Why the Seahawks Offense Fails (at Oakland)
So, we have an idea of why the Seahawks offense fails, but does the tape actually bear this out? The failure of the deep passing attack certainly contributes a lot failed plays on its own, but how can we tell if it is also undermining the effectiveness of runs and short passes?
I don't know that we can be sure, but we can at least attempt to judge this hypothesis further by seeing how the Raiders responded to the Seahawks offense, and whether it was a lack of a deep threat that kept Seattle from converting firsts and scoring points, or if that was but a small component.
Well, we have 59 plays to review. Let's see what happened.
1-10-SEA 33 (13:31) 8-M.Hasselbeck sacked at SEA 28 for -5 yards (93-T.Kelly).
Defenders within five yards: 10
The Raiders are definitely crowding the line, but that doesn't come into play here. Tommy Kelly rips through Chris Spencer and sacks Matt Hasselbeck. This is a total offensive line fail, with Hasselbeck barely able to get through his drop back before he's avoiding a free rusher.
2-15-SEA 28 (13:10) 24-M.Lynch left tackle to SEA 29 for 1 yard (Team).
Defenders within five yards: 9
Defenders within 10 yards: 11
This rush is beaten down by the Raiders selling out against the run. Notice the play-by-play. "Team" is awarded the tackle. And that's the case. There wasn't an inch of space for Marshawn Lynch to run through.
3-14-SEA 29 (12:28) (Shotgun) 8-M.Hasselbeck sacked at SEA 21 for -8 yards (92-R.Seymour).
Defenders within 10 yards: 10
This is another breakdown by the offensive line. Kamerion Wimbley pressures off left end. Richard Seymour forklifts Ben Hamilton, forcing him up and then walking him back towards Hasselbeck. Spencer attempts to assist, but his block manages only to send Seymour tumbling towards Hasselbeck's legs. This play never gets started.
(The Raiders nearly match the Seahawks for offensive ineptitude.)
1-10-SEA 22 (9:55) 24-M.Lynch right end to SEA 20 for -2 yards (99-L.Houston).
Defenders within five yards: 10
Raiders rush six on the run blitz. Rolando McClain is able to cut through the left "A" gap and disrupt this run and force Lynch towards the outside. LaMarr Houston breaks through Sean Locklear on the right and tackles, but as you can see here:
Every gap is filled. McClain works through and pressures Lynch into Houston's tackle.
2-12-SEA 20 (9:26) 24-M.Lynch left end to SEA 16 for -4 yards (52-Q.Groves).
Defenders within 10 yards: 11
Seahawks set with trips on the right, but Raiders are again selling out against the run. Matt Shaughnessy pushes Tyler Polumbus back and that lengthens Lynch's angle towards the outside. He bows back and attempts to turn the corner, but Quentin Groves is keying Lynch from the outset. He catches Lynch near the left flat and drops him for a loss of four.
3-16-SEA 16 (8:42) (Shotgun) 8-M.Hasselbeck pass short right to 81-G.Tate to SEA 28 for 12 yards (33-T.Branch).
Defenders within 10 yards: 11
This is an interesting play, because it's clearly a passing down and Hasselbeck is actually in shotgun, but the Raiders are still playing very close to the line. Nine are within five and the Raiders two deep safeties are exactly 10 yards away from the line of scrimmage. Oakland is set to defend the pass--the short pass.
And that works, because Oakland's two safeties combine to stop Golden Tate.
First there's pressure, as Polumbus blows his block, but Hasselbeck steps up. Tate slows and waves open and Michael Huff closes on him from behind. Hasselbeck passes to Tate, Tate is able to spin through Huff's tackle and then continues up the right sideline. It almost works, but strong safety Tyvon Branch has the angle. He squares and contains Tate up the right sideline, waits for him to arrive and hits Tate and forces him out of bounds well short of the first.
I think of this play as just about the very definition of "no space underneath because of no threat over top." Both safeties are primed to stop the underneath route and both safeties combine to stop the underneath route.
(Raiders kick a field goal)
1-10-SEA 29 (5:07) 8-M.Hasselbeck pass incomplete short middle to 17-M.Williams.
Defenders on the line: 8
Defenders within five yards: 9
Defenders within 10 yards: 10
Oakland has a single deep safety, and that seems to be a response to Deon Butler wide left. Seattle gets the look it wants, with Butler single covered by Nnamdi Asomugha and the safety out of position to double. Asomugha has a heckuva reputation, and it's probably fair to say Butler versus Asomugha one-on-one deep isn't a dream matchup, but single coverage deep is single coverage deep. Butler actually looks like he has a step on Asomugha.
Which is pertinent, because absolutely nothing is open underneath. Seattle keeps Lynch in to block, giving them six blockers. That leads to both Mike Williams and Quinton Ganther facing double cover. John Carlson has single cover, but he's all tied up, and Huff is over top ready to double. So Hasselbeck more or less throws it away. He throws it to Williams' left, when he's breaking right, to try and avoid a linebacker in his throwing lane. Williams has no shot of catching it. It's a throw away into the field of play. No good.
