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  [ 29 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:57 pm 
* 17Power Blogger *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11209
Or at least that's what this guy says. Believes Seattle is running on first down to try and protect Russell Wilson, not just to be boring and predictable. But then says that said predictability just isn't worth the protection.

This analysis bears out my observation that Wilson has often looked awesome out of unpredictable downs like 2nd-and-4. Most offenses do. Some of his greatest moments have come during drives in which we could reach that down-and-distance repeatedly, putting Wilson in a rhythm and defenses in base packages. (It also suggests that Bevell is at least competent at deploying versatile personnel looks on 2nd-and-short, otherwise we wouldn't look so good there.) The problem is that even running games as great as ours can't reliably pick up 6 yards on every first down, unless you're playing the Rams.

http://kcpelton.wordpress.com/2012/10/2 ... him-loose/

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

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

Follow me on Twitter at @17power


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:03 pm 
NET Pro Bowler
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 11172
Location: Antioch, CA
Along these lines, look how successful the Seahawks offense has been when they come out of the gates flinging the ball around. Against the Rams and Pats I believe Rice caught 15+ yard passes on the first or second play. Both led to scoring drives.

Defenses are expecting us to run Lynch early to set the tone, but Wilson has really surprised some defenses by taking a couple mid-range shots early.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:11 pm 
* 17Power Blogger *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11209
I wonder why we haven't tried a flea-flicker yet. Wouldn't it be an ideal way to trap Lynchaphobic defenses? Or is it, as usual, not that simple?

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

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

Follow me on Twitter at @17power


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:15 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7408
Location: CVN-68
MontanaHawk05 wrote:
I wonder why we haven't tried a flea-flicker yet. Wouldn't it be an ideal way to trap Lynchaphobic defenses? Or is it, as usual, not that simple?


Not exactly a flea flicker, but they did try the WR pass option w/ Rice.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:24 pm 
*NET FCC Liaison*
User avatar
Online

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 22877
Location: Kirkland, WA
Our predictable play-calling is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:31 pm 
* NET Radish *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
Posts: 18018
Location: Spokane, Wa.
FlyingGreg wrote:
MontanaHawk05 wrote:
I wonder why we haven't tried a flea-flicker yet. Wouldn't it be an ideal way to trap Lynchaphobic defenses? Or is it, as usual, not that simple?


Not exactly a flea flicker, but they did try the WR pass option w/ Rice.


I agree a flea flicker now and then, maybe a couple of times or even once a game gives the defense something else to think about. Or even the look of maybe doing it.

:les:

_________________
Image
The SuperB owl ladys have left the building with our thanks.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:36 pm 
* 17Power Blogger *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11209
I miss Jeremy Bates. PC fired him for giving up on the run too often, but what might he have looked like here without the 2010 defense that constantly had him down by three scores by the third quarter?

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

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

Follow me on Twitter at @17power


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:19 pm 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9839
Great topic and great article. I just skimmed it and I could already tell that the guy who wrote it might have a future at football outsiders. That was some seriously smart analysis.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 7:19 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 3870
Location: Tri Cities, WA
RolandDeschain wrote:
Our predictable play-calling is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.


yes yes yes......i've been saying this for 6 games now... bevell has got to step it up, and i actually put the blame on caroll's shoulders for not talking to bevell about better adjustments... i said it in a post a while back, run, run, pass is a recipe for disaster for a rookie q back, unless you're extremely succesful running the ball. but if you are constantly putting your q back in 3rd and longs where the defense can pin it's ears back , well we have all seen the results. yet bevell calls these types of games week in and week out, the exception being carolina and NE, where he actually passes on 1st downs here and there, we digressed last thursday in the second half especially, back to the run, run, pass... which equaled fail, fail, fail....

_________________
World Champs - Sounds good don't it


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 7:48 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:48 pm
Posts: 2279
I think the biggest issue with the playcalling is 3rd down playcalling. In the GB and SF games We'd run the ball twice and pick up 6-7 yards leaving us with a 3rd and 3-4 yards. The problem as I see is that when we get into these manageable situations we go from the I-formation into a shotgun, oftentimes in an empty backfield. The disadvantage to me is that this eliminates the likilihood of a run and so the defenses have an easier time stopping it. What I'd like to see is to stay in the I-Formation perhaps remove a TE and bring in a slot WR.

That way you can either run or pass, you can also utilyze play action. Whereas that's not possible with the numerous times we've employed Shotgun/empty looks.

