HawkShack.com

by **RiverDog** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:39 am

It's been pretty slow around here, so perhaps this article will light a fire under some of you.

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2019/7/12/20 ... 2UXrriJrCA

by **Rambo2014** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:02 am

I pretty much agree with the assessment!

Sndby for a trail of tears

by **burrrton** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:08 am

FG takes Barnwell apart pretty effectively. Good link- thanks!

by **c_hawkbob** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 10:51 am

They said pretty much the same thing last year about how our defense was supposed to fall apart after the lost of the last remnants of the LOB.

I'm moderately surprised that low with a top 5 QB in a QB league, but the pundits are always predicting us to fall off the cliff at the least provocation.

by **NorthHawk** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:16 pm

I'm more concerned with the Defense and potential lack of pressure from the DL than the Offense.

by **obiken** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:32 pm

Rambo2014 wrote:I pretty much agree with the assessment!

Sndby for a trail of tears

You need to worry about Girly little buddy

by **obiken** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:37 pm

c_hawkbob wrote:They said pretty much the same thing last year about how our defense was supposed to fall apart after the lost of the last remnants of the LOB.

I'm moderately surprised that low with a top 5 QB in a QB league, but the pundits are always predicting us to fall off the cliff at the least provocation.

Losing Doug Baldwin was huge CB, he bailed us out time after time on 3rd down. I have found a comfort of realization as a Hawks fan, either RW will find a way each game to bail us out, or he won't. Look at all the crap he had 2 years ago, and found a way to 9-7.

by **obiken** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:42 pm

NorthHawk wrote:I'm more concerned with the Defense and potential lack of pressure from the DL than the Offense.

Not me, PC can always get a bunch of young defenders to run around and tackle for him. On Offense we are Running back by committee, and 0 major pass catchers. As I said to Bob we will rise and fall on RW.

by **jshawaii22** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:28 pm

On Offense we are Running back by committee, and 0 major pass catchers.

Did we trade Lockett when I wasn't looking? Russell & Lockett # 1 duo in NFL in passes over 20 yards last year with a 158 passer rating.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/12/31/russell-wilson-tyler-lockett-passer-rating-numbers-seahawks

by **RiverDog** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:05 pm

obiken wrote:Losing Doug Baldwin was huge CB, he bailed us out time after time on 3rd down. I have found a comfort of realization as a Hawks fan, either RW will find a way each game to bail us out, or he won't. Look at all the crap he had 2 years ago, and found a way to 9-7.

I think our receiving corps will be fine. I'm really excited to see what Metcalf can do for our offense. I'm more worried about replacing Clark on defense than I am Baldwin on offense.

by **obiken** » Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:53 pm

We have difference of opinion, it's always been harder for Pete to replace stars on the offense than the defense.

by **RiverDog** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:33 am

obiken wrote:We have difference of opinion, it's always been harder for Pete to replace stars on the offense than the defense.

Good point.

I do think that there's enough experience on the offense, ie Wilson, Britt, Carson, Lockett, in each area of the offense that they can absorb one or two rookies/newbies. The offense isn't going to be depending on a rookie to carry them. But on defense, someone is going to have to step up. Most of our question marks on defense are along the front 4.

by **NorthHawk** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:12 am

He's been great finding secondary help, but without pressure from the DL, they have problems defending.
All teams are the same regardless of how good their DB's are. We might have to blitz more which brings
on some other opportunities for the opposing Offense. I hope it works out, though.

by **obiken** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:11 pm

I know its a little far a field, but was I expecting too much hoping for loyalty out of Clark? I mean PC took a chance on him, and I remember HS, going as ballistic as I have ever seen her, when we selected the guy. We get no love in return. Maybe I am overly naive for my age!

by **burrrton** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:34 pm

obiken wrote:I know its a little far a field, but was I expecting too much hoping for loyalty out of Clark? I mean PC took a chance on him, and I remember HS, going as ballistic as I have ever seen her, when we selected the guy. We get no love in return. Maybe I am overly naive for my age!

The NFL is a short-lived luxury where the most skilled at a child's game can earn enough to retire on in a few years- a player would be crazy to let 'loyalty' affect that. The team would cut him in a second if he was no longer worth what they were paying him.