2-10-SEA 29 (5:03) 24-M.Lynch left guard to SEA 29 for no gain (24-M.Huff; 26-S.Routt). PENALTY on SEA-50-B.Hamilton, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at SEA 29 - No Play.
Defenders on the line: 6
Defenders within five yards: 9
Defenders within 10 yards: 11
This is another numbers game, assisted by a Hamilton hold. At the snap, all three linebackers crash down to defender the run, and it is a run.
Ham holds Desmond Bryant, as Bryant worked him off the snap. His effort doesn't help. This play is dead, penalty or no. Lynch collides with the pile zero yards past the line of scrimmage, and is met by a pair of DBs: Huff and corner Stanford Rout. You can see Rout already closing on the run before Hasselbeck can hand Lynch the ball. Safeties biting run so early are supposed to be punished with play action.
2-20-SEA 19 (4:41) (Shotgun) 20-J.Forsett right tackle to SEA 20 for 1 yard (92-R.Seymour; 34-M.Mitchell).
Defenders within five yards:9
Defenders within 10 yards: 10
Nine defenders within five yards on second and 20? Yep. The 11th defender is 11 yards deep, by the way. Seymour blows this up by beating Polumbus off the snap and working through his angle block. Forsett is dropped when Huff, charging down hill to attack run pretty much off the snap, joins Seymour and the two push over and fall on Justin. Mad props to Force for never looking discouraged.
3-19-SEA 20 (3:59) (Shotgun) 8-M.Hasselbeck pass short left to 20-J.Forsett to SEA 33 for 13 yards (34-M.Mitchell).
Defenders on the line: 7
Defenders within five yards: 9
The two safeties are 11 yard deep.
The screen pass fails because the secondary isn't run deep and is thus able to swarm and stop Forsett short. He has blockers and uses them, but there's defenders everywhere. Discontinuing the trend of plays failing entirely because of a lack of deep threat, this play fails because Hasselbeck has to screen it out early. Locklear blows his block on Trevor Scott and Hasselbeck is running for his life to even get the ball out. That said, had the corners not be in position to swarm Forsett, both safeties were in position to stop him short of the first.
(Raiders three and out)
1-10-OAK 27 (1:05) 24-M.Lynch left end to OAK 27 for no gain (24-M.Huff). PENALTY on SEA-32-Q.Ganther, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at OAK 27 - No Play.
Defenders within five yards: 10
Defenders within 10 yards: 11
Lynch's welcome to the Seahawks offense continues as he faces another stacked box. Ganther holds, but let's examine this play as if he got away with it. He certainly could have. Lynch attempts to turn the corner and Huff is there to meet him. That marks the third straight run attempt stopped by a defensive back. Despite what the play-by-play says, Lynch would have gained about four. Lynch Beast Modes that four, as Huff hits him just as he's turning the corner.
The basic pattern continues: linebackers and defensive backs selling out to stuff the line of scrimmage.
1-20-OAK 37 (:38) (Shotgun) 8-M.Hasselbeck sacked at OAK 45 for -8 yards (33-T.Branch).
Hey! Safety blitz!
Defenders within five yards: 8 (10 are within seven yards)
Defenders within ten yards: 10
Oakland rushes five, dropping its left defensive end into coverage. This is a typical Marshall zone blitz, one he ran into the ground in Seattle. It works, because Lynch only lands a glancing block on Branch, and because Hasselbeck is looking left the entire way and doesn't see it coming or a way out of it. On the right, Carlson is single covered by Houston, but with the blitz arriving so quickly, Hasselbeck would have had to read that prior to the snap and he doesn't. Sack.
2-28-OAK 45 (:11) 20-J.Forsett right tackle to OAK 41 for 4 yards (92-R.Seymour, 33-T.Branch).
Seattle probably should have thought again about snapping before the end of the first quarter. If there was ever a time to slow the game down and regroup, this was it, but instead Seattle quick snapped. That meant Fox had a poor camera angle and action had already started. I couldn't record exactly how the Raiders were aligned, but one thing was clear:
Defenders within five yards: 9
On second and 29. Nine defenders within five yards. On second and 29.
So Seattle ran into it, and Stacy Andrews actually executed a nice pull block, but Seymour shadowed the play down the line and met Forsett after a gain of three. Force did his tiny power back thing and pushed the pile for another yard, but Huff was there to end it. Free safety Michael Huff.
Which is exactly how a stat that is designed to measure the contributions of the offensive line by measuring the contributions of the opposing defensive line and linebackers would confuse Seattle for a good offensive line. It's not, but it's also not responsible for the stream of defensive backs flying to the ball carrier snap after snap.
32 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Which is not a disagreement; I am with you on your findings so far. Definitely with you.
Just want to establish the context of the norm, more or less. Even 11 yards deep from 15 yards exemplifies the constricted spacing underneath from no deep cover demands.
Uncle!!!
