Our defense performed pretty well, holding Green Bay to respectable points and yardage.
We can't blame this one on Kam Chancellor.
Unfortunately, decent defense isn't good enough when your own offense fails to produce and commits two costly turnovers.
Rookie defensive end Frank Clark wasn't on the inactive list, but I didn't notice him making any impact on the field. We need more from our top draft pick.
Sadly, neither NBC analyst acknowledged the wood Shead laid, perhaps because it violated the hackneyed "Hawks can't hang without Kam" storyline they were trying to sell.
That was a rare miss, though. During the game, color analyst Cris Collinsworth accurately diagnosed most of the shortcomings that doomed Seattle.
Pete Carroll and defensive coordinator Kris Richard managed to eliminate most of the disorder and blown assignments we had seen in St. Louis, but they evidently managed this only by limiting Seattle to its base defense throughout the contest.
Our base defense is good enough to stop a lot of teams, but you need something more to shut down the Pack, with its elite O-Line, capable runners and talented receivers, led by an elite athlete who happens to be the cleverest quarterback in the NFL.
Green Bay's biggest gains came on free plays after Michael Bennett bit on hard counts and jumped offsides, allowing Rodgers to throw without fear against Richard Sherman.
Despite those lapses, our four down linemen put appropriate pressure on Rodgers for much of the game. But, would it have inordinately confused our defenders to send an extra blitzer now and then, or mix up the coverages, or do something to force Rodgers at least to contemplate the possibility of the unexpected?
Beast Mama must still be mad at offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell. I sure am.
Why does Bevell struggle as a playcaller, especially in the first half? Do we need to get Mike Holmgren out of mothballs to script the first 15+ plays of each game? (Remember how we used to start fast on offense?)
Why can't we get the ball to Jimmy Graham? He's on the field for 50 snaps (83% of all offensive plays), and he gets targeted twice for one catch?
Is this going to be a repeat of the Percy Harvin debacle, where a dynamic athlete should add a deadly new dimension to our offense, but it doesn't because our coaches can't figure out how to use the new toy?
As Collinsworth noted during the game, our offense really only works when Russell Wilson threatens the defense as a runner. In the first half, DangeRuss missed several obvious opportunities to gouge Green Bay.
I'm just a dumb never-was lineman, and the read-option is really complicated, but I'm pretty sure that when there's nothing but FieldTurf on the outside, the quarterback is supposed to keep the ball run. Those opportunities were still there in the second half, but they were more limited because the Packers made logical halftime adjustments.
Bright spots: Doug Baldwin, Luke Willson, the up-tempo offense.
The Diehard Diagnosis
We have an embarrassment of riches on offense at this point.
It should be fun to call plays in this offense. It would be if we adapted the scheme to our players instead of trying to adapt our players to a fixed scheme.
Cut Golden Graham's snaps and watch fresher legs increase his productivity. Don't ask the Ginger Giant to block. Or Luke Willson. Don't have them line up like traditional tight ends; split them out, every down. If you want to run when one of them is on the field, then send them out on routes; defenders will be forced to follow and take themselves out of the play.
1. Baldwin, Mathews, Lockette, Graham
2. Kearse, Lockett, Willson, Helfet
Throw to set up the run. Attack.
I like Doug Baldwin's new touchdown celebration better than the "drop a deuce" demonstration he perpetrated in Super Bowl XLIX. |
No comments:
Post a Comment