I think the playcalling is better, though I'm of the opinion that playcalling is 1/3% responsible for success. The other 2/3 comes from proper execution and frankly, through 7 weeks we just haven't executed well enought (or consistently enought)to sustain drives and to caplitalize in the redzone.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:03 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
Posts: 2373
Location: Sammamish, WA
run, run pass, repeat as needed........ ugh

_________________
60 percent of the time..........it works........every time


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:08 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:19 am
Posts: 720
They should run the annexation of puerto rico!

_________________
Status: Active lieutenant in the 12th Man Army


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:28 am 
*PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
*PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:52 am
Posts: 384
Location: Memphis (Displaced Seattleite)
jlwaters1 wrote:
I think the biggest issue with the playcalling is 3rd down playcalling. In the GB and SF games We'd run the ball twice and pick up 6-7 yards leaving us with a 3rd and 3-4 yards. The problem as I see is that when we get into these manageable situations we go from the I-formation into a shotgun, oftentimes in an empty backfield. The disadvantage to me is that this eliminates the likilihood of a run and so the defenses have an easier time stopping it. What I'd like to see is to stay in the I-Formation perhaps remove a TE and bring in a slot WR.

That way you can either run or pass, you can also utilyze play action. Whereas that's not possible with the numerous times we've employed Shotgun/empty looks.

I think the playcalling is better, though I'm of the opinion that playcalling is 1/3% responsible for success. The other 2/3 comes from proper execution and frankly, through 7 weeks we just haven't executed well enought (or consistently enought)to sustain drives and to caplitalize in the redzone.


I like your line of thinking on 3rd down formations.

Would it or would it not be an added side benefit to RW of this formation to have fewer WR's running around to have a shorter, simpler progression, thus getting the ball out quicker and less likely to miss an open target?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:33 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7721
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
Thanks for that link, Montana. Good stuff.

_________________
Image

Super Bowl XLVIII Champions


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:59 am 
NET Pro Bowler
User avatar
Online

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
Posts: 10243
Location: Vancouver, WA
RolandDeschain wrote:
Our predictable play-calling is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.

Our marginal pass blocking is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.

_________________
From the white sands
To the canyon lands
To the redwood stands
To the barren lands

Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:12 am 
*NET FCC Liaison*
User avatar
Online

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 22877
Location: Kirkland, WA
hawksfansinceday1 wrote:
RolandDeschain wrote:
Our predictable play-calling is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.

Our marginal pass blocking is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.

A good offensive coordinator changes things up to compensate for this, in my opinion.

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:19 pm 
* NET Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am
Posts: 3883
MontanaHawk05 wrote:
I miss Jeremy Bates. PC fired him for giving up on the run too often, but what might he have looked like here without the 2010 defense that constantly had him down by three scores by the third quarter?


I've been semi-discussing this for a couple of weeks. I feel like Bates was given the axe way too early. He was treated as if he was another Gregg Knapp in how quickly they canned him and basically didn't even talk about it. It was a total blindside to me. I felt like he didn't exactly see eye-to-eye with Hass, but then Hass was a goner anyway, so why did it matter? He actually made Jay Cutler look like all-pro or maybe even Superbowl quality good for a year.

Maybe he doesn't have as bright of a future as I thought, but he seemed like one of the more creative young minds on the offensive side of the ball that was coming up through the ranks of NFL coaches. Somebody mentioned it was because the Hawks thought they could sign McDaniels to take over as OC immediately as he got fired by Denver. I wasn't aware that there was any interest there from either direction.

I guess if the Hawks wanted to, they could hire quite a few offensive minds after this season as it looks like lots of teams will be scrapping their coaching staffs. Nobody was that into it last year due to the weird offseason, but after this year more teams will be ready to just cut bait and start over.

_________________
Image
R.I.P. Dad. I miss you. You will never be forgotten
1/12/39 - 8/7/08


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:27 pm 
* NET Philistine *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14120
Location: Portland, OR
Great read, Montana. Thanks for sharing it.

_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 1:49 am 
NET Pro Bowler
User avatar
Online

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
Posts: 10243
Location: Vancouver, WA
RolandDeschain wrote:
hawksfansinceday1 wrote:
RolandDeschain wrote:
Our predictable play-calling is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.

Our marginal pass blocking is the largest impediment to our offense, in my opinion.

A good offensive coordinator changes things up to compensate for this, in my opinion.

That's a factor too just not the largest one, in my opinion.

_________________
From the white sands
To the canyon lands
To the redwood stands
To the barren lands

Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 12:45 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:31 am
Posts: 350
HawkFan72 wrote:
Along these lines, look how successful the Seahawks offense has been when they come out of the gates flinging the ball around. Against the Rams and Pats I believe Rice caught 15+ yard passes on the first or second play. Both led to scoring drives.