You don't have to root for his success (I'm not anymore

), but don't fault a guy for chasing the $$- he promised us nothing, we promised him nothing.

by **trents** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:47 pm

On offense I expect to see a strong ground game again and maybe better than last year if Penny starts to come into his own. We still have a good O line. The ground game should draw defenses into the box and might open up opportunities for the receivers. Biggest question mark on offense is the slot receiver and also tight end.

On defense, how quickly and how completely Anseh can recover from his shoulder problems and get back into playing shape will have a lot of impact on D line pressure.

by **obiken** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:30 pm

You don't have to root for his success (I'm not anymore ), but don't fault a guy for chasing the $$- he promised us nothing, we promised him nothing

Good point Burry, no doubt.

by **RiverDog** » Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:35 pm

obiken wrote:I know its a little far a field, but was I expecting too much hoping for loyalty out of Clark? I mean PC took a chance on him, and I remember HS, going as ballistic as I have ever seen her, when we selected the guy. We get no love in return. Maybe I am overly naive for my age!

I don't have a problem with a player like Clark going to another team for more money. What I do have a problem with is someone like Sherman going to another team then ripping on his former coach.

by **idhawkman** » Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:04 am

I'm hoping that RW actually does better without his favorite receiver in the lineup anymore. Open it up and look for more folks open.

by **RiverDog** » Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:12 am

idhawkman wrote:I'm hoping that RW actually does better without his favorite receiver in the lineup anymore. Open it up and look for more folks open.

Our leading receiver last season was Lockett as he seemed to take over as Russell's go-to receiver. But I get what you're saying.

by **Aseahawkfan** » Mon Jul 15, 2019 2:34 pm

Not me. I like having a badass receiver or two. Every single great QB has a great receiver or two. Brady had Gronk, Edelmen, Welker, and a rotation of go to receivers over his career. Manning had go to receivers like Dallas Clark, Reggine Wayne, and Marvin Harrison. Joe Montana had Jerry Rice and Dwight Clark with Roger Craig at RB. I like having good receivers. This mythical idea of the QB that spread it arounds is exactly that...a myth. Even the great QBs need reliable, go to receivers to make the offense shine.

I'd really like to see what Russell could do with a strong group of receivers and a great TE that he had time to build timing with. One of the things that makes these combos so great is the chemistry they build whether the QB knowing where the receiver will be and the receiver knowing the best place to run to get the ball.

by **obiken** » Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:41 pm

Me too ASHF, I just think there where routes and catches that DB could make over anyone else. It will be tough divining up his production. Good news is, I don't see the Rams rolling us both games this year, AZ is bad, but any upside is taken away by our schedule. I predict 10-6, Playoffs but not a deep run again.

by **I-5** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:25 pm

Rambo2014 wrote:I pretty much agree with the assessment!

Sndby for a trail of tears

Uh, I think the Rams are the ones who are set up for disappointment in 2019. If they had made the SB more competitive it would have given some momentum....that was a disaster that I predict will cause a hangover to linger, just like the Hawks had. I don't see Gurley making it through the year healthy, or their WR corps.

by **RiverDog** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:09 pm

I-5 wrote:Uh, I think the Rams are the ones who are set up for disappointment in 2019. If they had made the SB more competitive it would have given some momentum....that was a disaster that I predict will cause a hangover to linger, just like the Hawks had. I don't see Gurley making it through the year healthy, or their WR corps.

I think so, too. They pushed all their chips to the center of the table last year. They lost 3 starters on defense to FA, 2 on offense if you count CJ Anderson. They replaced their defensive stars with over the hill veterans. Gurley literally disappeared at the end of the season.

by **idhawkman** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:10 am

idhawkman wrote:I'm hoping that RW actually does better without his favorite receiver in the lineup anymore. Open it up and look for more folks open.

RiverDog wrote:
Our leading receiver last season was Lockett as he seemed to take over as Russell's go-to receiver. But I get what you're saying.

