Lofa Tatupu Out for the Season
by John Morgan on Oct 18, 2009 4:48 PM PDT
86 comments
I can not confirm this independently, but several commenters have mentioned that Jim Mora announced during his press conference that Lofa Tatupu is out for the season following a shoulder injury. Corroboration. (Ed: Thanks Matthew)
Crap.
0 recs |
86 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
AAAAHHHHHHHHH NOOOOOOOOO NOOOOOOOOOOO NOOOOOOOOOO NOOOOOOOOOOOO
I work here: http://tinyurl.com/yfxlyhh
by Taylor H on Oct 18, 2009 4:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Both Matt Pittman and Danny O'Neill
have said the same thing.
And DON has a blog up
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seahawksblog/2010090316_lofatatupuoutfortheyear.html
by Matthew on Oct 18, 2009 4:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Seriously, newspapers and ESPN boards just call to the morons.
“lofa tatupu sucks. Hawthorne is better and we’ll see that the rest of the year. mark my words "
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
Next year's notable Ex-Seahawks:
Walter Jones, Patrick Kerney, Seneca Wallace, Jordan Babineaux, Kelly Jennings
by Wayward Llama on Oct 18, 2009 5:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The ESPN board is a crime against humanity.
The don’t let you use the words "moron or “idiot” but allow the most egregious trolling.
by redwolf75 on Oct 18, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So as a Florida Gator,
do you have a hard time coming to grips with your hatred of the officials as a Seahawk fan with your love of the officials as the Gators got handed the win?
1) Questionable PI on a horribly underthrown ball (on 3rd and 10)
2) Ridiculous Personal Foul on Arkansan DL when Florida OL guy tries to cheap shot him (VERY next play)
3) PI on Florida WR (not called) when Arkansas DB had an interception if the call isn’t made.
Just curious…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Oct 18, 2009 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My Seahawk depression is tempered with Florida wins.
So no, I don’t care.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
Next year's notable Ex-Seahawks:
Walter Jones, Patrick Kerney, Seneca Wallace, Jordan Babineaux, Kelly Jennings
by Wayward Llama on Oct 19, 2009 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Torn pectoral? Ouch. Have a speedy and complete recovery.
And maybe use this time to let your chest muscles atrophy a bit.
by abender20 on Oct 18, 2009 5:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Still two great linebackers on the field
Instead of Lofa and Curry, we’ll soon be watching Hill and Curry. That’s still two better linebackers than most teams have.
We desperately need Trufant back. He is key to improving this defense. Hawthorne cannot replace Lofa’s leadership and intincts, but he’s a good player. With Trufant and Hill back, we can still improve without Lofa.
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Oct 18, 2009 5:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I thougt Curry wasn't that good?
Has he improved his game?
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by chikmagnet_565 on Oct 18, 2009 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He made some rookie mistakes early in the season.
He’s really come on the past 3 weeks.
by MFAN on Oct 18, 2009 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's played like a rookie at times but has shown a lot of brilliance so far.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
His speed and ability to track the ball are just phenomenal
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Oct 19, 2009 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disappointing
But I’m ready to call it a season. I had such high hopes. It’s too bad when reality smacks you out of your dream.
This is how the Rams became a perennial fail team and Detroit. Not enough resources put into the O-line making your skill positions look worse than they are. I hope we can rebuild bette than Saint Louis and quicker.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 6:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
actually, we put more resources into our O-line than any team in our division.
We paid five starting O linemen over $12M this year. We expend plenty of resources for offensive linemen.
Two starters are injured. No NFL team has starting-quality OTs sitting on the bench waiting. You can’t blame the injuries on anyone.
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Oct 18, 2009 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The ROI on that investment must be a league worst, don't you think?
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes. injuries can do that.
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Oct 18, 2009 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So then
What is the excuse for the previous 3 years, during which Seattle consistently ranked around the bottom 5 in the NFL for adjusted line yards and adjusted sack rate?
I think some members of the O-line are making strides. Sims especially. Spencer too. We’ve suffered their growing pains. We might as well reap the rewards.
Locklear poses a bit of dilemma. He’s at least arguably injury prone. By the time he returns, he’ll have missed 5+ games in 3 of his last 4 seasons. That’s just simply too many for a Left Tackle.
