Cyrus12
Well-known member
Glad to see Wilson speaking out. Hopefully the coaches listen.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... o-moments/
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... o-moments/
hawksfansinceday1":cve99ivh said:Nunya, calling Nunya......please pick up the "Mike Florio" courtesy phone
It may not be fixed to top 10 level but even a middle of the road D could get us a SB win IF our RBs and o-line can stay reasonably healthy and yes, if they can score a bit more in first halves.Nunya":3pydiluo said:........Chris Simms was also right. The defense is a major issue and will not likely be fixed by next season. Scoring on every drive does little good if the defense can not make a stop. Extending the time our defense is on the field takes away 1-2 (or more) drives by the offense..........
hawksfansinceday1":3kzmaidw said:It may not be fixed to top 10 level but even a middle of the road D could get us a SB win IF our RBs and o-line can stay reasonably healthy and yes, if they can score a bit more in first halves.Nunya":3kzmaidw said:........Chris Simms was also right. The defense is a major issue and will not likely be fixed by next season. Scoring on every drive does little good if the defense can not make a stop. Extending the time our defense is on the field takes away 1-2 (or more) drives by the offense..........
Yeah someone posted the differences in the offense with and without Dissley and the numbers were significant. And if Will had stayed healthy, the O would've only continued to trend upward as Metcalf developed over the course of the season.Nunya":18cgebcb said:hawksfansinceday1":18cgebcb said:It may not be fixed to top 10 level but even a middle of the road D could get us a SB win IF our RBs and o-line can stay reasonably healthy and yes, if they can score a bit more in first halves.Nunya":18cgebcb said:........Chris Simms was also right. The defense is a major issue and will not likely be fixed by next season. Scoring on every drive does little good if the defense can not make a stop. Extending the time our defense is on the field takes away 1-2 (or more) drives by the offense..........
Totally agree. Seattle's defense was 18 on 3rd down at 39.52%/ That has to improve. They don't need to be a top 5 defense, but they do need to be fairly reliable. They can get away with a weak pass rush against average QBs, but the great QBs will tear a zone up if given time.
And I also agree that they need to start better in the 1st half. Maybe some up tempo will help, but they need an Oline with endurance to do that successfully. I don't think we have that yet. Metcalf will likely improve and I suspect he will only improve season after season. Our achilles on offense is the lack of a healthy TE. Our short passing game was fairly lackluster and I think that needs to improve.
hawksfansinceday1":2m8di4yv said:Yeah someone posted the differences in the offense with and without Dissley and the numbers were significant. And if Will had stayed healthy, the O would've only continued to trend upward as Metcalf developed over the course of the season.Nunya":2m8di4yv said:hawksfansinceday1":2m8di4yv said:It may not be fixed to top 10 level but even a middle of the road D could get us a SB win IF our RBs and o-line can stay reasonably healthy and yes, if they can score a bit more in first halves.Nunya":2m8di4yv said:........Chris Simms was also right. The defense is a major issue and will not likely be fixed by next season. Scoring on every drive does little good if the defense can not make a stop. Extending the time our defense is on the field takes away 1-2 (or more) drives by the offense..........
Totally agree. Seattle's defense was 18 on 3rd down at 39.52%/ That has to improve. They don't need to be a top 5 defense, but they do need to be fairly reliable. They can get away with a weak pass rush against average QBs, but the great QBs will tear a zone up if given time.
And I also agree that they need to start better in the 1st half. Maybe some up tempo will help, but they need an Oline with endurance to do that successfully. I don't think we have that yet. Metcalf will likely improve and I suspect he will only improve season after season. Our achilles on offense is the lack of a healthy TE. Our short passing game was fairly lackluster and I think that needs to improve.
I don't know about uptempo because of what you mentioned. I mean the best way to avoid giving up points is having your D on the sidelines. But at least we could be more aggressive early on.
Nunya":mye2yjv0 said:Unless they are eating up 5-6 ypc on the run, they do need to rely on Wilson's talent more. Until we get another "beast mode" type of RB, they need to find alternatives to running.
BASF":1k99r1nv said:Nunya":1k99r1nv said:Unless they are eating up 5-6 ypc on the run, they do need to rely on Wilson's talent more. Until we get another "beast mode" type of RB, they need to find alternatives to running.
What exactly does this mean? I'd say that Carson's running style is pretty close to Beast Mode. As far as getting 5-6 ypc, Lynch only did 5 ypc once in his career, and for the most part it is because teams had no idea how to handle the read option with Wilson and Lynch in Wilson's first season. Other than that season, Lynch did not have back to back seasons with a better ypc than Carson.
