formation ? Or how about comparing every formation with a FB. Take out the rushes from Wilson. You'd have a better idea how Coleman is doing, and it's not good. It affects Lynch; he doesn't trust his blocking, even when it's there. Some teams figured it out and clogged the cut back lanes, which ended up with lower rushing totals.

What Kearly said was that "very important pieces were being left ouf of the playbook". We were leaving the fullback on the sidelines, running 3 WRs, spreading the defense out, and running Lynch out of single set back. Anyone notice that we haven't been wearing teams out in the 4th quarter with our run game ? I formation has a lot to do with that; you beat up people a hell of a lot more with a FB than spreading the defense out and finding lanes that way. It's a finesse way to run, and people honestly have to admit that Carroll definately doesn't want to be a finesse team.


How am I cherry picking stats? And what the hell does Russell Wilson's rushing total have to do with Marshawn personally being on pace to put up 1,300 individual rushing yards this year? He has 578 yards through 7 games in 2013, 578/7=82.6YPG. 82.6x16 games=1,322 yard pace for the 2013 season. Show me what I cherry picked...

No, I think you missed my point that Marshawn Lynch is perfectly capable of being a feature back that puts up 1,000+ yards a season without Mike Robinson. At no point did I specifically mention I formation when I said that. To hear some around here talk, you'd think Marshawn incapable of putting on his own shoes or feeding himself without Michael Robinson there to help and I call bullshit. Marshawn is a fricken BEAST.

You make a good point about I Form contributing to beating teams up in the first 3 quarters and I totally agree with that. But you're also forgetting to factor in the fact we're playing with 2 back up tackles (one of whom is a pro bowler and the other a bad mutha trucka) and had 2 games without our All Pro center. You don't think THAT might ALSO be a contributing factor in why we're not beating teams up in the 4th? And I'm the one cherry picking...

Look, I hope Mike's return has as big of an impact on that part of our identity as many here seem to think it will be. If he's healthy and he's the same guy he was at the end of last year, then he will absolutely be an improvement over the deaf blind mute. But Tech's right; people are putting this one guy on way too high of a pedestil. Setting expectations for one guy as high as people are only sets us up for dissapointment...



That's a 20% drop off from last season


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:01 am 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8830
Location: Granite Falls, WA
themunn wrote:
CANHawk wrote:
Hawks46 wrote:
CANHawk wrote:
[quote="AgentDib"]I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.


This is what happens when you cherry pick stats. How about looking at our rushing average out of....say, I formation ? Or how about comparing every formation with a FB. Take out the rushes from Wilson. You'd have a better idea how Coleman is doing, and it's not good. It affects Lynch; he doesn't trust his blocking, even when it's there. Some teams figured it out and clogged the cut back lanes, which ended up with lower rushing totals.

What Kearly said was that "very important pieces were being left ouf of the playbook". We were leaving the fullback on the sidelines, running 3 WRs, spreading the defense out, and running Lynch out of single set back. Anyone notice that we haven't been wearing teams out in the 4th quarter with our run game ? I formation has a lot to do with that; you beat up people a hell of a lot more with a FB than spreading the defense out and finding lanes that way. It's a finesse way to run, and people honestly have to admit that Carroll definately doesn't want to be a finesse team.


How am I cherry picking stats? And what the hell does Russell Wilson's rushing total have to do with Marshawn personally being on pace to put up 1,300 individual rushing yards this year? He has 578 yards through 7 games in 2013, 578/7=82.6YPG. 82.6x16 games=1,322 yard pace for the 2013 season. Show me what I cherry picked...

No, I think you missed my point that Marshawn Lynch is perfectly capable of being a feature back that puts up 1,000+ yards a season without Mike Robinson. At no point did I specifically mention I formation when I said that. To hear some around here talk, you'd think Marshawn incapable of putting on his own shoes or feeding himself without Michael Robinson there to help and I call bullshit. Marshawn is a fricken BEAST.

You make a good point about I Form contributing to beating teams up in the first 3 quarters and I totally agree with that. But you're also forgetting to factor in the fact we're playing with 2 back up tackles (one of whom is a pro bowler and the other a bad mutha trucka) and had 2 games without our All Pro center. You don't think THAT might ALSO be a contributing factor in why we're not beating teams up in the 4th? And I'm the one cherry picking...

