Quick Cap: Eagles 26 - Seattle 7
by John Morgan on Nov 2, 2008 4:27 PM PST
in Game Recap
44 comments
A metaphor for Bruce DeHaven's coaching:
Think about it. It's a grower.
I'll tell you what, I ain't no loser and don't like this one bit, but I'm not pissed-pissed. By all rights, the Eagles should have skullfucked Seattle. And I don't whip that verb out every day. And Seattle really did its best to give away this game. Nothing like a zero blitz on third and 6. Clearly, when I think Deon Grant and Brian Russell, I think blitz those mothers.
The distaste of this season just doesn't wash away. It's like a black bandage over our hands. Rust red dirt jammed deep under our fingernails. A burned out, divided and probably never very good coaching staff mismanaging a good group of young talent.
Let's take stock.
Both starting corners are good. Obviously, it's early on Wilson, but kid's shown a ton for a corner without a full year starting. Love the talent.
Brian Russell should be receiving a letter bomb right about
Deon Grant is a fine free safety and I hope he plays there again someday. He's so-so at strong safety.
Darryl Tapp is very good though condemned to be forever misunderstood by his fanbase. I have faith Jackson will develop. We'll revisit LoJack, but obviously he didn't do much this game.
Brandon Mebane and Red Bryant are two of the best young defensive tackles in football.
I'll hold off talking about anyone else, but Seattle's not the Detroit Lions. There's talent here. Right now, it doesn't matter. For Seattle, there're just too many injuries, too many bad calls, bad personnel decisions, bad blitzes, perverted special teams play and now the fetid air of defeat. It's not that 90% of the team isn't playing its ass off snap to whistle, first to fourth, it's that 10% of this team isn't. And that ten is holding clipboards, wearing headsets and milling, putzing and futzing out the end of their careers. I wish you all a good happy, healthy retirement. God help me if I don't see a shotgun next year. A shotgun, creative blitzes, competent special teams; the sense of modernity, life and fire I've never felt this season.
Game Ball: Tapp deserves some recognition after a sack and forced fumble. The line survived ten step drops and blitz after blitz. Koren Robinson is clearly Seattle's best remaining receiver. And the interior defensive line played well all day, but even Pat and Kevin Williams can't make a D. But I give the game ball to Seneca Wallace. Yeah, he's not great. He's flawed. He creates pass rush and is often football stupid. But he's a backup. He made some great passes, showed a pocket awareness he's never before had, didn't panic too bad or at least wasn't punished when he did and all in all played like a damn good backup quarterback. Seattle didn't stand a chance, but they never really did. The drop off from starting to backup quarterback is notoriously high. In the modern NFL, where passing rules and defenses are as intricate and confusing as any offense, the gap between starter and backup probably has never been greater. So, against the 4th ranked pass defense, sure he sucked, but he held up and gave his team a shot. Sometimes, that's all you can ask.
There still some life in this team. The playoffs are so, so far off you'd need Detect-o-vision to see them. If somehow this team gets back to full strength before the season's over, it will be that fun, scrappy, more talented than its record team no one wants to play. Pride, bitches.
0 recs |
44 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I wouldn't mind seeing a Tim Ruskell overreaction right now
provided it results in the termination of Bruce DeHaven and John Marshall.
by BrianL on Nov 2, 2008 4:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I hope we put Hasselbeck on IR.
And I think someone has to say it:
MICHAEL CRABTREE. period.
by michaelfox99 on Nov 2, 2008 4:42 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Taylor Mays
You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 2, 2008 8:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Graham Harrell looks pretty good.
Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.
by BrettJMiller on Nov 2, 2008 10:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't be opposed to Harrell if we wanted to open our offense up a little more
But it depends on what round we would get him. Does anyone know where he’s projected to go? I don’t think I’d use a first-day pick on him
by SeaTownBlueDevil on Nov 3, 2008 1:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
video clip
The video clip reminds me of Seth Rogen’s first line’s to Steve Carell’s character in The 40-Year-Old Virgin.
“I kinda felt bad for her. I kinda felt bad for the horse…”
Sports and Bremertonians. Because we can.
by wackomann on Nov 2, 2008 4:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
no reason to push Hasselbeck back before he's absolutely 100%
Also: Walter Jones? Canning too many players has a cascade effect and wastes the efforts of everyone else, but we’ll need Jones next year. Or at least finally give Jones a break with a few games off when he needs them, no need to be an iron man on a non-playoff bound team.
by Will Kier on Nov 2, 2008 4:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
agreeing with everything posted so far.
get rid of dehaven and marshall ASAP, see if anyone else on the staff shows us something, and start looking for replacements when the season’s done.
