Gameplanning Week 8: Oakland and 59 points
by EequalsMc2 on Oct 26, 2010 8:35 PM PDT
Email
Print
Like many of you, I am shocked and happy over the last weekend. Happy because the Hawks won, and shocked also because the Hawks won. If anything showed during Sunday's win against Arizona is the the Seahawks can win the division, but barely. We have only played one full game effectively on the 3 sides of the ball against Chicago while we were bailed out from our 3 wins with special teams, defense, home-field advantage our just plain sucking from their offense (I'm looking at you Alex Smith).
Which brings us to next weeks opponent, the Oakland Raiders.
Now, if you were in NFL land last weekend as I was, you would be shocked to see Oakland scoring 59 whooping points against a pretty good Denver team that routed us in week 2. 59 points, and mind you, not like a breakout from a catastrophic injury or some miracle: total domination from the Raiders within the first few minutes of the game. Jason Campbell, once benched in week 2 and had a 10.7 rating against the 49ers, threw for 204 yards and 2 touchdowns. The Raiders defense, who had a 6 total takeovers over the course of 6 games, doubled their total in just a day. Oakland led at halftime 38-7. Scary statistics isn't it.
Observant bloggers would instantly list off the numerous mistakes Denver made in the game,but something still doesn't seem right. Oakland Raiders and 59 points? These two words are as similar as Mike Singletary and a good head coach. They just don't add up.
So how did this once pathetic team manage to score so much on a pretty good team like Denver? I tell you how, and for the Seahawks to win this Sunday and continue their dominance over the NFC (West), they will need to stop...
...This guy, Darren McFadden.
via m2.nflrush.com
Now McFadden has been rapidly shedding his bust label, and for good reason. He's 8th overall in the league with 557 rushing yards. He's third for most receiving yards on his team. Whatever McFadden was looked at 2 years ago in the draft is finally breaking out, and the Raiders can't be happy enough to have him.
Let's look at his overall performance as of now:
Week 1 : 18 carries, 95 yards, 6 catches, 55 yards, 1 TD
Week 2: 30 carries, 145 yards, 2 catches, 8 yards
Week 3: 25 carries, 105 yards, 1 TD
Week 4: 12 carries, 47 yards (Injured midway)
Last Week: 16 carries, 165 yards, 3 TD
Again, scary statistics. But like a complex math problem, one must go deeper into this info.
Reading the official stats book found on NFL, I calculated the times the McFadden ran up inside (Lynch) or outside (Forsett). Because there is a limitless number of offensive plays through 7 games, I picked Sunday's and Week 1's to create a mix.
The results were staggering
On week 1, McFadden rushed 18 carries for 95 yards. 12 of those carries were rushed inside for 69 yards. The 6 carries outside resulted in 26 yards.
On week 7, McFadden rushed 16 carries for 165 yards. 6 of those carries were rushed inside for 24 yards. The other 10 resulted in 141 yards.
At least Tom Cable is a bit smarter than his predecessors.
Seattle is currently ranked 2nd in rushing defense, allowing only a average of 77.5 yards a game. Against Arizona though, it looked liked our run defense regressed a little bit. I did the same analysis for McFadden as with Arizona, and last week, the Cardinals had 20 carries for a total of 113 yards. Surprisingly, the 8 outside runs that they made only resulted in 37 yards, while we suffered from 12 inside runs for 76 yards. So seemingly, we seem to be defending their greatest strength well.
With Red Bryant and Chris Clemons at the corners, I'm not really worried that McFadden has the power or speed to get to the outside. More importantly, the Seahawks are the first team in the top 10 in rushing defense to face the Raiders this season, outside of San Diego which they won on special teams.
The Raiders offense is centered on McFadden, and Jason Campbell has not prove that he can win a game (See San Francisco, week 6) without his star running back. If we can stop McFadden, (such as stacking 8 men in the box), then we can stop their overall offense and have a greater chance of winning the game.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
NFL Game Game Statistics and Information System
has our rush D as: 7th off left end, 3rd off left tackle, 19th off left guard, 4th up the middle, 30th off right guard, 6th off right tackle, 27th off right end.
It has the Oakland Raiders general rushing O (which is mostly DMC so far) as 8th off left end, 7th off left tackle, 28th off left guard, 8th up the middle, 13th off right guard, 2nd off right tackle and 6th off right end.
Other than plays running off right end (only 8 attempts logged there so like most runs off either end it is likely a statistical anomaly), I’d say this agrees with your take. Good job.
That site requires a login, from my point of view
How’d you get in?
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
http://seahawksblog.wordpress.com
I write a Seahawks blog, could that qualify me?
Serious question.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
http://seahawksblog.wordpress.com
It's one of those generic public PR passwords
Mail John Morgan and he can hand it to ya.
by Thomas Beekers on Oct 27, 2010 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Are you a journalist?
And we rocked, and they said that we rocked, and they rejoiced, and there was much rejoicing. Seahawks astride the division at 4-2 and gunning for the lead in the conference. Look out Rodney Harrison.
FO has the numbers as well
If you can’t sign in.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
by Topher Doll on Oct 27, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Mebane being out has hurt us in the middle. A lot.
If he’s out for the Oakland game, Seattle could be in for a long, long game.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
http://seahawksblog.wordpress.com
Or a short one.
In which one Raiders drive consumes 12 minutes on 18 plays.
And we rocked, and they said that we rocked, and they rejoiced, and there was much rejoicing. Seahawks astride the division at 4-2 and gunning for the lead in the conference. Look out Rodney Harrison.
Other than praying...
What’s the back-up plan if Mebane can’t go this week? Is Balmer capable of stepping up and filling the void to at least some degree? He was a first round pick after all, granted he wasn’t one of our first round picks, but don’t good teams somehow find a way to win even with their plug-ins starting? What can Gus Bradley do to make our front four more fierce if Mebane’s not playing? Or is it perhaps a blessing in disguise that we saw this past game that without Mebane there’s a clear problem stopping the run and that the ‘hawks will (presumably) be working on it in practice this week to attempt to find a solution? I’d also hope that the Seahawks are avidly working on defending screen passes in practice this week.
In terms of offense, I take it that the gameplan is to run the ball? Is there some way to ensure that Locklear doesn’t goof it up again for us this week? It’s going to be tougher to run without Okung in. (I’d prefer to hold him out this week in order to err on the side of caution if it will mean he’s back closer to 100% next week for the Giants)
Adjustments would be made, I'd imagine
Campbell will probably see a lot less blitzing in general if no Mebane. Blitzes are vulnerable to the screen pass, and also take personnel out of the second and third levels who might be need to stop a medium gain, or prevent a long gain on a run that eludes the blitzers.
That becomes my greatest fear from the game, because while the Hawks have shown good pressure through mixing up blitzes with 3 and 4 man rushes, I haven’t felt like they’ve generated too much actual pressure when bringing just the D-line. Campbell isn’t a terrible QB, and there is some skill at the WR and TE (especially) positions down there in Oakland. If he has time to get comfortable, he will make some plays.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