Look, I hope Mike's return has as big of an impact on that part of our identity as many here seem to think it will be. If he's healthy and he's the same guy he was at the end of last year, then he will absolutely be an improvement over the deaf blind mute. But Tech's right; people are putting this one guy on way too high of a pedestil. Setting expectations for one guy as high as people are only sets us up for dissapointment...



That's a 20% drop off from last season[/quote]

Of course there is. We are missing 40 percent of our starting offensive line.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 4:03 am 
* NET Sage *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:28 am
Posts: 953
Scottemojo wrote:
I let Kip pick out what I'm going to wear, but when it comes to football I do my own thinking. And I thought Coleman was pretty bad.
I like you pointing out groupthink. Like you said, it doesn't make it wrong.


Exactomundo. Kip DID mention Coleman's poor blocking way back when Michael Robinson was cut ... but he was far from the only one. From the moment he was released, I was very vocal in complaining about Coleman's poor blocking as well. It wasn't exactly rocket science when you see Coleman go try to lay a block ... he gets knocked back ... and Lynch (who was running that way) suddenly reverses his field and decides to go the other way. It was dead obvious that Coleman was nowhere near the blocker that Robinson is. And when you see that pattern play itself out again and again ... it was clear that wasn't working well, as Coleman simply wasn't as experienced and polished at it. Little did I realize at that point how much of an issue blocking for this offense as a whole was going to be.

Look, I have nothing but the greatest respect for Kip's football knowledge and listen to his opinions (and others whom I respect) ... but I most certainly do my own analysis and make up my own mind when it comes to football.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 4:10 am 
*PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
*PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
Posts: 8676
Location: Is Everything
Tech Worlds wrote:
themunn wrote:
CANHawk wrote:
Hawks46 wrote:
[quote="CANHawk"][quote="AgentDib"]I wonder if everybody realizes that we are averaging 4.5 yards per carry so far this season? Obviously I would love for it to be even better with MRob, but blaming our offensive struggles on Derrick Coleman is hilariously silly.


Yerp. Marshwn is on pace for 1,300 yards this season. That's bang on pace for what he's done the last two full seasons he's played. Giving MRob as much credit for Marshawn's success as some people around here are giving him is an insult to Marshawn.

And this is coming from a guy who PLAYED fullback! I NEVER think my kind get enough credit, but people are being a bit silly fawning over MRob these days.


This is what happens when you cherry pick stats. How about looking at our rushing average out of....say, I formation ? Or how about comparing every formation with a FB. Take out the rushes from Wilson. You'd have a better idea how Coleman is doing, and it's not good. It affects Lynch; he doesn't trust his blocking, even when it's there. Some teams figured it out and clogged the cut back lanes, which ended up with lower rushing totals.

What Kearly said was that "very important pieces were being left ouf of the playbook". We were leaving the fullback on the sidelines, running 3 WRs, spreading the defense out, and running Lynch out of single set back. Anyone notice that we haven't been wearing teams out in the 4th quarter with our run game ? I formation has a lot to do with that; you beat up people a hell of a lot more with a FB than spreading the defense out and finding lanes that way. It's a finesse way to run, and people honestly have to admit that Carroll definately doesn't want to be a finesse team.


How am I cherry picking stats? And what the hell does Russell Wilson's rushing total have to do with Marshawn personally being on pace to put up 1,300 individual rushing yards this year? He has 578 yards through 7 games in 2013, 578/7=82.6YPG. 82.6x16 games=1,322 yard pace for the 2013 season. Show me what I cherry picked...

No, I think you missed my point that Marshawn Lynch is perfectly capable of being a feature back that puts up 1,000+ yards a season without Mike Robinson. At no point did I specifically mention I formation when I said that. To hear some around here talk, you'd think Marshawn incapable of putting on his own shoes or feeding himself without Michael Robinson there to help and I call bullshit. Marshawn is a fricken BEAST.

You make a good point about I Form contributing to beating teams up in the first 3 quarters and I totally agree with that. But you're also forgetting to factor in the fact we're playing with 2 back up tackles (one of whom is a pro bowler and the other a bad mutha trucka) and had 2 games without our All Pro center. You don't think THAT might ALSO be a contributing factor in why we're not beating teams up in the 4th? And I'm the one cherry picking...