IR Hass, this guy is our franchise and his long-term health is now the most important thing.
Crabtree. Worst football-player name ever, but man-oh-man would I ever kill for that kind of playmaking potential. A trips-WR set of Crabtree/Branch/Burleson would be absolutely boner-inducing.
by djafrot on Nov 2, 2008 5:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Koren...
dropped too many balls. But, he’s got the “tools” to be a good #1, still. How’d you like Russell’s contain on that sweep at the end of the first quarter? Nice play. Special teams erratic at best. Good atheletes, that’s not the problem. But players not being ready to get out on the field with their units—I don’t get that.
The game was lost in the first. Eagles were playing poorly on offense, back on their heels. We had excellent field position, could not move the ball.
Eventually, maybe they would have won anyway. But not scoring on those short fields made a loss a certainty.
by Hawkdawg on Nov 2, 2008 5:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
did Koren
really drop many? I was at the game and always miss stuff like this, but I really thought it was Kerry “I wanna be Ctaylor” Colbert that kept dropping passes.
by scotthawk on Nov 2, 2008 6:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He dropped two
and was hit hard both times. I didn’t think either one was really on him.
And it was Kent both times that didn’t get out on the field when he was supposed to.
by Nate Dogg on Nov 2, 2008 6:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the only real "drop" I saw was Carlson's
The others were tough catches.
by djafrot on Nov 2, 2008 6:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Tough catches and very well defended.
by Ovreel on Nov 2, 2008 7:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Professional WRs
Should make professional catches. Most HS receivers can catch the easy ones. I’m not saying they should catch all of them, but this game was littered with drops; at some point someone has to catch some of those.
by Azimeir on Nov 3, 2008 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well stated...
I wonder if the effort in being as flexible is overwhelming for most. Or if the need for high intelligence in key spots (aka Bruschi, Harrison) is the requirment.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 3, 2008 11:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And professional defenders
should make professional pass defenses. The two Koren drops weren’t like the Carlson drop, they were forced incompletions.
by Nate Dogg on Nov 3, 2008 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No shit...
So, you’re right, every time that a defender hits a WR while in the act of catching he gets a pass. Every time.
by Azimeir on Nov 3, 2008 9:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Funny, I tried to get my dog to hump my cat earlier today.
It didn’t work out.
by LantermanC on Nov 2, 2008 6:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Holmgren vs. Belichick
I just watched Matt Cassel look the part of a poor man’s Hasselbeck. Why is it that Belichick can make his team look decent regardless of injuries, and we simply come up with words like “potential”, “injuries”, “luck”?
I am a huge supporter of what Holmgren brings, but his lack of creativity during his ten years at Seattle has been, and is, his achilles.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 2, 2008 8:11 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well to be fair
Matt Cassell is the same type of QB as Tom Brady in terms of physicality. (Not smarts Cassell has a long way to go) Seneca and Matt are 2 completely different QB’s. Plus Cassell has Moss to throw to.
You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 2, 2008 9:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure if QB development is really where you want to knock Holmgren.
And for all the complaints about Holmgrens conservative and or antiquated play calling he’s brought a lot of success to Seattle on the offensive side of the ball. He’s did some extra retarded things today in terms of clock management, but I’m not sure I agree with the complaints on his play calling overall.
by Nate Dogg on Nov 2, 2008 10:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No complaints on Holmgren
more just a thought out loud… how can New England look so decent with a similar rash of injuries, play to their strengths, and be competitive?
I’m actually not even knocking Holmgren or Seneca… I may be going down another path that leads to Ruskell.
That said, the D played hard, and no one quit it seems yesterday.
I was just astonished at the compettive level and ingenuity (sp?) of NE. They used their personnel really well, and gave themselves a chance. Not so in Seattle. Perhaps we are too far under with injuries… but I recall NE winning a SB with corners off the street.
I just wrote a whole lot about nothing… but hey, it felt good :)
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 3, 2008 8:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
I’m of the opinion that Belichick schemes for what he has while coaches like Holmgren try to make what they have fit their scheme; I support the former philosophy over the latter.
by Azimeir on Nov 3, 2008 10:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well stated...
wonder if the effort in being as flexible is overwhelming for most. Or if the need for high intelligence in key spots (aka Bruschi, Harrison) is the requirment.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 3, 2008 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
At this point I'm looking towards the draft and beyond
A better coaching staff, a healthy team, and the bounty from having one of the top picks in the ‘09 draft? I can’t wait 9 months until the preseason.
by katal on Nov 2, 2008 8:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
If there is a lesson to take out of this dreadful season
it is that when a coach is contemplating retirement it’s already too late. He’s already retired. You have to just bite the bullet and move forward. As a GM you can’t be in the business of creating poetic endings for your coaches; you just have to be a jerk. I use to always wonder why people—and this seems more prevalent in the NBA than in the NFL—would get so worked up about coaches on the lame duck year of their contracts. Now I get it. Like the title of the fabled novel by the late Chinua Achebe, “”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Things_Fall_Apart" target="new">Things Fall Apart." A lame duck coach always runs the risk of having some players and staff bail at the first sign of adversity, and that’s when the thing unravels and falls apart. In our case it’s been the staff more than the players who have bailed. No coach on this team has done what anyone would consider a “fine” coaching job this season.
