Observations

[hawknation2017]

I will point this out one more time... the Packers stacked their squad more than any other team to beat the schemes that the Seahawks run. Pretty much since thier 2014 draft.

It's why they've been the one of only two teams thus far since 2011 mid-season to give us some of our biggest losses. Falcons being the other.

The score was 17-9 Packers, but we all know the game was pretty much a stalemate. Which I'll take any day going away at Lambeau. Packers got some help from officiating and really were only to capitalize on some really bad Seahawks mistakes and miscues.

Wilson should have took the sack or protect the ball better.

That late substitution was a bad decision.

Their FG made was a foot away from being a miss.

The game looked ugly, but only because it was ultra-competitive... win or lose in those games... imo... is only going to make everyone better in the long run.

We're you watching the same game I was? The Seahawks were badly overmatched offensively by a much improved Packer defense. As a result of this and not being able to stop Rodgers often enough on third down they were doubled up on time of possession... These teams are NOT the same talent wise... Having the best defense and the worst offense in the NFL is not going to win you the super bowl, which is what it's all about... You must have SOME balance...

Worst offense in the NFL? That is a bold proclamation after Week 1.

 

[ptisme]

I will point this out one more time... the Packers stacked their squad more than any other team to beat the schemes that the Seahawks run. Pretty much since thier 2014 draft.

It's why they've been the one of only two teams thus far since 2011 mid-season to give us some of our biggest losses. Falcons being the other.

The score was 17-9 Packers, but we all know the game was pretty much a stalemate. Which I'll take any day going away at Lambeau. Packers got some help from officiating and really were only to capitalize on some really bad Seahawks mistakes and miscues.

Wilson should have took the sack or protect the ball better.

That late substitution was a bad decision.

Their FG made was a foot away from being a miss.

The game looked ugly, but only because it was ultra-competitive... win or lose in those games... imo... is only going to make everyone better in the long run.

We're you watching the same game I was? The Seahawks were badly overmatched offensively by a much improved Packer defense. As a result of this and not being able to stop Rodgers often enough on third down they were doubled up on time of possession... These teams are NOT the same talent wise... Having the best defense and the worst offense in the NFL is not going to win you the super bowl, which is what it's all about... You must have SOME balance...

Worst offense in the NFL? That is a bold proclamation after Week 1.

OK.... Well I also told you that you had the best defense in the NFL.... How about this: Great defense/horrible offense...

 

[endzorn]

When Russ doesn't have "magic" to fix our broken offensive game plan, it shows that yes, we have a horrible offensive gameplan.

We know we have a cheap line, but in order to keep the core of our offense and defense together, we had to pay them. Sure, they could be coached better, but they are still cheap or freshly drafted guys. The money isn't there to go buy a line.

What that means is we need to strategize and come into games with a game plan suited to a line that for the most part can't provide protection for long developing plays. Tons of teams do this. The Patriots constantly hit hot routes all the way up the field 5 yards at a time.

Bevell doesn't do this. He develops gameplans to try to maximize explosive plays. He doesn't take into account that we don't have OL personnel to carry that out. That is why we are constantly going 3 and out.

Take 2 receivers, spread them out wide and run their routes fast and deep to make sure and draw the corners and free safety. Run 2 TE for the hot routes both in and out routes, bit short and horizontal. RB in the backfield for either the run play or to provide addl protection. The RB can also release late when he sees a hole.

Watch the teams that are good at moving the chains and this is what they do. It forces LB'S to have to pay attention to the short pass, which then takes the pressure off the line and running plays.

It is maddening that an OC Maki g big money with tons of talent to work with can't seem to grasp this.

It is EXACTLY what we did the last half of 2015 to finally start getting W's, but has been abandoned since.

People, take a minute and read through johnnyfever's post. He makes outstanding points about strategy and minimizing flaws.

I just rewatched the condensed version of the game twice and was surprised to see how many times we squandered opportunities in the game because Bevell was looking for "chunk" plays and not just trying to move the chains. What I cannot understand about our current philosophy is that they take a personnel-be-damned approach and feed into our weaknesses.

Andy Reid is fantastic at recognizing what his offense is capable of and what it is not able to do. When he traded for Smith the Chiefs didn't have many playmakers so he let Smith stick to short, high-percentage throws to minimize the risks of a team without the ability to stretch the field. The result wasn't an explosive offense, but they moved the chains and kept the defense fresh, while playing solid special teams and maximizing field position.

That is what we need.

Rewatch the game and notice how many times the top of all the receivers' routes are 12 yards or more from scrimmage. Wilson doesn't have that kind of time. Why are we not flooding the short areas of zones? Why are we not moving the pocket more? Why are we constantly trying to push the ball 15 yards or more downfield when Wilson can't set his feet and make reads?

Our line has difficulty moving the line of scrimmage in the run game, and more often than not one of them loses his battle in pass-pro. Let's dial back the aggressiveness in the pass game, worry less about setting up chunk plays with play-action and start concentrating on moving the chains with high percentage, shorter throws. This line isn't built develop plays downfield.

