Would the dink and dunk work in Seattle?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Would the dink and dunk work in Seattle?
Tue Oct 30, 2012 2:51 pm
  • So far, it looks like the only offensive scheme that works against the Seattle defense is the "dink-and-dunk" - lots of short passes at the line etc, to move the ball 5-6 yards a down. And if you look around the NFL, it seems like that's what is working best everywhere. New England is a great example.

    So with a rookie QB and no WRs or TEs that seem capable of getting separation, wouldn't the "dink-and-dunk" seem to make some sense in Seattle? Maybe with a lot of hurry-up no-huddle to keep opponent defenses off-balance? We need to start sustaining drives, and our offense appears totally unable to do that this season.
    User avatar
    HansGruber
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1987
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:39 pm


  • Funny how you call the West Coast Offense the "dink-and-dunk".
    User avatar
    NorCal
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 257
    Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:10 pm


  • It sure worked in the Holmgren era.
    @SeahawkGreg

    Image

    "I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan
    User avatar
    FlyingGreg
    * Master Chief *
    * Master Chief *
     
    Posts: 7448
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
    Location: CVN-68


  • I think it was this that divided this forum regarding Wilson and Flynn. To me, I think Flynn is more adept at a dink and dunk WCO, type offense. I also felt that other than Rice, our receivers were more of that mold as well. I was personally frustrated watching Pete put Wilson in situations where it seemed likely Flynn would do better. That said, this is a new league and I will be the first to say I feel Wilson offers more than Flynn, as long as Pete lets him improvise (but I don't think there is much room for improvisation in a true WCO). As soon as Wilson starts hitting those underneath patterns and slants consistantly, I think this offense is going to be very hard to gameplan for and I assume Pete has some sort've schizo WCO in the works. I'm likin' it.
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5061
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0


  • The dink-and-dunk is not an offensive scheme. It's a failure for the offense, and a settling compromise for when their opponent takes away everything past 15 yards (or for when your QB lacks the requisite arm strength to threaten at deeper ranges). Forcing an offense to dink-and-dunk is usually quoted as a defensive strategy for stopping elite quarterbacks, because it requires said quarterback to repeatedly make quick, accurate throws into very tight windows and string together drives of 15 or more plays doing it. That increases the chance of a turnover by increasing the fatigue of the offense, manifesting in concentration failures like, oh I dunno, throwing a bad-decision interception to Earl Thomas or a wide-open #1 receiver dropping an easy TD pass. Have we seen that lately?

    Only the elite quarterbacks can handle the pressure of a constant dink-and-dunk offense. It's not a desirable strategy at all. The fact that Seattle succeeded in forcing Detroit into it was a victory for our defense, even if there are improvements to be made.
    GO HAWKS!!!

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

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:The dink-and-dunk is not an offensive scheme. It's a failure for the offense, and a settling compromise for when their opponent takes away everything past 15 yards (or for when your QB lacks the requisite arm strength to threaten at deeper ranges). Forcing an offense to dink-and-dunk is usually quoted as a defensive strategy for stopping elite quarterbacks, because it requires said quarterback to repeatedly make quick, accurate throws into very tight windows and string together drives of 15 or more plays doing it. That increases the chance of a turnover by increasing the fatigue of the offense, manifesting in concentration failures like, oh I dunno, throwing a bad-decision interception to Earl Thomas or a wide-open #1 receiver dropping an easy TD pass. Have we seen that lately?

    Only the elite quarterbacks can handle the pressure of a constant dink-and-dunk offense. It's not a desirable strategy at all. The fact that Seattle succeeded in forcing Detroit into it was a victory for our defense, even if there are improvements to be made.



    Solid points. The a-hole that has / had his name most often tied to this style of play had receivers named Rice and Taylor. That inspired his many students to continue on with the plan, but they didn't have receivers named Rice and Taylor. This is why I am hopeful Pete has some sort've of alternate plan. Apparently he does, and it apparently starts with Russell Wilson.
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5061
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0


  • NorCal wrote:Funny how you call the West Coast Offense the "dink-and-dunk".


    huh?
    Image
    User avatar
    SNDavidson
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1437
    Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:22 pm


  • Wilson has played both West Coast offense and more play action style offense in college between NC State and Wisconsin--he's perfectly comfortable with both.
    Help bring peace to the South LA / Puget Sound communities. Are you in?
    http://www.abetterla.org | http://www.abetterseattle.com
    User avatar
    sc85sis
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4626
    Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:40 am
    Location: Southern CA