I think that was because Baldwin missed so much time, otherwise, I don't think Lockett would have been that guy.

by **idhawkman** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:13 am

Aseahawkfan wrote:Not me. I like having a badass receiver or two. Every single great QB has a great receiver or two. Brady had Gronk, Edelmen, Welker, and a rotation of go to receivers over his career. Manning had go to receivers like Dallas Clark, Reggine Wayne, and Marvin Harrison. Joe Montana had Jerry Rice and Dwight Clark with Roger Craig at RB. I like having good receivers. This mythical idea of the QB that spread it arounds is exactly that...a myth. Even the great QBs need reliable, go to receivers to make the offense shine.

I'd really like to see what Russell could do with a strong group of receivers and a great TE that he had time to build timing with. One of the things that makes these combos so great is the chemistry they build whether the QB knowing where the receiver will be and the receiver knowing the best place to run to get the ball.

I wholeheartedly agree with your comment but look at how many receivers you listed with each of those other QBs. 3 each. RW focused on just one much to the exclusion of others. This is also partly because of the lack of time he had to look for others on most drop backs for the last 3-4 years but nonetheless, history is littered with good QBs that have had one or two good receivers and not that third wheel.

by **RiverDog** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 6:04 am

idhawkman wrote:I'm hoping that RW actually does better without his favorite receiver in the lineup anymore. Open it up and look for more folks open.

RiverDog wrote:
Our leading receiver last season was Lockett as he seemed to take over as Russell's go-to receiver. But I get what you're saying.

idhawkman wrote:I think that was because Baldwin missed so much time, otherwise, I don't think Lockett would have been that guy.

Baldwin only missed 3 games last season, yet Lockett had 1/3 more receiving yardage and 2x the number of TD's. Number of receptions are comparable, but Lockett had a lot higher yards per reception. I think it's safe to say that he was Russell's go-to guy even when Baldwin was on the field.

by **Aseahawkfan** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:43 pm

idhawkman wrote:I wholeheartedly agree with your comment but look at how many receivers you listed with each of those other QBs. 3 each. RW focused on just one much to the exclusion of others. This is also partly because of the lack of time he had to look for others on most drop backs for the last 3-4 years but nonetheless, history is littered with good QBs that have had one or two good receivers and not that third wheel.

Russell Wilson almost won a second Super Bowl with a bunch of 5th and no name receivers with Doug Baldwin. Are any of them even playing any more? Who was the 6'5" guy that caught two TDs with Russell throwing to him that isn't even in the league any longer as well as Ricardo Lockette.

RW did not focus on one receiver. You just make crap up in your head that isn't close to what happened.

Not even sure why you continue to find faults with Russell. The guy's a Hall of Fame QB continuing to build on that career. Get him good players and a defense, he'll take us back to the SB.

by **idhawkman** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:35 pm

RiverDog wrote:Baldwin only missed 3 games last season, yet Lockett had 1/3 more receiving yardage and 2x the number of TD's. Number of receptions are comparable, but Lockett had a lot higher yards per reception. I think it's safe to say that he was Russell's go-to guy even when Baldwin was on the field.

There were a couple games where he was only played a couple of plays, too. He missed quite a bit of time last year. More than just 3 games, time wise.

by **idhawkman** » Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:37 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:Russell Wilson almost won a second Super Bowl with a bunch of 5th and no name receivers with Doug Baldwin. Are any of them even playing any more? Who was the 6'5" guy that caught two TDs with Russell throwing to him that isn't even in the league any longer as well as Ricardo Lockette.

RW did not focus on one receiver. You just make crap up in your head that isn't close to what happened.

Not even sure why you continue to find faults with Russell. The guy's a Hall of Fame QB continuing to build on that career. Get him good players and a defense, he'll take us back to the SB.

That's crap and you know it. Do you really think RW could do that without Beast running the rock and sucking up the defense?

by **c_hawkbob** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 5:08 am

Aseahawkfan wrote:Russell Wilson almost won a second Super Bowl with a bunch of 5th and no name receivers with Doug Baldwin. Are any of them even playing any more? Who was the 6'5" guy that caught two TDs with Russell throwing to him that isn't even in the league any longer as well as Ricardo Lockette.

RW did not focus on one receiver. You just make crap up in your head that isn't close to what happened.