Its way too early to judge Unger. However, even when he was first drafted I questioned if he had the size and strength to be a good NFL guard, and now I’m starting to think its unlikely he’ll surpass Spencer as a center either. At least not any time soon.
I like Ray Willis but I’d like him more if he was backing up a superior player.
I’m not sure I agree about the resources take. First, this division is notorious for crappy O-line play. Secondly, $12 million divided over 5 people is only 2.4 million per person, which is much lower than the league average. And finally, that low number is greatly influenced by rookie contracts that will expire in the next couple offseasons.
In terms of talent, the Seahawks have an oddball collection and only some of the players truly fit a zone scheme. If only to fill out a roster of 5 starters all designed for this system, it would be worth drafting another few lineman. Depth is needed also. Really, drafting at last another lineman or two is a non-argument, the argument is over how high a draft pick and for which role, starting or backup?
There are some decent pieces on this team, an overhaul is not needed. I do think a 1st round LT and maybe a developmental interior lineman, would help a lot.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually a lot more than $12M
which doesn’t include Ray Willis’ new contract or Max Ungers big rookie deal. I couldn’t find the 2009 numbers. But Jones and Lock each made $5M/year so anyone who understands managing a budget knows that Ruskell already has huge resources tied up in the O line.
Its not about the talent of our O linemen. Talent to good.
Its not about depth. Depth is good.
Its about injuries, which cannot be predicted and which eliminate talent and depth.
We played with a 4th-string OT who should not be on a football field on Sunday.
We played with a 3rd-string OG who is really a backup C.
They both failed miserably against one of the more intimidating D lines around.
You can replace the starting O linemen if you like, but anyone can get injured, including the new guys you want. The only way to fix this is to have five O linemen stay healthy and play together for a year. It can be the guys we have, lots of good O lines are no more talented than our guys. They need to get healthy.
Its not the GM’s fault, its not the coaches fault when guys are injured. What part of this is hard to understand?
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Oct 19, 2009 8:22 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
2 starters???
Try 3.
Unless Vallos was in your plans as a starter at LG.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Oct 18, 2009 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant Locklear and Sims
Calling it 3 is fair. I called it 2 because I consider Willis and Locklear our starting OTs now.
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Oct 18, 2009 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gotcha.
And understandable. I guess it’s time I moved out from the mid 2000’s and acknowledged the O line is changed and not going back…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Oct 18, 2009 7:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes...part of the problem is we had to give respect to Walt
Just like we had to show respect to Alexander. If Walt can’t come back healthy this year, he should retire or we should cut him. Yeah, I know, blasphemy. But we have to go into next year knowing where we’re at at the LT position.
Locklear is not a starting LT in this league. So we upgrade that position. Re-sign Spencer and look to upgrade the LG and depth in the draft. If Ruskell relies on Lock to be our starting LT, or whoever is GM, that will be bad news for us.
So I guess not enough resources isn’t necessarily true. We did have to show Walt his due respect. But next year business is business and we have to move on and get this LT position and our depth solidified. No more screwing around. The O-line must be made strong again.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
At the same time
It’s not all about the money. Walter Jones is probably one of the highest paid O-lineman in the league (Not sure but I’m guessing he is) but at his age he’s way way more likely to be injured than someone like Joe Staley, who isn’t paid that much. The fact that he has a big contract does not necessarily mean that he’s a good option to have as your LT at this point in his career.
by Brendan Scolari on Oct 18, 2009 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Having watching them for several years now
The first law of Seahawks football seems to be: “The likelihood of season-ending injury is directly proportional to the size of the player’s salary and is highest in the first season after that salary is signed.”
I don’t mean to jinx him or anything, but Housh should be very very careful. Franchise history is against him.
Obviously, the corollary is that to fix the injury problems we’ve been having, we need to sign more undrafted free agents for the league minimum salary. :-P
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How much of that went to Walter Jones
who has spent the last six months sitting around in sweatpants?
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
Next year's notable Ex-Seahawks:
Walter Jones, Patrick Kerney, Seneca Wallace, Jordan Babineaux, Kelly Jennings
by Wayward Llama on Oct 19, 2009 12:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do people keep pinning talks of the rebuilding process on the O-line?