  • Just watch Ponder this weekend, then tell me if you want a lot more dink and dunk.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10738
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • The problem is that when your running game is way more efficient than your passing game, the defense comes forward. They press the outside receivers, do everything they can to take away the quick and easy stuff, and dare you to beat them down the field. The "dink-and-dunk" game isn't available until Wilson proves he can burn teams down the field. Then the safeties have to stay on top, the corners have to respect the deeper routes, and the underneath stuff opens up. You have seen guys like Brady and Brees come full circle. When they started, they were crowded. Then, for a few years they made teams pay for this by throwing the deep ball. A few years later, teams adjusted and took that away, leaving the underneath stuff open. Now they just take whatever the defense gives them. If you crowd them, they'll hurt you deep. If you take that away, they'll rip you apart underneath. Right now, Wilson is still in phase one. He has a ways to go until the dink-and-dunk game will be effective for him.
    "So between my friends and I we have been at every home game to date this year, and we have all been plotting the offensive plays called. " ------Anthony!
    User avatar
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1353
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm


  • Yes it would work. But why? We have Lynch and Turbin both good backs. We are weak at receiver
    User avatar
    Happypuppy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1859
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:The dink-and-dunk is not an offensive scheme. It's a failure for the offense, and a settling compromise for when their opponent takes away everything past 15 yards (or for when your QB lacks the requisite arm strength to threaten at deeper ranges). Forcing an offense to dink-and-dunk is usually quoted as a defensive strategy for stopping elite quarterbacks, because it requires said quarterback to repeatedly make quick, accurate throws into very tight windows and string together drives of 15 or more plays doing it. That increases the chance of a turnover by increasing the fatigue of the offense, manifesting in concentration failures like, oh I dunno, throwing a bad-decision interception to Earl Thomas or a wide-open #1 receiver dropping an easy TD pass. Have we seen that lately?

    Only the elite quarterbacks can handle the pressure of a constant dink-and-dunk offense. It's not a desirable strategy at all. The fact that Seattle succeeded in forcing Detroit into it was a victory for our defense, even if there are improvements to be made.


    10+ play drives also tend to fatigue the defense, which sets up the run in the second half of games.

    It is true that a team needs a QB and receivers capable of executing this type of attack. However, quick, short passes also take pressure off the offensive line, and these are higher-percentage throws than the deep ball.
    manders2600
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 203
    Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:50 pm


  • manders2600 wrote:10+ play drives also tend to fatigue the defense, which sets up the run in the second half of games.

    It is true that a team needs a QB and receivers capable of executing this type of attack. However, quick, short passes also take pressure off the offensive line, and these are higher-percentage throws than the deep ball.


    They may be higher-percentage, but a lot more of them have to be made than deep balls.

    Also, quick passing games aren't exactly the same thing as dink-and-dunk. Quick passes can still be 10-15 yards and merely involve the QB getting the ball out to a receiver whose timing will have him right where he needs to. Dink-and-dunk might just involve repeatedly losing your deeper routes and settling for what's underneath.

    Stafford had a lot of the latter Sunday night, IIRC. He held onto the ball quite a bit, indicating that the shorter routes weren't really the intention. Then he'd go for the underneath stuff and our zones would prove not to be a little too big.
    GO HAWKS!!!

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

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11245
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • HansGruber wrote:So far, it looks like the only offensive scheme that works against the Seattle defense is the "dink-and-dunk" - lots of short passes at the line etc, to move the ball 5-6 yards a down. And if you look around the NFL, it seems like that's what is working best everywhere. New England is a great example.

    So with a rookie QB and no WRs or TEs that seem capable of getting separation, wouldn't the "dink-and-dunk" seem to make some sense in Seattle? Maybe with a lot of hurry-up no-huddle to keep opponent defenses off-balance? We need to start sustaining drives, and our offense appears totally unable to do that this season.


    Early in the season fans were complaining Russell Wilson was "dinking-and-dunking" and not taking shots down field. Now we are throwing long and people want "dink-and-dunk".....confusing.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2462
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • You need consistent WR's for the short passing game - if you go out on first down and throw a 5 yard pass, then on second down it's incomplete, you're left with an undesirable 3rd and 5 situation.

