In the no-huddle offense, the Seahawks were efficient and at times explosive. After the Week 4 "explosion," Pete Carroll regretted not going to it sooner. And that was before the Week 5 win in New York sent the team optimistically into the bye.

Unfortunately, the no-huddle didn't work nearly as well as intended coming out of the bye. Charlie Whitehurst, not Tarvaris Jackson, started at Cleveland and was overwhelmed as they tried to implement the scheme. They sputtered and scored three points. In Week 8 Whitehurst started again, but not without the same issues he showed a week earlier. The return of Jackson in the second quarter of that game wasn't enough to keep whatever no-huddle momentum was left.

Fast forward to the present: the no-huddle has effectively been phased out of the primary offense - we're talking an average of less than three no-huddle plays per game in the past five (based on the play-by-play scripts). Perhaps consequently, as Danny highlighted earlier today, the rushing attack has exploded.

I touched on the no-huddle during the bye, leaving off on these two questions; "Is the no huddle sustainable and does the 'soulful' connection associated with the scheme have the potential to help move the program along?"

Part of the recent offensive change is much, much less use of the no-huddle, so I'll have to go with 'no' on the first question. Though, I don't think we truly know if it was "sustainable" given what has transpired over the past month-plus because of the discontinuity created by the Jackson injury. How does the scheme work at Cleveland with a healthy Jackson? That was an acknowledged issue during the bye, and I think part of the scheme's undoing. Not to mention it didn't work as well when he came back. It's now pretty much a moot point.

Onto the second question; did the "soulful" connection associated with the no-huddle have a positive impact on the program? Remember, the "soulful" connection achieved within the scheme helped a fragmented group - their discontinuity coming from lack of reps during the lockout and general youth of the line - that needed to do less thinking and more instinctual playing. The goal was to get them coming off of the ball with authority; the better each individual does their job, the stronger the power of the whole - this is where the "long body" came into play. In the no-huddle, this was happening more than it was before they adopted the scheme.

Even with Carroll's expressed desire for the scheme to work, an up-tempo, no-huddle offense was a deviation from the philosophy of featuring a clock controlling running game. Furthermore, there was always an expressed desire by the coaches to improve the rushing attack. One could think the no-huddle isn't a precursor to that, or even a scheme change that would facilitate improvement in the trenches. Fast forward to now; the offensive line is playing more together, better and possess a nasty attitude.

Continue reading this post »

The progression of Seattle's running game is really pretty remarkable.

The Seahawks have gone from having one of the most impotent rushing offenses in the league in the first eight weeks or so to possessing a seemingly effective and efficient ground game the last five. I think it's interesting to take a closer look at each week and compare the beginning of the year to what's happening now. I wrote about this a few weeks ago over at the Seattle site, so I'm borrowing some of that now, and wanted to update it a bit here.

Let's take a look:

Week One, At San Francisco: 22 rushes for 64 yards. 2.9 yards per carry. Marshawn Lynch rushed 13 times for 33 yards (at 2.5 ypc), Justin Forsett 3 times for 3 yards, and Michael Robinson once for 2 yards. The longest 'rush' was actually Ben Obomanu on an end-around for 13 yards.

Week Two, At Pittsburgh: 13 rushes for 31 yards. 2.4 yards per carry. Marshawn Lynch carried it six times for 11 yards. Justin Forsett, 3 for 10 yards, and Leon Washington, 1 time for a loss of 2. Tarvaris Jackson led the Seahawks in 'rushing' with 3 attempts (probably scrambles) for 12 yards. Yeesh.

Week Three, vs Arizona: 30 attempts for 122 yards. 4.1 yards per carry. Marshawn Lynch led the way with 19 attempts for 73 yards on a 3.8 ypc clip. His long run was 23 yards. Leon Washington carried the ball three times for 29 yards, including one 21 yard run. The Seahawks finally got a few 'explosive' plays out of their run game. That's something.

Week Four, vs Atlanta: 15 attempts for 53 yards. 3.5 yards per carry. Marshawn Lynch carried it 8 times for 24 yards, 3.0 ypc. Again, the Hawks never got any traction, playing from behind. Seahawks long carry here was 11 yards by Lynch.

