Packerlifer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,782
- Reaction score
- 118
Official Seattle thread
- Thread starter longtimefan
- Start date
ls1bob
Cheesehead
Other than coming on here and Packers.com it is time to shut the radio off already. When a program manager for a major radio network(at least he was truthful about it) says live on the air that he and his show hosts were pulling for the cowboys and it made them so mad and sick when the dez call was reversed that they couldn't even watch the beginning of the Colts game,it tells you main stream is all about ratings.He said that if dallas was in the championship game it would generate juice for all the sports entertainment industry,plus dallas can beat the seahawks and the Packers have no chance,which has been repeated by analysts on NFL radio this morning. Amani Toomer said the way we were manhandled first game that seattle was in our heads and we would be disinterested when we get dominated like the first game.Experts..... If our D holds up and McCarthy has a good game plan like he did against NE,I believe we have a damn good shot IMO.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
The Seahawks have allowed a total of five (!!!) TDs to receivers during the regular season compared to 11 to TEs. Seattle is more than capable to contain a team´s top WRs but they have troubles covering tight ends. Quarless and Rodgers will have to be a huge part of the puzzle to get a win at their place.
Seattlehusker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2015
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 0
Good luck with that prediction.
Seattlehusker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2015
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 0
When that happens the threat of the run game is eliminated. I'm sure Seattle will be in nickel or dime based on the GB player package. They have a fair amount t of tape of Cobb in the backfield now so I'm sure they'll devise something to account for it.
Seattlehusker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2015
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 0
A potential weakness is Chancellor in man-to-man situations against big TEs. Antonio Gates burned him for 3 TDs earlier this season. This is why Chancellor is in zone coverage more often. That also allows him to attack the WRs with his monster hits.
Hincha
Cheesehead
You are responding to a troll
OP
OP
Let's not forget we lost bulaga and sherrod gave up two sacks-- our ol has been together since week three
Let's not forget that since the 1st game, our def has changed a ton.. Clay plays a diff role, our worse player Jones isn't starting and Hawk's role has been reduced
Not saying our def will stop Seattle fully, but no one should be using the 1st game as a gauge
Let's not forget that since the 1st game, our def has changed a ton.. Clay plays a diff role, our worse player Jones isn't starting and Hawk's role has been reduced
Not saying our def will stop Seattle fully, but no one should be using the 1st game as a gauge
OP
OP
Cobb runs from the back field so how is run game eliminated
Seattlehusker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2015
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 0
I recognize he carries the ball to keep the defense honest but he's not a significant running threat, particularly inside the tackles. It's no secret to anyone that he's back there with the explicit purpose of creating a mismatch in the passing game with Cobb on an LB or Safety. If GB would rather use Cobb as a RB than as a WR and Lacey back there then that's a win for Seattle.
OP
OP
You said it was a eliminated I just pointed out it is not.... I realize it's not a big threat to run but it's still a threat
Pkrjones
Cheesehead
Not that it would be the most potent run formation (no TE on the edge), but could have Lacy & Cobb as RB's and still have 3 WR's. This could be used as a Cobb-screen formation or send Cobb in motion against a LB while still having Lacy-run threat. Would also force the Safeties to stay back in coverage or if Chancellor stays in the box open-up a WR for 1 on 1 situation.
PackersRules
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2015
- Messages
- 20
- Reaction score
- 3
Seattle is due for a very bad game and I think coming Sunday is going to be that game where they play terrible with lots of stupid penalties. I think Wilson is going to play terrible and Lynch will be a non-factor. I also predict Luke Willson is going to drop plenty of balls & their WR's will be inefective as usual. Their D is gonna get gashed by Lacy. I'm guessing 3 running TD's and over 150 yards for our man.
BOOK IT. Greenbay vs New England = SUPERBOWL
BOOK IT. Greenbay vs New England = SUPERBOWL
mradtke66
Cheesehead
If I got to play offense coordinator for a week, the big focus I would have is a lot of trips formations. Trips was "invented" to help beat zone coverage, which Seattle prefers--Cover-3 is a zone defense.
1) I would lineup trips to Sherman's side as often as possible. He's a damn fine corner, but he cannot cover three guys.
2) Nelson is the lone receiver away from Sherman. This makes the choose between singling Nelson/shading to the strength, doubling Nelson/Shading away from the strength, OR playing a different coverage than their preferred Cover-3. Their counter is pass rush. 3 man route concepts typically take longer to develop.
3) A good, healthy dose of the 3-2-0 offense that we played against the Cowboys. If they play nickel, do exactly what we ran against Dallas. If they go dime, shift to a Pro-I alignment (Cobb as the tail, one TE inline, one as the fullback) and run. If they go base, line up 4 bunched to Sherman's side (Nelson still singled away), TE wide and on the line as the split end, and run bubble screens. I can't image Sherman wants to get blocked by 270 pound R. Rodgers too often. Hell, get both TEs to double him a few plays. If all is goes is take 1/2 a step away from him because it sucks getting beat up, it'll help.
4) The softest part of their run defense is up the middle. Their DTs are solid, not great, and they don't have depth. Of course, for that to work, the game needs to be kept close, run early, run often. For us to stick with it well enough, we'll need a little early success.
I'm not saying these are the super secret ways to beat Seattle or that doing them will promise a victory. They're a good team. These are just ideas on to stress their weakest points. I consider their weak points running up the middle and their predicable defense. They're good enough to make it work, but if you can count on them to run the safe defense 90% of the time, you can do things to make them hurt themselves. They're stubborn, not unlike us in 2007 vs. the Giants game.
1) I would lineup trips to Sherman's side as often as possible. He's a damn fine corner, but he cannot cover three guys.