    I'd prefer if we had a 40/40/20 split between running the ball, throwing it deep and throwing it short, particularly on first down.
    Such a strategy would keep defenses honest, and as such mismatches would occur all over the field leading to big gains in all 3 areas
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2364
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • So let me get this straight. Many on this board were frustrated by dink and dunk and checkdowns early in the season... now it's what you want?

    The second we start doing this, you will complain about the lack of chunk plays.

    I'm starting to think that many will complain no matter what we do.
    Give me some damn skittles...
    User avatar
    Basis4day
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3046
    Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:57 am


  • i'm not seeing where our offense is a huge problem, we're moving the ball , cutting down on penalties, scoring td's , we're appearing to be getting better every week, not sure what you guys are looking for, we went down and scored a 4th qtr td last week for a win, and th D took a big dump... i would like to see the play calling mixed up a bit, and stop running on every 1st down, or every 3rd and long, but the offense is definately improving... just need to get better on 3rd downs.
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3898
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


  • HansGruber wrote:So far, it looks like the only offensive scheme that works against the Seattle defense is the "dink-and-dunk" - lots of short passes at the line etc, to move the ball 5-6 yards a down. And if you look around the NFL, it seems like that's what is working best everywhere. New England is a great example.

    So with a rookie QB and no WRs or TEs that seem capable of getting separation, wouldn't the "dink-and-dunk" seem to make some sense in Seattle? Maybe with a lot of hurry-up no-huddle to keep opponent defenses off-balance? We need to start sustaining drives, and our offense appears totally unable to do that this season.

    Not if that's all you do,,It is just another gismo in the bag of tricks that the QB's can use to move the ball.
    I don't believe that, by itself, it can be a sustainable plan of attack, because Defenses play your tendencies.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3473
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • Unfortunately, for a lot of fans, it will never be good enough w/Wilson, they have already decided they want Flynn etc. I was thinking about how before the season a lot of ppl were saying they would be happy with 4-4 considering our schedule. Now it seems like a ton of ppl are pissed off about that exact record. It just is whining for the sake of whining imo.
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2694
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • HawkWow wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:The dink-and-dunk is not an offensive scheme. It's a failure for the offense, and a settling compromise for when their opponent takes away everything past 15 yards (or for when your QB lacks the requisite arm strength to threaten at deeper ranges). Forcing an offense to dink-and-dunk is usually quoted as a defensive strategy for stopping elite quarterbacks, because it requires said quarterback to repeatedly make quick, accurate throws into very tight windows and string together drives of 15 or more plays doing it. That increases the chance of a turnover by increasing the fatigue of the offense, manifesting in concentration failures like, oh I dunno, throwing a bad-decision interception to Earl Thomas or a wide-open #1 receiver dropping an easy TD pass. Have we seen that lately?

    Only the elite quarterbacks can handle the pressure of a constant dink-and-dunk offense. It's not a desirable strategy at all. The fact that Seattle succeeded in forcing Detroit into it was a victory for our defense, even if there are improvements to be made.



    Solid points. The a-hole that has / had his name most often tied to this style of play had receivers named Rice and Taylor. That inspired his many students to continue on with the plan, but they didn't have receivers named Rice and Taylor. This is why I am hopeful Pete has some sort've of alternate plan. Apparently he does, and it apparently starts with Russell Wilson.


    Bill Walsh won 2 Super Bowls before Jerry Rice was even drafted. Just felt like I had to point that out to you.
    User avatar
    NorCal
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 257
    Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:10 pm


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Unfortunately, for a lot of fans, it will never be good enough w/Wilson, they have already decided they want Flynn etc. I was thinking about how before the season a lot of ppl were saying they would be happy with 4-4 considering our schedule. Now it seems like a ton of ppl are pissed off about that exact record. It just is whining for the sake of whining imo.


    They moved the goal posts when we beat DAL, GB and NE. For whatever reason people assumed we'd lose 2 or all 3 of those games and would beat AZ and STL on the road. Because we held at home, we have a bunch of captains hindsight saying "well then we shoulda won the 2 division road games if we're good enough to beat GB and NE!!"

    I'd almost rather have this 4-4 than the alternatives that put us at 4-4. We have head-to-head wins over GB and Dallas, and will have it over the Vikes after this weekend. Those are the only teams that concern me about competing for a WC spot, since at this point I'd say the Hawks have about a 1% chance of winning the division. SF virtually owns every tie breaker if we both end up at 12-4. They'd have to lose 3.