Week Five, at New York: 29 attempts for 145 yards 5.0 ypc. This spells progress. Marshawn Lynch had a big day, rushing 12 times for 98 yards, 8.2 ypc. He padded this number with a 47 yard rush, the longest for the Seahawks on the year to that point. The Hawks averaged 5.0 yards per carry on the ground and got a big upset win.

Week Seven, at Cleveland: 17 attempts for 65 yards, 3.8 ypc. Lynch was a pre-game scratch and Leon Washington carried the ball 7 times for 39 yards to lead the Seahawks. That is 5.6 yards per carry but for some reason the Seahawks didn't run the ball with any regularity, instead passing 30 times with Charlie Whitehurst. Quite unsuccessfully, I might add.

Week Eight, vs Cincinnati: 20 rushes for 61 yards, 3.1 ypc. Lynch carried the ball 16 times for 24 yards. Ouch. Washington carried it twice for 34 yards, which I'll take. The Bengals have a very good rush defense but this game the Seahawks couldn't get anything going, and threw the ball 40 times, a ratio of 2:1 in favor of the pass.

This game coupled with the performance in Cleveland might have been a turning point for the coaching staff in deciding that running the ball was priority number one, outcome of the game be damned.

Week Nine, at Dallas: 30 rushes for 162 yards, 5.4 yards per carry. The Seahawks best rushing performance on the year, and probably in Pete Carroll's tenure. Lynch carried it 23 times for 135 yards (5.9ypc) and the Hawks finally ran the ball as much as they passed (30:30). They lost the game to a good Dallas team, but we saw glimpses of what this offense is capable of on the ground.

Furthermore, the Hawks ran the ball late in the fourth quarter while trailing, which demonstrated the steadfast dedication to creating that offensive identity.

Week Ten, vs Baltimore: 42 rushes for 119 yards, 2.8 ypc. The ypc in this game isn't much but the Seahawks rushed it 42 times to 27 passing attempts and demonstrated they could put a game away by protecting the lead with the run. By pounding the rock on the ground for the final five-plus minutes in the fourth quarter, the Seahawks did exactly what they had set out to do early in the season - create a lead then keep it by grinding clock and wearing down the defense.

I noted after Week Ten that with Paul McQuistan and Breno Giacomini taking over, things were likely, or possibly going to stall a bit. Did they?

Week Eleven, at St. Louis: 39 rushes for 126 yards, 3.2 ypc. Marshawn Lynch was the feature back, as usual. He carried the ball 27 times for 88 yards and a touchdown. Justin Forsett got some late carries and scored on a 22-yard run, boosting the total. Still though, a solid outing considering it was a whole new right side and the passing offense wasn't exactly lighting it up, - TJack passed for 148 yards on 14/24 and a 55 rating. Essentially, the run game won this one for the Seahawks, who also won ToP 35 to 25.

Week Twelve, vs Washington: 30 rushes for 124 yards, 4.1 ypc. Lynch with 24 carries, 111 yards on 4.6 ypc. Lynch also scored on a swing/screen pass for 20 yards.

The Seahawks passed for 30 times for 144 yards, again, pretty lackluster. The run game more or less carried the offense.

Week Thirteen, vs Philadelphia: 33 rushes for 174 yards, 5.3 ypc. Lynch, 22 for 148, 6.7 ypc and a touchdown. With the Seahawks' 172 yard rushing performance on Thursday, Seattle has now rushed for over 100 yards in five straight games, something they haven't done since 2005.

In other words, the last time the Seahawks accomplished that feat was courtesy of soon-to-be NFL MVP Shaun Alexander, on his way to 1,880 yards rushing with 27 touchdowns and a Super Bowl appearance as he ran behind future Hall of Famer Walter Jones and perennial All-Pro Steve Hutchinson.

Continue reading this post »

When I think of the Eagles offense one of the first plays that comes to mind is the screen. Michael Vick and Jeremy Maclin are out for this game, and LeSean McCoy is questionable. This is not the Eagles offense, but this is not a group to take lightly, either. On a short week and without all of their weapons, the coaching staff must gameplan creatively to beat the Seahawks.