2) Nelson is the lone receiver away from Sherman. This makes the choose between singling Nelson/shading to the strength, doubling Nelson/Shading away from the strength, OR playing a different coverage than their preferred Cover-3. Their counter is pass rush. 3 man route concepts typically take longer to develop.
3) A good, healthy dose of the 3-2-0 offense that we played against the Cowboys. If they play nickel, do exactly what we ran against Dallas. If they go dime, shift to a Pro-I alignment (Cobb as the tail, one TE inline, one as the fullback) and run. If they go base, line up 4 bunched to Sherman's side (Nelson still singled away), TE wide and on the line as the split end, and run bubble screens. I can't image Sherman wants to get blocked by 270 pound R. Rodgers too often. Hell, get both TEs to double him a few plays. If all is goes is take 1/2 a step away from him because it sucks getting beat up, it'll help.
4) The softest part of their run defense is up the middle. Their DTs are solid, not great, and they don't have depth. Of course, for that to work, the game needs to be kept close, run early, run often. For us to stick with it well enough, we'll need a little early success.
I'm not saying these are the super secret ways to beat Seattle or that doing them will promise a victory. They're a good team. These are just ideas on to stress their weakest points. I consider their weak points running up the middle and their predicable defense. They're good enough to make it work, but if you can count on them to run the safe defense 90% of the time, you can do things to make them hurt themselves. They're stubborn, not unlike us in 2007 vs. the Giants game.
hawknballs
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 3
This is all based on...what exactly? You are probably right though. Seattle's just been lucky to go 11-5, 13-3, 12-4 the past 3 seasons with a 5-1 playoff record and a superbowl trophy in that time frame, so it's completely plausible that in the biggest game of the seasons, against a Packer's defense that is no offense meant, fairly average away from home - they will completely fall all over themselves and every facet of the offense and their rushing defense is suddenly going to completely fall apart.
You should count on that happening. You really should.
Charles Fischbein
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
- Messages
- 12
- Reaction score
- 1
Charles Fischbein
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
- Messages
- 12
- Reaction score
- 1
I think we are better coached than Seattle, regardless playing injured win or lose and I hope we win Rodgers deserves MVP. I am having major spinal surgery on Thursday so will be watching from hospital bed, just hope I don't get to excited when we win and jump out of my hospital bed and mess up the pins in my spine. They may have to tie me down a few friends are coming to Hospital for a pre game party with me hope they can sneak one beer past the nurses Go Packers even from hospital bed I will be your twelfth man.
Charles former Wisconsin resident now in Virginia
Last edited:
Charles Fischbein
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
- Messages
- 12
- Reaction score
- 1
sorry already posted hit reply twice, the best to all Cheezeheads where ever you are hope my nurses in hospital are not Seattle fans
hawknballs
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 3
Seattle has no problem covering TE's. They had one bad game against Antonio Gates but that was in San Diego and that was when Chancellor wasn't 100%. Aside from that game, there are a lot of "2 catches for 17 yards and a TD" type games for TE's we've faced.
To be exact, outside of the bad game against gates (7 catches 96 yards 3TD), Seattle's numbers against TE's:
53 catches for 497 yards and 8 TD's.
Even if you factor Gate's numbers back in, that only averages out to 4 catches a game for 37 yards and less than 1 TD per game for TE's against Seattle, and it only got better towards the end of the season when Bobby Wagner was back. So I wouldn't really count on exploiting much at the TE position.
Seattlehusker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2015
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 0
As somebody told me...he's a troll.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
That might prove to be a mistake.
Pkrjones
Cheesehead
You forgot about the part where Thursday EVERY coach finds out their wife is a cheating ****, and while the coaches are celebrating being single on Friday night they get bad sushi and have to miss Saturday's walk-through. The players are confused that the coaches miss the walk-through, go home and sleep through their 7AM wake-up call.
hawknballs
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 3
Yeah we aren't going to play much cover 2. We haven't much the past few seasons. That's worked out ...pretty okay. usually it's cover 3 or cover 1, in cover 3 thomas plays deep and the corners play more shallow than traditional cover 3.
sounds like things are shaping up nicely, even for a team going to face the number one D with a one legged quarterbackYou forgot about the part where Thursday EVERY coach finds out their wife is a cheating ****, and while the coaches are celebrating being single on Friday night they get bad sushi and have to miss Saturday's walk-through. The players are confused that the coaches miss the walk-through, go home and sleep through their 7AM wake-up call.
Just a thought- does anyone else think that Starks might have more success than Lacy running the ball? I don't have a whole lot of evidence to back up this thought, however, here is my thought process. Lacy relies on breaking tackles and running over defenders to gain much of his yardage. I don't know where I would pull up the exact numbers, but I am sure he gains a ton of yardage after contact. Starks, on the other hand, it more of a one cut runner who isn't quite as reliant on breaking tackles. Given the fact that Seattle is a great tackling team, Starks would seem to match up better in some ways.
Here are their statistics against San Francisco and Seattle since 2013(both great tackling teams). It's not enough data to gather a definitive conclusion, but it is something to think about.
Lacy
47 carries for 156 yards
3.3 average
Starks
12 carries for 66 yards
5.5 average
Obviously Lacy had the concussion earlier in the year, and our offensive line play has improved drastically so my whole thought could be completely wrong. But I'd still be interested in seeing Starks for a few carries, and seeing how he does.
Here are their statistics against San Francisco and Seattle since 2013(both great tackling teams). It's not enough data to gather a definitive conclusion, but it is something to think about.
Lacy
47 carries for 156 yards
3.3 average
Starks
12 carries for 66 yards
5.5 average
Obviously Lacy had the concussion earlier in the year, and our offensive line play has improved drastically so my whole thought could be completely wrong. But I'd still be interested in seeing Starks for a few carries, and seeing how he does.
Similar threads