    All this talk about electively changing the passing game to dink and dunk due to receiver depth is bollocks. If you want to render the running game ineffective, then by all means go for it.

    We're 2 losses in the hole because guys couldn't catch crucial throws or you have stupid penalties that bring back huge gains. You don't change your whole philosophy because of that.
    User avatar
    CrimsonWazzu
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 414
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:33 am


  • Exactly. Prior to that Niners game, we were the #1 team is catching the ball according to Clayton (as in NON drops)
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2694
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • I have to 100% agree with Montana. The "dink and dunk" is not a successful scheme. It's a sign of failure or a sign of playing a terrible defense. You aim that low, you will never go anywhere. And hello? What exactly were we doing at the start of the year that drove every fan insane? That was the definition of "dink and dunk".
    Hawkadeus
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 201
    Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:50 pm


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Unfortunately, for a lot of fans, it will never be good enough w/Wilson, they have already decided they want Flynn etc. I was thinking about how before the season a lot of ppl were saying they would be happy with 4-4 considering our schedule. Now it seems like a ton of ppl are pissed off about that exact record. It just is whining for the sake of whining imo.


    In time they will stop...then pretend they never acted the way they did and praise Russell as the man. Some of them will probably own a Wilson jersey ..... everyone will come around eventually. The national media all ready has come around on Wilson, the haters will be soon to follow.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2462
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


  • Scottemojo wrote:Just watch Ponder this weekend, then tell me if you want a lot more dink and dunk.


    Do you know who wants more 'dink and dunk' from Ponder?

    Image

    Samantha Steele of ESPN. Pretty good catch for a quarterback only in his second year huh?
    Russ Willstrong
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 651
    Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:31 am


  • Tical21 beat me to it, and hit the nail on the head. With teams stacking the box against our run game, throwing quick passes into the teeth of the defense isn't exactly an optimal strategy.

    I like what we're doing, and I like the offense once Bevell has opened it up a bit.

    We have a good run game, and that rolls right into the play action that they like to run. It also allows for guys like Rice and Tate to get that extra separation for deep balls. It also opens up the intermediate routes for our TE's.

    We've also been doing more roll outs, screens (although not always well executed), wheel routes by the RBs, etc. With a slightly better run game, our offense will be hard to stop, which is why it worked so well in Minny. Teams have to gameplan for Lynch like they did for Peterson.

    The only think I'd really like to see is more true 2 TE sets, where we run the ball, then pass out of the same formation. I'd love to see a slightly uptemp run game with these 2 TE sets, wearing the defense down, then sending Miller and/or McCoy out in coverage against a team's base LBers, thus creating more mismatches
    Hawks46
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3429
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Unfortunately, for a lot of fans, it will never be good enough w/Wilson, they have already decided they want Flynn etc. I was thinking about how before the season a lot of ppl were saying they would be happy with 4-4 considering our schedule. Now it seems like a ton of ppl are pissed off about that exact record. It just is whining for the sake of whining imo.

    There is MAYBE, M A Y B E, 3 fans that fit this description, why don't you address THEM, and ask them to stop injecting the life serum into that DEAD HORSE that you and a couple others have been beating on.
    This silly subject has been in about every single QB post on .NET.
    You're not going to FORCE anyone that thinks that way about Flynn or Wilson, so what's your goal?
    Your time would be better spent, yacking at a wall LOL
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3473
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • I'm going more off of what I hear on the radio, I never once said anyone on here, I'm new here and don't really know anyone on here other than Skip. It's just an observation on reading stuff on blogs, FB, comments on KJR and ESPN, along w/just listening to ppl around town.
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2694
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • scutterhawk wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Unfortunately, for a lot of fans, it will never be good enough w/Wilson, they have already decided they want Flynn etc. I was thinking about how before the season a lot of ppl were saying they would be happy with 4-4 considering our schedule. Now it seems like a ton of ppl are pissed off about that exact record. It just is whining for the sake of whining imo.