Now, by no means am I an expert on the Eagles' screen game. But as a football fan, this particular offense has always intrigued me. They can be so dangerous creating explosive plays with misdirection or well-timed patience; personally I think one of the more difficult team specific, offensive sub packages in the NFL to stop when clicking on all cylinders. They are currently tied with the Bills as the league's best screen blocking team according to Pro Football Focus. The Eagles may not be having the year they hoped for, but they are still prolific running the screen.

My impression of the Seahawks' performance against the screen is that they are OK, at the least they are better than last year - that's not saying much. Last week the Redskins used the screen early and often - the first offensive play of the game was a screen. They had decent success, notably mixing the screen game in on their two touchdown drives.

For the Seahawks to win, they can't allow the Eagles to get into a rhythm and dig into the screen playbook. Let's take a look at a few recent examples of Seattle against the screen.

The first example is from Week 8 against Cincinnati on 3^rd and 11. But before we get to the play, it's worth mentioning what happened on 1st and 10. The Bengals ran a double screen concept from the shotgun; they faked the run left, came back to the right to fake the wide receiver screen, only to come back to the running back on the left with the screen.

The defense, in a 3-4 with Kam Chancellor as the sixth man on the line, didn't bite. The three down linemen didn't rush up field because of the wide receiver screen fake. Ultimately, the Bengals got -1 yards on a play that could have been even worse.

On 3^rd and 11 the Bengals tried again, but with a different play. Seattle is in 'Bandit' versus the four receiver, shotgun set. Tight end Donald Lee is circled, as he will get the ball.

Continue reading this post »

Red Bryant made one of the top defensive plays of the season for the team against St. Louis, when he intercepted a twice-tipped pass after dropping back into zone coverage. While this is the first big-time play we've seen as a result of this schematic wrinkle, dropping the defensive tackle is something the Seahawks have done with regularity this year. Now, 'regularity' can mean a lot of things, but here I use it to mean at most a handful of times a game and it's something they've broken out a little bit each week.  It doesn't always work, but it can be effective. 

During the preseason Gus Bradley "joked" during a Seahawks.com, Tony Ventrella piece about the possibility of having Red out in the open, dropping into coverage. It seemed almost like Bradley was half kidding about the prospect of having such a large man in coverage, which on the surface seemed somewhat unorthodox. Clearly, he wasn't.

The Seahawks have used both Bryant and Alan Branch in this coverage role. While both of these men are primarily seen as run stoppers, I like the idea of dropping them into short coverage because their unique size and movement ability creates some scheme versatility - both of the following plays are in nickel, where Seattle can defend the run or pass. Both men are extremely intimidating when controlling the middle, too. I mean, you imagine catching a pass on a short cross, then running into 330+ pounds of angry man. 

I highlighted a four man pressure from the Cincinnati game where the Seahawks dropped Branch in a very short zone, along the line of scrimmage and in the middle of the field, his job being to protect against the scramble and generally be disruptive. I liked this strategy because it puts a mobile giant in space and limits the quarterback's ability to make a play when the pocket breaks down.

The play Bryant intercepted the pass on is an evolution of this idea, and is very similar to a play I noticed the Seahawks use against Baltimore with Alan Branch. This is a unique idea the Seahawks have been scheming into a growing defense and it's paid dividends on a few occasions.  Let's take a look.

Continue reading this post »

Part one of this article focused on Seattle's new found ability to create the 40 yard-plus pass play.  Now it's time to look at a very different type of explosive play. It's not a deep ball, or even a pass down the seam. This is an example of the Seahawks manufacturing the 20+ pass play with savvy play calling and offensive balance.

Going into Week 10 the Ravens were in the top three in at least three pass defense categories - touchdowns allowed, completion percentage against, sacks - and in the top 10 in about a handful of others.  One weakness that appeared in the stats was that they had allowed 24 pass plays of 20 yards or more, which was tied for 19th in the league. On the flip side Seattle had generated 24 pass plays of 20 yards or more, ranked 18th in the league.

I know this because I researched for an article for last week's game, but I went to Seattle to attend the game and ultimately had technical difficulties that prevented my posting. This is relevant only because heading in, I thought making 20+ pass plays with creative play calling could help create running lanes against a stout Ravens run D. The Seahawks needed to exploit this "weakness" for them to win the game. (I swear, the meat of these two paragraphs was written last week.)  