Yes, the Seahawks need to rebuild the O-line, but it’s not as if the Seahawks became a perennial fail team after just this loss because of the O-line. Most teams without 3 of their original starters on the O-line would struggle. It’s not as if their regular starters just plain sucked.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Oct 18, 2009 6:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The thing is, we don't have any proof that the "regular starters" wouldn't have sucked
Maybe I didn’t understand what he was saying, but after reading Morgan’s reports on the o-line during training camp and the preseason, I didn’t get the feeling that the “starters” weren’t going to be a problem. Week in and week out, he was telling how one or the other offensive lineman had serious holes in his game.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our O-line guys are pretty weak
Sure, you can’t blame the injuries on the player.
But that doesn’t mean from a competitive you dont’ acknowledge them. You’re in the business to win games, not coddle three hundred pound men because their hurt.
Durability is a major issue for O-line players. I would not have a problem at all with Ruskell cutting Sims and upgrading over Sean Locklear if he can find more durable players. You gotta be an iron man in this league to play O-line, especially as young as some of these guys are. And if your team is losing because your O-line guys can’t stay healthy, time to find new ones.
To summarize what Chris Gray used to say, “You miss games on O-line and you lose your job if the guy that steps in outperforms you.” That’s how the O-line is. A high level of durability is expected of the O-line, in fact, it is required. And it doesn’t matter how the injury happens, bad luck, poor conditioning, whatever, stay healthy or be replaced. I think that should be every team’s philosophy that wants to compete.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That sucks
Looks like Tats was going to have a big year after returning from his hamstring injury. Huge loss. Go Heater!
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 6:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I am terribly vexed. At least the Sonics start soon...
Child please...
by Airborne Hawk Guy on Oct 18, 2009 8:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You mean bulldogs and huskies.
NBA is dead to me.
And I know, you were being ironical, jerry.
I use the same line when referring to how debacled we are myself quite frequently.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Oct 18, 2009 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Husky basketball is always fun. Bow down!
Child please...
by Airborne Hawk Guy on Oct 19, 2009 8:41 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
You guys saw the defense we ran out there today...
Yeah..pretty awful. Now imagine our defense without our main “leader” in 51. That is really sad/a bummer.
Kerney re-injury does not surprise me.
Jennings injury I do not care about. I think he sucks. We’re more thin now yes, but we can throw basically any 5’5" guy in there to run next to a body.
Straight up we just can’t compete against decent to good teams. Warner basically threw all day to anyone he wanted to.
Offense stunk.
Defense stunk.
Special Teams stunk.
Top 10 Pick again, and with how good Denver is doing, a late-ish First Rounder.
Bummer times.
by GriffinNW on Oct 18, 2009 8:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hard for any defense to do well when they're on the field for 2/3 of the game.
A Mariners fan in Seattle
by Coach Owens on Oct 18, 2009 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defense was fine
Normally the argument the defense couldn’t get themselves off the field holds water. But not this time. The defense got off the field. They made Zona work for their points giving up very few big plays. They stuffed the run. They even created a turnover.
Offense and special teams didn’t move the ball and put the defense on a short field multiple times with poor kick coverage and turnovers. I don’t blame the defense at all. I feel fortunate they only gave up 27 points to that high powered Arizona D considering they were on the field 42 minutes.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 8:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, they got off the field real quick on that first series today, didn't they?
Warner sliced and diced us. Whatever Mora and Bradley had planned, it didn’t work — or, if you insist, it didn’t start working until the game was already out of hand.
Bottom line, the Cardinals brought more talent to the game today — on the game and on the sidelines. We were outplayed and outcoached.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One drive for 7 points doesn't kill a game
Then when your offense and special teams gift them a short field, what do you expect?
It’s funny how much some people focus on one drive.
I’m as hard on this defense as anyone on this board. But I’m also realistic. The defense did not play badly or lose this game for us today. The Offense and spectial teams did.
The defense kept the ball in front of them. Sure, Warner and company drove on them as expected for an offense as good as theirs. But they held the points to 17 in the first half even with the turnovers on offense and total inability to move the ball. And they held them 10 points in the second half. And once againt, the offense couldn’t move the ball.
The defense was fine today. If they weren’t, I’d be all over them. But they held the Zona receivers in check for the most part. Held Boldin to 13 catches for 100 yards. Last year if Bolding had 13 catches, it would have been for 150 or more.