    There is MAYBE, M A Y B E, 3 fans that fit this description, why don't you address THEM, and ask them to stop injecting the life serum into that DEAD HORSE that you and a couple others have been beating on.
    This silly subject has been in about every single QB post on .NET.
    You're not going to FORCE anyone that thinks that way about Flynn or Wilson, so what's your goal?
    Your time would be better spent, yacking at a wall LOL

    What was your point? Soulfish doesn't have an ass-ton of posts on here, it is unlikely he he has beating on ANY dead horses.
    Or did you just feel like lecturing somebody?
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10738
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Hawkadeus wrote:I have to 100% agree with Montana. The "dink and dunk" is not a successful scheme. It's a sign of failure or a sign of playing a terrible defense. You aim that low, you will never go anywhere. And hello? What exactly were we doing at the start of the year that drove every fan insane? That was the definition of "dink and dunk".


    Actually, at at the beginning of the season, we were running the ball a lot, and not a lot of passing. And when we did pass, it was a lot of mid-range routes, 10-20 yard seams, etc. That's not dink and dunk. "Dink and dunk" is a lot of underneath routes, screens, and quick passes at the LOS for 5-6 YAC. A true "dink and dunk" offense will throw the ball A LOT (>35 times a game), because you're only trying to get a handful of yards per passing down. And it's most often used against teams that have a strong defense, specifically teams that have a great pass rush and secondaries that play a lot of zone. It's also very effective at creating opportunities for your run game, as evidenced by the Patriots success at running up the middle this season. LBs start spreading out and playing coverage rather than rushing the passer or playing inside to stop the run.

    And New England just totally blows up your theory. They're having HUGE success with the dink and dunk. In fact, they are the #1 ranked offense in the NFL for both yards AND points - 440 yards/game, and 32.8 pts/game. And they've done it against the best defenses in the NFL. They absolutely torched Seattle's defense when we were ranked #1 in the NFL. And they're doing it entirely with a dink and dunk approach, using those great TEs and a bunch of fast slot WRs from a fast-paced offense where Brady just snaps the ball and gets it out quick to whoever doesn't have a man on them at the LOS, letting the receivers pick up YAC. If you watched them play, you'd see Brady throwing the ball without even dropping back, he's literally taking the snap, standing up and firing it out immediately. And defenses are just getting blown away by it, nobody seems to be able to stop them.

    And the comparison between WCO and "dink and dunk" couldn't be further from the truth. WCO (at least the classic Bill Walsh and Holmgren WCOs) is a scheme based on timing routes, uses a lot of 3-step and 5-step drops and generally requires the QB to stand in the pocket for a bit. The WCO also uses the run to setup passes (dink and dunk uses short passes to setup runs, generally up the middle because LBs are spread out trying to defend against the quick LOS passes). The only way I can conceive comparing the WCO to "dink and dunk" is that the Holmgren WCO has a lot of plays designed so that a couple slot receivers are available as underneath checkdown options while another receiver or two are going deep. Holmgren's theory was that this helps to neutralize a pass rush and also spreads out the secondary, specifically, it is designed to force DBs to choose a WR to cover, leaving at least one WR open on any given play. The biggest difference here is that the WCO is relying on open receivers up-field, at least 8-10 yards deep. The dink and dunk relies on open receivers at the LOS. I think the misunderstanding in this thread is based on how Holmgren used the WCO in Seattle, where he never really had any deep threats. He tended to call a lot of plays with multiple slot receivers because that's what we had. I remember all this from listening to him while he was coaching in Seattle, he was very open about his philosophy and his WCO.
    User avatar
    HansGruber
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1987
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:39 pm


  • Scottemojo wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Unfortunately, for a lot of fans, it will never be good enough w/Wilson, they have already decided they want Flynn etc. I was thinking about how before the season a lot of ppl were saying they would be happy with 4-4 considering our schedule. Now it seems like a ton of ppl are pissed off about that exact record. It just is whining for the sake of whining imo.

    There is MAYBE, M A Y B E, 3 fans that fit this description, why don't you address THEM, and ask them to stop injecting the life serum into that DEAD HORSE that you and a couple others have been beating on.
    This silly subject has been in about every single QB post on .NET.
    You're not going to FORCE anyone that thinks that way about Flynn or Wilson, so what's your goal?
    Your time would be better spent, yacking at a wall LOL

    What was your point? Soulfish doesn't have an ass-ton of posts on here, it is unlikely he he has beating on ANY dead horses.
    Or did you just feel like lecturing somebody?