Defenses are expecting us to run Lynch early to set the tone, but Wilson has really surprised some defenses by taking a couple mid-range shots early.


Agreed. That Bleacher article on Wilson said he leads the NFL in scoring plays of 20+ yards. If our receivers can hang onto the ball RW can do some damage. We sure could use a resurgence of former UM standout Braylon Edwards to along with Rice.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:54 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 am
Posts: 2410
2 points. 1) Bates was fired because he either would/could not do what PC directed him to do.
2) We are not protecting Wilson with our offensive philosophy, we are retarding his development.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 4:02 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:09 pm
Posts: 836
Location: Puyallup, WA
I think this "run, run, pass" perception is not accurate. I could be wrong but I was under the that impression myself a couple games ago and went and looked at the play-by-play's for 2 or 3 games and it wasn't like that at all. But this is also just my perception, I could be wrong without really going through each game.

I'm still with the people that believe the play-calling is predictable though even with the limitations on the rookie QB.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 4:25 pm 
* 17Power Blogger *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11209
A couple of games have allowed Wilson to pass from first down, but others have been pretty rigidly run-run-pass.

_________________
GO HAWKS!!!

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

Follow me on Twitter at @17power


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:04 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:09 pm
Posts: 836
Location: Puyallup, WA
It may be true but I'd still like to see some data to back that up instead of just some fan telling me it's so. Because I was really suprised at the games that I did check.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:53 pm 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:37 am
Posts: 493
Its peoples keep saying that it is run run pass and moan and groan on game day saying its everytime when it does happen but its not true.Its only about 30% of the time.Considering there are only 4 combinations of 1st and 2nd down I think it is mixed up pretty well.
The problem isnt the run run, the problem is the pass part.Picking up 3rd and 4 should be easy.Any QB in the league should be thriving in that situation.This isnt a bash Wilson thread I have stayed out of the whole debate.But he isn't where we need him to be yet.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:07 pm 
*NET FCC Liaison*
User avatar
Online

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 22877
Location: Kirkland, WA
Justafan, 30% IS practically all the time. You can't run that play hardly ever and expect it to be successful unless you have a really dominant running game. The problem is, running on 1st & 2nd downs and not converting just broadcasts your 3rd-down play to the defense...it should be run like 3% of the time. >.>

_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.

*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:53 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm
Posts: 3181
With the addition of Moore, I'm actually surprised we don't run more 2 TE sets. Think about it:

Start out the game with an up tempo run game, with a 2 TE set. Get up to the line quickly, so the defense can't subsitute, then using the same personnel package, you run the ball, and then alternate with 1 and both TEs going out into routes. This would keep the defense in a base run package, while getting mismatches with most base LBers on Miller and Moore, or McCoy. All 3 of our TEs can get separation from 80% of the LBers in this league easily.

Sidney Rice can also beat many one on ones, and if Tate can live up to his reputation as being that good in space, I'd like my chances with him on the outside in one on one situations as well. We could also go to a "jumbo package" with Rice and Edwards on the outside.

I'd script the first 15 plays this way, then maybe run another 10 with different personnel packages. It would be extremely difficult to game plan on the defensive side when a team that can run as well as us would come up in a run package set with 2 TEs, then either run or pass out of the same formation, while not allowing the defense to substitute, or sometimes not even get set. It would be a total abberation to the rest of the game, and allow us more freedom throughout the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:34 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:00 pm
Posts: 1363
Right on point. I've always thought this too. It's amazing that brilliant football minds can't figure this out as well.

Our best drive of the year was against STL. Anyone else wonder why Lynch was able to go for 22 and a TD on 1st and 10 run? Well it's because we had passed on 1st down many times earlier on the drive. It was truly a balanced offense. Run Run Pass is not balanced.

_________________
Image

"We all we got, we all we need"


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Passing on first down, not running, would better protect RW
 Post Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:41 am 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:37 am
Posts: 493
30% is actually a third of the time.Not even close to everytime..from a math standpoint.25% would be an even distribution considering you have 4 combos you can run on 1st and 2nd down.If tendencies are what you are worried about.So Bevell is actually mixing it up pretty well.
I am glad the Rams game was brought up.That first drive we had 5 first down plays and Lynch ran on three of them.Including his 18 yard TD.In that game we we did the run run thing 5 times and got 4 first downs.We should have ran more that game.The reason Lynch made that run was the rams sucked at run D.We were averaging over 6 ypc and lost.We should have steamrolled those f$%#@^^.The rams should have been sitting at home questioning their manhood like Dallas was.
Its not playcalling its execution.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ] 

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



 
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.