On the opening drive in Week 10 Seattle went run, run, pass; three and out. After holding the Ravens to a missed field goal and keeping the juice in the stadium, the Seahawks came back out on offense: a pass to Zach Miller, Lynch run for the first down, Lynch for 21 on a pass, Washington run for four, pass to Lynch for 23 yards to the 1, then the touchdown.

This set up and play calling is much different than the setup we saw in part one, when Seattle went run heavy before the big play on second and long, which should be noted was a dissimilar distance and in a different part of the field than for these two plays. Here Seattle didn't go for the haymaker, but instead landed some heavy handed, wind-knocking body shots.  

Continue reading this post »

The Seahawks struggled to create big plays early in the season. They generated only four explosive pass plays (while some metrics count a 40+ pass as an "explosive play," I'm going to use 20+ as the standard - and I believe that's what Pete Carroll uses as well) in the first three weeks, leading to questions about where this offense was going with Tarvaris Jackson at the helm.

Then the offense took a temporary turn for the better in Week 4 against Atlanta, as Seattle generated five explosive pass plays - including a 52-yard bomb to Sidney Rice for a touchdown and a 30-yard shot to Doug Baldwin.

Jackson and Charlie Whitehurst split duties in Week 5 because of Jackson's injury, and the offense slowly stalled until Jackson re-entered the equation in the second quarter of Week 8 versus Cincinnati. Again, Seattle had five explosive pass plays, - including 55 and 32-yard strikes to Ben Obomanu, and a 35-yarder to Sidney Rice - and they've continued to gain chunks of yards in the past two weeks.

Against Dallas Sidney Rice caught a 43-yard pass from Jackson and Anthony McCoy got in on the fun with a 31-yard reception. Last week, Doug Baldwin had a big 50-yard reception that Danny broke down here. 

True, Seattle didn't have Sidney Rice in the first two weeks - Seattle generated three of their four explosive pass plays from the first three weeks in his debut - but we're talking recent production on a game to game basis that equals Seattle's explosive passing production in the first three weeks of the year. 

After 8 weeks Seattle was able to shake early season stagnancy and begin to consistently gain chunks of yards through the air, and maybe this happens sooner if Jackson doesn't get hurt. Just for comparison - in 2010, Matt Hasselbeck had 33 pass plays of 20 or more yards, with ten of those going for 40-plus, while Jackson currently has 23 plays of 20 yards or more, with five 40-plus pass plays.

The super slow start in 2011 and Jackson's injury must be accounted for as well. Even though Seattle's passing game is ranked in the bottom half of the league in many statistical categories, they are on pace to eclipse last year's number of explosive plays. If Jackson doesn't get injured Week 5 it's possible he's currently very close to Hasselbeck's 20-plus total from last season already. Anyway...

While the recent step forward in the running game is not something I'm going to highlight, I think the running game success and these big plays are connected. The Seahawks have started to pound the rock. It's easier to run the ball when you are creating big plays through the air, and in a variety of situations. The defense has to adjust and big play opportunities arise if you can find the right matchups.

In the Shutdown Corner Week 10 podcast, Doug Farrar asked Greg Cosell about teams winning a Super Bowl with a 'run first offense' instead of a 'pass first offense'. 

Doug Farrar: "Can you win a Super Bowl these days with the pass as, if not a secondary option, kind of a 1A thing?"

Long, long pause...

Greg Cosell: "Yeah, because I think what it comes down to, is generating explosive pass plays, Doug. As long as you get to that, and can do that, then you can, for sure.

Let me make this analogy, in boxing, let's say. The object, obviously, is to hit the other guy in the chin and knock him out. To do that, you don't just come out and start swinging freely. You try to set that up, and maybe you use some jabs, maybe you use some body shots, and then, you can hit him on the chin.

As long as you can throw the ball, and generate chunks of yards in the pass game, that's the important point. You don't just have to come out in 4 or 5 wide spreads and just start winging it."

I liked the comparison to boxing, saying a fighter doesn't step into the ring looking for the knockout blow to the chin (except maybe Mike Tyson). He sets it up. The running game and dumpoffs are the jabs or body shots; the explosive passing game is the shot to the chin, or the knockout blow. The haymaker. I'm going to take your head off the second you let down your defense. 

Continue reading this post »