Look, I hope Mike's return has as big of an impact on that part of our identity as many here seem to think it will be. If he's healthy and he's the same guy he was at the end of last year, then he will absolutely be an improvement over the deaf blind mute. But Tech's right; people are putting this one guy on way too high of a pedestil. Setting expectations for one guy as high as people are only sets us up for dissapointment...



That's a 20% drop off from last season[/quote]

Of course there is. We are missing 40 percent of our starting offensive line.[/quote]

McQuistan is playing out of position too and Unger missed 2 games. Just sayin.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 9:06 am 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11083
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
That's a 20% drop off from last season


Of course there is. We are missing 40 percent of our starting offensive line.


McQuistan is playing out of position too and Unger missed 2 games. Just sayin.


And we also haven't got to the soft mushy vulnerable underbelly of our 2013 schedule either. Thus far we've had games against the Panthers (currently #4 against the run), San Fransisco, Houston, and Arizona. All are pretty tough front 7's and aren't particularly easy to run on. MRob's back now so the argument is totally moot, but tell me the group we've had for the past two weeks couldn't get Marshawn up over 100+ yards against STL(twice) & TB & ATL & whatever will be left of the rotting bloated corpse of the Minnesota Vikings by the time we play them. I think that'd make up your 20% and then some.

In taking the stance that I don't believe Michael Robinson deserves as much credit for Marshawn's success as he seems to get around here, I've been making arguments that sound like I'm not a fan of his return. That couldn't be further from the truth. I'm totally P&J'd about it. Not trying to be Debbie Downer here or anything (but I's keeps it REAL bitch!). A healthy Mike Rob is absolutely better than a healthy Derrick Coleman and that's a no-brainer (sorry Danny but you're just wrong). Nothing but good things will come from this addition, but the people carrying on like Shawn is going to run for 2,500 yards now that the great and powerful MRob's back need to just settle down a little bit...

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 9:28 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:40 pm
Posts: 1310
kearly wrote:
Smellyman wrote:
Danny, good writer, funny, good insight and Brock, Danny and Tom have a great time working with each other.

Some poeple in this thread need to be better in life


Ironically, I read this comment in my head using Skip Bailess voice.

Tom Wassel is great. Funny, insightful, and IMO the sharpest mind of the three. Wouldn't mind one bit it becomes the Brock and Tom show down the road.


Tom has a random funny point but about 9 annoying points. I think Danny/Salk are/were the most annoying. If I hear danny play this hip hop gansta rap angle one more time I'm going to destroy my Iphone. For your viewing pleasure i've posted i pic of Danny, just imagine being in the studio having to listen to this guy talk about Wu Tang Clan.

Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 11:33 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am
Posts: 2051
I would hope that Coleman could beat out a deathly ill Mike Rob.

That would be embarrassing.

_________________
Image

Go Hawks.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 12:45 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm
Posts: 2266
Tech Worlds wrote:

Of course there is. We are missing 40 percent of our starting offensive line.


And the 43 yard game in Carolina with everybody healthy? Good run D or not, we've put up far more yards against far superior run D's in the past

Having everyone injured didn't seem to matter at the end of 2011 either, when Lynch was the first player to put up 100 yards against the 49ers in 37 games or something (and averaged over 5 ypc), behind a line of McQuistan, Gallery, Unger, Jeanpierre and Giacomini.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 12:54 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8830
Location: Granite Falls, WA
themunn wrote:
Tech Worlds wrote:

Of course there is. We are missing 40 percent of our starting offensive line.


And the 43 yard game in Carolina with everybody healthy? Good run D or not, we've put up far more yards against far superior run D's in the past

Having everyone injured didn't seem to matter at the end of 2011 either, when Lynch was the first player to put up 100 yards against the 49ers in 37 games or something (and averaged over 5 ypc), behind a line of McQuistan, Gallery, Unger, Jeanpierre and Giacomini.


It still is a factor not having your guys up front.

You can't cherry pick games.

Last year's game against Atlanta... We couldn't run worth shit WITH Robinson.

Even with all our guys we still struggle sometimes to run the ball. All teams do. To act like missing 40 percent of our starting offensive line is not a factor in the run and pass game is ignoring football 101.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 90 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 12HawkFan, City Of Reign, Google [Bot], hawknation2014, hgwellz12, MichaelHawk70, NINEster, Pandion Haliaetus, samwize77, Throwdown, UK_Seahawk and 53 guests

 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.