To me the blame is a three-headed monster. No matter how many high draft picks or free agents we bring in, Cable can't assemble an NFL caliber unit. It's obvious that our line has shortcomings, yet Bevell continues to dial the aggressiveness up to 11. Carroll needs to demand that our offensive brain-trust adjusts its strategy and stop putting Wilson in no-win situations.

 

[scutterhawk]

When Russ doesn't have "magic" to fix our broken offensive game plan, it shows that yes, we have a horrible offensive gameplan.

We know we have a cheap line, but in order to keep the core of our offense and defense together, we had to pay them. Sure, they could be coached better, but they are still cheap or freshly drafted guys. The money isn't there to go buy a line.

What that means is we need to strategize and come into games with a game plan suited to a line that for the most part can't provide protection for long developing plays. Tons of teams do this. The Patriots constantly hit hot routes all the way up the field 5 yards at a time.

Bevell doesn't do this. He develops gameplans to try to maximize explosive plays. He doesn't take into account that we don't have OL personnel to carry that out. That is why we are constantly going 3 and out.

Take 2 receivers, spread them out wide and run their routes fast and deep to make sure and draw the corners and free safety. Run 2 TE for the hot routes both in and out routes, bit short and horizontal. RB in the backfield for either the run play or to provide addl protection. The RB can also release late when he sees a hole.

Watch the teams that are good at moving the chains and this is what they do. It forces LB'S to have to pay attention to the short pass, which then takes the pressure off the line and running plays.

It is maddening that an OC Maki g big money with tons of talent to work with can't seem to grasp this.

It is EXACTLY what we did the last half of 2015 to finally start getting W's, but has been abandoned since.

You're exactly right ^...This is a "Copy Cat" League, but "I'm gon do it my way, even if it kills Russ" Bevell is a different kind of Cat and he ain't 'bout to copy anyone.

 

[scutterhawk]

This game 100% proved the officials will attempt to steer a game to a predetermined outcome for reasons unknown. There is no way that level of incompetence that we observed was by accident, and if it was, you don't deserve a job in such a prestigious position.

At least become better at disguising the bias so it doesn't ruin the game

This ^......When a Packers fan comes here and says "You Can't Blame It All On The Officials"?.......You KNOW you've struck a nerve.

 

[rjdriver]

Can we still claim that there isn't much investment in the offensive line? The starting line has two first-round draft picks (one via FA getting paid well for one year), a second-round draft pick, a third-round pick, and a fourth-round pick.

Glowinski is now in his third year, and he's back at his natural position. And he was absolutely atrocious. I really thought the interior line would be improved. It was so awful.

The struggle of the tackles isn't surprising, well, maybe in the run game it is. But there were a dozen snaps where it looked like college guys (GB) playing high school guys.

Good Post.

It sure seems like that a lot of teams do more with less (draft pick wise) on their O-Lines.

It's interesting that no team has drafted more offensive lineman in the past seven years than the Seahawks. http://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahaw ... since-2010

We have not ignored the O line at all. Quite the contrary, we have just been unsuccessful in drafting and developing effective players.


Here is a summary of our O line picks since 2010.

ROUND YEAR PLAYER STARTS FOR SEAHAWKS
1 2010 Russell Okung 72
1 2011 James Carptenter 39
1 2016 Germain Ifedi 13
2 2014 Justin Britt 47
2 2017 Ethan Pocic N/A
3 2011 John Moffitt 15
3 2016 Rees Odhiambo 0
4 2015 Terry Poole 0
4 2015 Mark Glowinski 17
6 2014 Garrett Scott 0
6 2015 Kristjan Sokoli 0
6 2016 Joey Hunt 1
6 2017 Justin Senior N/A
7 2012 J.R. Sweezy 49
7 2013 Ryan Seymour 0
7 2013 Michael Bowie 8

 

[Hawks46]

The short version is that our defense allowed 17 points to Rodgers at home. He was shut out in the first half at home for only the 2nd time in his career.

One of those TD's was due to us fumbling on the 6 yard line. The other one was some trickery and getting caught with their pants down, which might also be on the coaching staff there as well. All that after playing 2/3 of the game.

Seriously, this defense is going to be epic. Maybe historic if Griffin rounds up to form quickly. I was pleasantly impressed by him. First game as a rookie, IN Lambeau across from Sherman...who Rodgers usually avoids. He "balled out" as Earl Thomas said, and should only get better.

Historically (excepting last year) our offensive line typically starts slow and starts to get better around weeks 4-6. I'm hoping for that this year with more veteran presence on the line. Wilson has more weapons than I can remember him having. Carson should only get better and we're getting Rawls back.

I penciled this in as a loss. It's still frustrating (more so because of the officiating), but I see a lot of positive signs.

 

[rjdriver]

I penciled this in as a loss. It's still frustrating (more so because of the officiating), but I see a lot of positive signs.

I did too. The problem is there were no positive signs on the offensive side of the ball (with the potential exception of Carson moving up on the depth chart).


If you would have offered me giving up 17 at Lambeau against Erin Rodgers, I would have taken it all day long and I agree this D is amazing.