    You know what?, screw it, why don't we just start another thread, another thread, another thread, another thread, another thread.
    The original OP said nothing about Flynn............NOTHING, and I was under the impression that he wanted to discuss the dink and dunk option, and would it work here.
    Seems like we've had to endure the same shit over and over again, BUT, if y'all wanna grab a club and join in then knock yourself out.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3473
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • scutterhawk wrote:You know what?, screw it, why don't we just start another thread, another thread, another thread, another thread, another thread.
    The original OP said nothing about Flynn............NOTHING, and I was under the impression that he wanted to discuss the dink and dunk option, and would it work here.
    Seems like we've had to endure the same shit over and over again, BUT, if y'all wanna grab a club and join in then knock yourself out.


    Yeah you've got a point. The Flynn vs Wilson thing is all over the forum, but that's kind of to be expected with a rookie QB. It was the same with Dilfer and Hass. I'm not really offended or feel like it was hijacking. Although I do understand your annoyance, it's gotten to the point where when that comes up in a thread, I just close it and don't go back.

    Considering that Flynn had a lot of success running a dink and dunk during his 6-TD performance in Green Bay, it actually kind of ties into the topic though. Seems like if Seattle went to more of a dink and dunk style offense, they'd build an offense that could adapt quickly to Flynn if he needed to start. Flynn seems to excel in that sort of system.
    User avatar
    HansGruber
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1987
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:39 pm


  • The "dink and dunk" is phenomenal when it's clicking. It's bo-ho-horrring though (Dr Cox voice). I very much prefer a more vertical passing offense but honestly I'll gladly take whichever is working.
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 14137
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


  • No doubt, if it's working, go with it. I prefer the ground and pound, and sticking with it. Mainly because of the whole time of possession thing, keeping the D fresh etc. Dink and Dunk is fine though, and beats the hell out of the run, run, pass on 3rd and long, over and over again. Sometimes it's just better to take what the defense gives you. In fact, I think they need to start using Miller a hell of a lot more. And for the love of god, NO MORE BUBBLE SCREENS :141847_bnono:
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2694
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Zebulon Dak wrote:The "dink and dunk" is phenomenal when it's clicking. It's bo-ho-horrring though (Dr Cox voice). I very much prefer a more vertical passing offense but honestly I'll gladly take whichever is working.

    I think that the bordom of the dink and dunk is why most people hate it, and I have to say, that I really don't want to see too much of it either, but if used sparingly, and you have success with it, I'm ok with it.
    Just mix it up Bevel, let's see what Wilson can do with another facet, just move the chains and we'll all be happy.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3473
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • It can set up the long passes, keep the defense honest etc. Obviously, a more balanced O is better.
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2694
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:No doubt, if it's working, go with it. I prefer the ground and pound, and sticking with it. Mainly because of the whole time of possession thing, keeping the D fresh etc. Dink and Dunk is fine though, and beats the hell out of the run, run, pass on 3rd and long, over and over again. Sometimes it's just better to take what the defense gives you. In fact, I think they need to start using Miller a hell of a lot more. And for the love of god, NO MORE BUBBLE SCREENS :141847_bnono:

    Bubble screens?, please don't get me started on that tangent, I don't understand why they keep going with that when it really hasn't paid off :17:
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3473
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • Every time they do one, I guarantee 90 percent of the Hawks fans are screaming at the TV. It rarely works, and is a truly dangerous play, way too easy to fumble.
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2694
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • I bet it wouldn't work.
    Image
    User avatar
    MANUNITED23
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1877
    Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 5:27 pm
    Location: Bay Area, CA


  • scutterhawk wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Unfortunately, for a lot of fans, it will never be good enough w/Wilson, they have already decided they want Flynn etc. I was thinking about how before the season a lot of ppl were saying they would be happy with 4-4 considering our schedule. Now it seems like a ton of ppl are pissed off about that exact record. It just is whining for the sake of whining imo.

    There is MAYBE, M A Y B E, 3 fans that fit this description, why don't you address THEM, and ask them to stop injecting the life serum into that DEAD HORSE that you and a couple others have been beating on.
    This silly subject has been in about every single QB post on .NET.
    You're not going to FORCE anyone that thinks that way about Flynn or Wilson, so what's your goal?
    Your time would be better spent, yacking at a wall LOL


    Yes. I don't understand the constant need for Wilson-adoration-validation. How many people are calling for Flynn these days? God forbid this should happen, but if Wilson gets dinged and Flynn is called upon, please refuse to support the team until Wilson is again healthy. I get the impression a few of these guys are Wilson 1st, Seahawks 2nd. Kinda' creepy, actually.
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5061
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0




It is currently Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:41 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information