As much as I wish Hass was what he used to be, I can see that he is probably the biggest reason that the offense isn’t what it could be… I hope that makes sense. Either way, your articles while not always great for morale, are definitely a great way to digest what went wrong.
While watching in the first half, even though it was close I knew we were going to lose, because we weren’t taking any chances and getting owned on the o-line. I only knew those things because of the wonderful breakdowns you go through to show a more casual fan like me. Thanks for the great articles and count me as a convert, as much as I like Matt, he clearly isn’t good for this football team any longer.
Well sure
But what about his post?
by Moresoftness on Nov 3, 2010 5:25 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Chances....
It looked like they didn’t really try taking any shots downfield until the second half, but maybe I have a revisionists memories.
I'm a long time reader. I don't post much and have wanted to say this for a while.
Not trying to kiss ass or anything here. But damn we have it lucky here in Seattle. Look at other teams blogs and you don’t get this kind of analysis. So…. thanks John.
by grips on Nov 3, 2010 5:46 PM PDT reply actions 7 recs
I agree. I don't even read the other Hawk blogs any more.
They seem rather shallow and sophomoric by comparison.
Here, I think you dropped this...
Fail
by flyinmonky on Nov 3, 2010 6:35 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
John, do you think defenses will just emulate the Raiders' approach for the rest of the season?
I mean … we punished the Raiders deep what … once? Twice?
If I’m a defensive coordinator, I’m stacking the box every play until the Seahawks can prove they can consistently complete deep throws. It’s risky, but thus far the Seahawks offense hasn’t proved it can play the deep passing game, so how likely is it that opposing defenses are burned by stacking the box? Not very, in my opinion.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
http://seahawksblog.wordpress.com
I imagine
That the way our guys salivated watching tape of the giants destroy the bears pales in comparison to the way umeniyora and co. must feel looking at the raiders tape against us.
by Moresoftness on Nov 3, 2010 9:26 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Teams have been "emulating" this approach for a few years.
Need to beat the Seahawks? Play press coverage.
So how does this dynamic
Change with Whitehurst in? Granted he has a stronger arm but he still needs to have accuracy and his receivers need to get open. Oh, and he also needs to not get sacked – which he has a strong tendency to do so.
by m_b on Nov 3, 2010 10:31 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
The Third and Sixteen is especially damning.
The Raiders are using their safeties to stop anything underneath. Not LB’s or a combo of DB’s and LB’s, just two safeties.
coming on the edge
yep i said it, this team is on the verge of a mid season meltdown.
hasselbeck wont let go and retire even though he cant play anymore, the o-line is shot to hell, and yet again no one ever thought to bring in a young TALENTED QB to replace hasselbeck. just some 28 yr old that spends more time with the clip board then he does on the field… in fact, hes never been in one regular season game!
giants are going to eat our o-line alive and whoever the poor sap they get to QB on sunday….. atleast we’ll get a good draft pick this coming year.
pack it up everyone, this team sucks, and just got lucky in the first half.
''no one ever thought to bring in a young TALENTED QB''
Who was available? would you prefer Clausen to be in the lineup right now? should we have signed Derek Anderson? traded for Brady Quinn? We never had a chance to acquire a young talented QB.
by hawksfan1401 on Nov 4, 2010 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
thanks john for the posts, can you call hasselbeck and tell him to retire.. or atleast slip in the shower..? something…?
They failed at Oakland for the same reason
they failed at Denver and will fail this coming Sunday, they block as if they hate their QB.
John Hancock
ugh, ...ugh. what more is there to say?
There are playmakers at receiver and running back. But it doesn’t matter.
The Raiders gambled on two things:
They could get through our bad o-line and pressure Matt before he had a chance to throw deep: they did.
They knew even if they couldn’t do that, Matt couldn’t throw deep: he can’t.
And we’re not even talking real deep here, 20-30 yard passes would be enough wouldn’t it? I don’t know what to say.
So who is our 3rd string QB?
I ask legitimately because I question our ability to keep both Hass and Whitehurst healthy by the end of this game.
Stacked boxes, reckless blitzing without fear of getting burned, and terrible line play bodes very ill as we play the best D-line in the NFC.
I am going to come into your house at night and rec up the place.
Zac Robinson on the PS
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Nov 4, 2010 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions
If it gets to that, we may see a lot of the BeastCat offense
by SmartAssCoug on Nov 4, 2010 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Or some run, run, run, punt
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Nov 4, 2010 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions
And running isn't limited to rushing plays
Strap on your track shoes, Charlie — given the injuries, you will be playing behind one of the worst offensive lines ever to suit up in modern times, especially across from one of the more fearsome defensive front four.
Combined with the UW/Oregon game (Locker or not), it is shaping up to be a “fun” weekend for northwest football.
Let's establish the "box."
The width of the o-line and say, 8 yards deep?
by THolt on Nov 4, 2010 10:16 AM PDT via mobile reply actions

by 






