Not even sure why you continue to find faults with Russell. The guy's a Hall of Fame QB continuing to build on that career. Get him good players and a defense, he'll take us back to the SB.

idhawkman wrote:That's crap and you know it. Do you really think RW could do that without Beast running the rock and sucking up the defense?

Exactly which sentence are you saying is crap? I think each is plainly obvious.

by **burrrton** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:02 am

I'm on vacation, but isn't RW historically prolific at distributing the ball??

by **RiverDog** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:00 am

burrrton wrote:I'm on vacation, but isn't RW historically prolific at distributing the ball??

I'm not sure what you mean by "historically prolific", but with rare exceptions (Jimmy Graham), I don't think he's ever been guilty of focusing one receiver at the expense of others that might have been more open.

Having said that, he has had the tendency to hold onto the ball waiting for a wide open receiver or a big play vs. a short gain.

by **burrrton** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:12 pm

"Historically" was a poor choice of words, but I thought I'd read multiple times spreading the ball around is something RW *excels* at.

Maybe I'm wrong, though.

by **RiverDog** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:25 pm

burrrton wrote:"Historically" was a poor choice of words, but I thought I'd read multiple times spreading the ball around is something RW *excels* at.

Maybe I'm wrong, though.

Russell's never had a true #1, Pro Bowl-type receiver so there hasn't been the motivation/pressure that other quarterbacks might have felt to get a particular receiver the ball.

by **Aseahawkfan** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:41 pm

idhawkman wrote:That's crap and you know it. Do you really think RW could do that without Beast running the rock and sucking up the defense?

No. I don't know it. Beast wasn't doing near as much until Russell came. You don't think Russell as a running and passing threat backed the defense up so Beast could run? Beast's career didn't take off until a dual threat QB like Russell came taking the defensive focus off of him. And then there is the historically great defense, which allowed us to win tight games when nothing was working on offense. Just like nearly every great team has had in history.

All the components work together, each improved by the other. Russell lead us to a near Super Bowl win with no name receivers. Not sure why you refuse to acknowledge how good he is, but you're stuck in your thinking. So whatever. He'll keep on doing what he does and go into the Hall of Fame while you keep whining. If you don't want to enjoy the best QB in team history and an absolutely stud QB, then have at it. I'm going to enjoy the greatness while it is here. We likely won't see a QB as good as Russell in Seattle for a long, long time after he retires or leaves.

by **Aseahawkfan** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:42 pm

burrrton wrote:"Historically" was a poor choice of words, but I thought I'd read multiple times spreading the ball around is something RW *excels* at.

Maybe I'm wrong, though.

The only people I know that think Russell Wilson isn't a great QB is Pete Prisco and Idhawkman. Cut from the same cloth I guess.

by **burrrton** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:46 pm

Agreed- I'm just saying I think it's like so many of the other RW tropes that won't go away ("He can't see over the linemen!", "He's no good from the pocket!", etc).

He's actually as good as anyone in the league at most things, and better than most in everything else.

by **c_hawkbob** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 4:03 pm

burrrton wrote:"Historically" was a poor choice of words, but I thought I'd read multiple times spreading the ball around is something RW *excels* at.

Maybe I'm wrong, though.

Historically was a fine choice of words, it can mean "has a history of" as well as "as good as any in history". And once his career is in the rear view it'll be a given that he was as good as any of his era at least at spreading the ball around. So I think your OK in either context.

by **idhawkman** » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:09 pm

RW usually zones in on one receiver (primary for that play) and waits for that one to come open unless the play breaks down and they go into extended play drills. At that point he is really good at picking up the open receiver. Over the years I've documented with videos on the Blue multiple times this tendency of his. I can't post videos in this forum though.

Now to be fair, most of the years was under an offensive scheme that had all long routes (15 yards or more) before the receivers ever got to their breaks and by that time the oline was so bad that RW was scrambling for his life. Used to frustrate me so much that the Defense was getting to RW before his receivers ever got to their breaks. During that time though, RW was focused on the primary receiver only which may not have been totally his fault since he didn't know if they'd be open or not coming out of their break.

HawkShack.com

Who is online