As previously mentioned, keeping your defense off the field is a good thing, especially when your line is very poor at pass blocking. I have been reviewing the All 22, and I have been shocked at how badly our line performs in the quick passing game. It is to the point where I think that there is a tell when we are going slant. In each case, the guard was pushed directly into the passing lane when they needed to get push and turn their defensive tackle towards the center. In each case, it seemed that the player was not trying to rush the passer, he was legitimately trying to occupy that space. What happened later determines a bit of success off of the defenses tactic, is that when it happened in the second half, the slant was a decoy and the secondary route was changed and Lockett was running a crosser that gained significant yards (I don't have my notes in front of me).
This is just one example of how testing the defense in the early stages of the game to see how they will respond to what you are doing makes it far easier to move the ball in the second half. There will be more.
This is incorrect. We always snap the ball late, unless we are behind and/or are playing with urgency. We were always late under Bevell too. We weren't under Bates. What's the common connection here....John63":1u26www8 said:Its not just uptempo it is changing the tempo. In the first half we almost always snap the ball very late, this gives the defense an advantage, our play calling is very predictable. However most of the time in the 2nd half we snap the ball at different times, some early, some late, some as soon as we get to the line. We also are much less predictable in play call.
Again no one is saying throw more we are talking quality which goes with the changing of tempo, play calling and the aggressiveness that goes with it
jammerhawk":2o5rb9yv said:BASF, I agree with your post but also agree the O needs to change up more frequently to uptempo, to me it's not an either or situation but a situation that becomes more unpredictable. RW needs better receivers who win with speed or are physically dominant enough to beat the press.
Seriously, watch a clip of games. Plays getting in late is not a problem at all.Attyla the Hawk":kkcstr4w said:jammerhawk":kkcstr4w said:BASF, I agree with your post but also agree the O needs to change up more frequently to uptempo, to me it's not an either or situation but a situation that becomes more unpredictable. RW needs better receivers who win with speed or are physically dominant enough to beat the press.
I agree.
I don't even think it has to be up tempo per se. The coaches have to get the plays in much faster. It's a sluggish process, that constantly takes 20+ seconds to get through. Leaving almost no time to employ motion or to even survey a defense. This is a coaching thing. Not a player thing. They simply have to improve here.
It's not as if they have to run the plays faster. But they can't be constantly breaking the huddle with 7-10 seconds left on the clock. It's much easier for the defense to time their rush when we only have 2-3 seconds before the clock runs out.
Seattle just doesn't stress the defense at all when they are in 'feel them out' mode. The tempo at the end of halves/end of games contributes to play success. Just as adding motion/misdirection. It gives opponents more opportunities to make a mistake. Or to tip a blitz/coverage. We do better when we're not in our lethargic can't win in the first quarter mode because we make it harder on the defense.
And yes, our receivers could use a serious infusion of talent. We saw what Josh Gordon provided, even in very limited form last year. We get that level of production on a more consistent basis from day one -- this offense stays on the field and churns TOP and scoring opportunities. Gordon provided game altering catches and that was with just a dramatically small handful of targets. Imagine what 3-5 similar catches per game from our #3 receiver could do (along with hopefully a complete season of quality TE production).
This is an epic class of WR. Any team that wants a top 10 WR group can have one from this class. Russell is the best player on this team by far and we're not leveraging that talent in full. Given the amount of attention that Lockett and Metcalf receives -- our #3 receiver is going to be our least covered/accounted for target. Improving that particular option has the potential to provide massive return for us.
It'd almost be a crime not to come away with 2 WRs from this class. There are going to be close to half a dozen prospects on the board late R4 that all would have graded higher than Jaelen Strong did (R3/2015).
jammerhawk":34mx2qs5 said:While there are certainly times you need to see more uptempo, you also need to have the O stay on the field so the D has tome to have a blow. This last season the D was truly not that good and having the O play slow early didn’t hurt.
While it wasn’t pretty to watch an 11-5 record speaks to the success of the mentality adopted. However, of course we wanted to see more but the reality of the nature and simple number of critical injuries doomed the team to late season failure. The close late loss to SF pointed out there just weren’t enough healthy horses left. I’m not. Disagreeing with the desire to see more uptempo O but truly we need to see a better D that can actually put some pressure on opposing QBs, the two are not mutually exclusive and we’d see more uptempo with a stronger D.
Another thing we need is to see more raw s-p-e-e-d from the O, which would also assist the uptempo O.