The Tampa 2 kept the ball in front of the defense and the defense swarm tackled to keep the YAC down. That is how the Tampa 2 zone is supposed to work. And it did.
If we build a solid offense, this defense is looking pretty solid. We’ll get wins with them.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the pass defense struggled pretty mightily in the first half
And you can’t really blame that on being tired as they should still be fresh at that point. Warner was carving the secondary up.
by Brendan Scolari on Oct 18, 2009 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Someone point me to the nearest cliff.
Time to find out if I can fly.
by Fear on Oct 18, 2009 9:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wait a sec
No no this is all wrong. It was “Loofah” that got injured, not Lofa.
-Brian Billick
by WABronco on Oct 18, 2009 9:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
How the hell do you blotch a name as simple as "Lofa"
He reminds me of senile old substitute teachers in high school who would pronounce every other name wrong.
by aerozeppelin on Oct 18, 2009 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For all who say the defense did fine
What about Cole, Redding, and Mebane? So far this season, aside from a few scattered plays by Mebane, I have definitely not seen a consistent inside pass rush. For all the arguing I’ve seen in forums on the O-line, there is a ton of money invested on the defensive line and I have yet to see Ruskell’s master plan come to fruition.
by kmedic on Oct 18, 2009 10:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We are lacking a dominant pass rusher
on the D-line. Still the defense did not lose this game today. They did not play badly as a unit. If they had played badly, this game would have been more like the Patriots versus Tennesse as bad as our offense and special teams played.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm talking INSIDE DT
in particular.
We have some good edge rushers in Jackson and Tapp (and Kerney when healthy), but our inside pass rush is near zero. Mebane is tough against the run, but I don’t perceive him as a great inside pass rush threat. Cole and Redding give us nothing.
by kmedic on Oct 18, 2009 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True. We have several good pass rushers, BUT
The only pass rusher we have that looks like he can be truly Dominating is Aaron Curry.
Kerney, Tapp, and Jackson are all good pass rushing ends (Kearney on the decline, the other two improving). Mebane is strong and talented inside, Cole is an average big DT.
I’ve watched and talked about our D line a lot this year, but I’m starting to think they have a ceiling above with they won’t rise unless they change some things. IF (and only IF) we could go get a true NT for the middle (Cole could perhaps backup at NT but not start) we should consider transforming to a 3-4 D next offseason. Reason being, Curry and Hill would be freed up to rush the passer, and Mebane could become a great DE in a 3-4. Redding also is a fine 3-4 DE and Jackson can probably add weight to play that position as well. Lofa and Hawthorne at ILB.
We have all the players we need for a strong 3-4 D, except for the NT. Curry, Hill, and Mebane playing in a 3-4 could allow then to be more disruptive on every play.
Is it worth trading two first round picks up to draft Suh? He has the frame to add weight and could help make our D line (either a 4-man line or a 3-man line) into one of the best.
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Oct 19, 2009 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure if you were connecting Suh to the 3-4
But I don’t think he can play NT in a 3-4 if that’s what your looking for, he’s not big enough.
by Brendan Scolari on Oct 19, 2009 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ton of money on the defensive line where?
Kerney, yes. He had two sacks today. The rest are on rookie deals (Tapp, Jackson, Mebane, Bryant), or a frugal 1year deal (Redding).
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
*Cole , but overpaid, sure.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who is next to be injured?
On the bright side, Denver didn’t win today.
by Wilder. on Oct 18, 2009 10:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Our current 1st round pick is 7th, 8th, or 9th.
6. Cleveland – needs QB? 50-50%
5. Detroit – does not need QB
4. Kansas City - does not need QB
3. Tampa Bay - does not need QB
2. Tennessee – needs QB
1. St. Louis – needs QB
I’m not liking this. Add in Buffalo and Oakland possibly (also 7th, 8th, or 9th), and those are two team not likely to go QB, but the Bills could. We either need to really start winning or play great, play competitively, and lose. Hmm…sounds like the Rams, eh?
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 10:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
But do you see TEN paying big bucks for a QB again?
by LantermanC on Oct 18, 2009 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you want a QB?
