Danny O'Neil claims Coleman "beat out" Mike Rob

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Wed Oct 23, 2013 2:31 pm
  • 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
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11265
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • 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.
    User avatar
    Missing_Clink
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2494
    Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am


  • 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
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • 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.
    User avatar
    plyka
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1323
    Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:40 pm


  • 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
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11265
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • 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
    User avatar
    thebanjodude
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 486
    Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 am


  • 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

    "Everyone has a plan... until they get punched in the face." -- Mike Tyson on the 2014 Seattle Seahawks.
    User avatar
    LawlessHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1138
    Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Tonasket, WA to Temecula, CA


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:07 pm
  • 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.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11230
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • 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.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11230
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • 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...
    Last edited by CANHawk on Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    WAR BEAVER!!
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11436
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • 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
    User avatar
    Smellyman
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 990
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:58 pm
    Location: Taipei


  • 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.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3928
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • 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.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11230
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • 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.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11230
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • @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
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11265
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • 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
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11265
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • 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
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11327
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • Scottemojo wrote:BORING! BORING! BORING!


    Hey, I never said he was perfect. I'd still take his mannerisms over Danny's any day.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11230
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • 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
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11265
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Danny you S**t head, show me anytime this season when coleman was able to do this. It's usually the other way aruond.

    User avatar
    Axx
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2539
    Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:37 pm


  • 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.
    User avatar
    thebanjodude
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 486
    Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 9:18 am


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


  • Ebola
    WAR BEAVER!!
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11436
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Mersa
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • Sturm wrote:What was Mike Rob's illness?


    Sars
    User avatar
    -The Glove-
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7207
    Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am


  • AIDS 2
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 14747
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


  • Zebulon Dak wrote:AIDS 2

    That's like SUPER aids...
    WAR BEAVER!!
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11436
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Chicken Pox
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • 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???


    2013 Adopt-a-rookie: #humblethug
    2014 Adopt-a-rookie: Kevin Norwood
    User avatar
    razgriz737
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1678
    Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:12 pm
    Location: Spokane/Seattle


  • 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!
    User avatar
    FPD
    * NET Admin *
     
    Posts: 998
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 2:37 pm
    Location: BFE, MT


  • 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
    User avatar
    AF_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2128
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
    Location: Marysville, WA


  • 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
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2520
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • 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
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Thu Oct 24, 2013 4:03 am
  • 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.
    User avatar
    Hawkscanner
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 981
    Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:28 am


  • 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.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Thu Oct 24, 2013 9:06 am
  • 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...
    WAR BEAVER!!
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11436
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • 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
    User avatar
    plyka
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1323
    Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:40 pm


  • I would hope that Coleman could beat out a deathly ill Mike Rob.

    That would be embarrassing.
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2210
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am


Re: Danny O'Neil claims Coleman
Thu Oct 24, 2013 12:45 pm
  • 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.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2520
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • 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
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


Previous


It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:49 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information