When I try to look at this through Ruskell’s mind’s eye, I see him in a no-win situation. If he pressures Holmgren to retire he’s pushing out a legend but by keeping him you run the risk a lame duck season. And besides, the game hasn’t passed Holmgren by. He just came off a 10-6 season, and one of his better coaching jobs ever. Getting that offense to the post-season and winning a game without the faintest pretense of a running game an no serious deep threat was in retrospect pretty spectacular. Holmgren deserved a better ending to his season, but then so did Joe Gibbs. Sometimes you don’t get that.
If Ruskell had this past off-season to do over again maybe he’d say “I’d rather not have a year-to-year coach. You just can’t run a franchise that way Mike. You know that.” Even still, I don’t know that you call the decision to bring Holmgren back a clear swing and miss by Ruskell. It’s a tough call. Without the rash of injuries Seattle is probably one of a gaggle of 4-4 or 5-3 teams, and we’re not even really having this conversation.
If we can be philosophical—and really, what else is left in this season?—it’s easier to come back from a throw away season in the NFL than in any other league. In the meantime, Ruskell, if he’s honest with himself, ought to re-evaluate his commitment to Jim Mora, jr. I’m not suggesting that junior is the wrong guy. I’m saying the market for coaches should include other candidates (e.g., Bill Cowher). In either event, this team needs a high impact draft.
Sigh.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
by dcrockett17 on Nov 3, 2008 7:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you
philosophically… :) would love to find another Mike Smith.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 3, 2008 8:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
'the sense of modernity'
That is something that coaches like Sean Payton get praised for, although dynamic, explosive players like Reggie Bush help. I have wondered about whether or not the current coaching staff is ahead of the curve when it comes to creative offense (well, and defense). Teams catch up to many things season-to-season. Is Holmgren’s system partially at fault here? Execution is great. Attention to detail? Check. At some point, I would like to see the coaches get radical with the offense. Provide some change-ups or wrinkles; and occasionally, throw caution to the wind. It’s hard to argue with what has been successful for so many years, but I would like to see Mike open a bag of tricks once in awhile and maybe give other teams something to game-plan for other than what they can expect . Have we not gotten fairly predictable? Obviously, there are many factors involved with our stagnant offense but where is the coaching trying to breakthrough our mediocrity on that side of the ball?
It feels to me like the attitude is: “We’ll do what we do, and if it we execute, we’ll be fine”. We are not fine.
by Misfit74 on Nov 3, 2008 10:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Is the coaching staff ahead of the curve?
What play will the Seahawks run on 3rd and 7+?
I rest my case.
by Azimeir on Nov 3, 2008 11:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I know, I know!!
The patented Holmgren draw?
by m_b on Nov 3, 2008 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and, as befits my love of the 3rd and long draw
it was used on the ONLY time we converted a 3rd and long this weekend.
Plus, no sacks and no INT’s as a result.
by djafrot on Nov 3, 2008 11:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Because a play works doesn't mean it was a smart call.
Let’s take a look at the Paul DePodesta success matrix.
by BrianL on Nov 3, 2008 1:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well and we should consider how often that's run...
and how often it’s worked. Also, the criticism is of the third and long fullback draw, not the third and long draw. The fullback draw is an attempt to be tricky, like no one expects me to run the fullback, but everyone does. Everyone has seen that same play from Holmgren for nearly two decades. A running back draw on third and long is football 101. It’s a standard conservative, low risk/decent reward play and not at all unique to Holmgren.
by John Morgan on Nov 3, 2008 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I completely forgot that particular play was a half-back draw.
I’m just conditioned to expect an FB draw on third-and-long.
by BrianL on Nov 3, 2008 1:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
Holmgren was saved from himself by Weaver’s injury.
by John Morgan on Nov 3, 2008 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm ALL FOR
Draw plays SOME of the time, but when you run it with the frequency that Holmgren does anyone that watches a minimal amount of film is going to be looking for it.
by Azimeir on Nov 3, 2008 9:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If myself, average fan, knows an FB draw is coming
chances are the opposition does too.
by BrianL on Nov 3, 2008 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