I do too, but it’s not my top priority. With our first pick I want a left tackle or a killer DT to play next to Mebane.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll go out on a limb and say Cleveland could use a new QB.
by waldo rojas on Oct 19, 2009 8:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oakland and Buffalo could too.
by Brendan Scolari on Oct 19, 2009 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
With Al still in charge, anything is possible
He could go either way and be crazy. Crazy to give up so much and then quit so early. Or crazy to stick with him.
But until I hear otherwise, I would consider both those teams to be more likely to be seeking a QB than not. Tennessee, might not be so quick to quit on Young. Something is wrong with that team. I don’t know what. A good QB would fix a lot, but I don’t feel they’re zeroed in on QB already.
by jacobstevens on Oct 19, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm taking OT this year
somewhere in the first with one of our picks. Unless there is an outstanding value pick on defense I’m all for ignoring it the first couple of rounds, the offense needs some attention.
by Hancock.Brett on Oct 18, 2009 11:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Goddammit, I can't stand any more injuries!!!
Between last year’s Seahawks, this year’s Mets, and now this year’s Seahawks, it’s getting frickin ridiculous. Why cant I just root for a team that stays healthy??
Check out my Mets blog: http://metsmosh.blogspot.com/
Part of the Shore Sports Report blog network, Fox Sports Radio 1310 New Jersey
by Steeeve on Oct 19, 2009 6:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sucks.
Well, there goes the season boys & girls. Hopefully the team will scratch out more than 4 wins so we can at least claim that there is improvement.
I have my doubts.
by mrcoffee1969 on Oct 19, 2009 7:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Seriously?
We’ve still got 10 games left, including matchups against Detroit, Tampa and St. Louis. (One win among the three.) This sucks, no question, but if you really don’t think that the team can win more than two of their remaining games even with Tru, Hill and others coming back after the bye week then I don’t know what to do other than shake my head.
by thebyron on Oct 19, 2009 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least 4 more!
Don’t forget the Titans at the end of the year!
by chrees on Oct 19, 2009 9:00 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
God loves everyone
but especially optimists.
by mrcoffee1969 on Oct 19, 2009 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Optimistic to think you guys can beat teams that are a combined
1-23?? Not really…
by Brendan Scolari on Oct 19, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think the team
can win more than two of their remaining games because the O-line is beyond horrible. Beyond. Horrible. Matt is a VERY good QB and a strong on the field leader but with his O-line employing it’s infamous “Ole” blocking scheme, he’s a sitting duck. Add to that that this team has not had a running game to speak of since Shawn Alexander was healthy and you are left with special teams and defense. Special teams? I think we saw enough yesterday to know better than to depend on them.
Between the O-line, NO running game and horrible special teams, this team will be LUCKY to win two more games this year. I say they will beat Tennesee and St. Louis. I’d bet a steak dinner on all that right here. No matter HOW good or healthy this defense gets, they do not and will not (this year) possess the talent to consistently win games on their own.
by mrcoffee1969 on Oct 19, 2009 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
These things aren't static, though
They’ll improve, I’m sure. Playoffs are now slim, but we’ll probably win 4-5 more. Dallas feels like this Arizona game turned out. But maybe we catch them sleeping.
by jacobstevens on Oct 19, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Losing Tats stinks but doesn't fundamentally alter our fortunes
Hawthorne is a quality backup. And even if you had to play Lance Laury a few snaps per game I doubt the D would fall apart. The real problem is what Lofa’s loss does to a) leadership — and by that I mean Lofa’s coordinator-like feel for pre-snap adjustments, b) pass coverage, especially deep middle, and c) the quality of the special teams.
The problem Seattle keeps running into, and it is really uncanny, is that we continue to experience injury stacking. Our injuries tend to wipe out all the depth at a particular position. Last year it was WR and the entire offensive line. This year its LT. In that sense, losing Frye hurts worse than losing Tats. Other than QB, most well-run teams can replace even a good defensive player with at least a replacement-level backup. But, as someone mentioned earlier, nobody has 5 starting caliber LTs hanging out just waiting for a chance to shine.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
by dcrockett17 on Oct 19, 2009 8:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe it's the relentless optimist in me...
But I only see two games remaining on our schedule where I would chalk up an L before the week even began (MIN and GB). Every other game is winnable if we can get healthy and get our shit together.
by chrees on Oct 19, 2009 8:58 AM PDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
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.
