Winning with Seneca Wallace Part 1: Adding a Weapon
by John Morgan on Nov 2, 2009 3:54 PM PST
Email
PrintCould Seattle win with Seneca Wallace starting at quarterback? Apart from Seneca himself, it's an attractive proposition. The Seahawks could approach the offseason with one vital need filled. Wallace turned 29 September 6. He is within a quarterback's prime. He has glaring weaknesses, but amazing athleticism and solid arm strength. Wallace cannot be the center of an offense, but can he be the trigger man on a successful offense? And more importantly: Can Seattle build that offense in one offseason?
The following series is meant as an exercise in team construction. I don't think Seattle should build around Wallace, but I do want to know if it can. I hope by doing so I can provide a novel look at another vital offseason for the Seahawks franchise. This is in line with my series on Jason Campbell. The idea is not to endorse a player (I'm not yet ready to endorse Campbell) but only to explore realistic options.
We know Wallace well enough to build an offense around him. It will be built around the run game. With respect to Justin Forsett, Seattle must add a superstar rusher. Free agency is good for stop gaps and retreads, but this offense needs game-breaking talent. That leaves Seattle looking to the draft to fill its need at back.
For purposes of argument, I will presuppose that this year's running back class, though deep and talented, does not produce a back that Seattle cannot pick. The best rated back, the extremely premature pick for first running back selected, is C.J. Spiller. Spiller is not an every down back and teams rarely select a complementary back in the top ten. We'll use Spiller as the template, but Seattle could select Jahvid Best, Joe McKnight, Noel Devine or a host of others and have the same basic back.
Seattle could attempt to import thunder to trail its lightning or just convert Julius Jones into a thunder back. Given his age and rounded skills, he's not far from the designation as is. He won't pound down defenses, but then, does any back?
Whoever is selected and however that rotation is filled out, if we want Wallace taking the snaps, we need a special back to build the rest of the offense around. Most likely, that means investing a first round pick. Seattle is likely to have two. One in the five to 15 range and the other in the 15 to 25 range.
So Seattle selects C.J. Spiller with the 12th overall pick. Spiller on board, Wallace can be babied. Spiller opens a whole new avenue of offense for Seattle. He opens the middle by drawing the safeties in, and Wallace will need to be able to hit his fullback and tight ends to survive. Drawing the safeties in is also vital to the play action game, and play action will be used extensively with Wallace. He upgrades the screen game immensely and that gives Wallace big-play potential without Wallace himself executing big plays. Spiller could be lined out wide or in the slot and draw out safeties and linebackers. Wallace could run a read option with Spiller, as he did with Jones when Seattle first went SeaCat on Sunday.
The offense has a home run threat, but it's foolish to spend big on a back and leave the line in disarray. The next step is to find offensive line talent to further improve the run game. Seattle has added a rusher that can take over, but it also needs Jones and Forsett to be able to rush effectively. Adding talent to the offensive line keeps the running game productive, the playbook open, Wallace out of passing downs and Wallace in the pocket when he must pass.
Winning with Seneca Wallace starts with adding a weapon but depends on adding a line. Seattle wants to run a clock control offense that can score, but that defers to the defense. It wants succesful drives and to own the clock. It wants to put the boot on its opponents when it's ahead and be able to stick with the run when it's behind. Spiller helps, but Seattle needs much more than a back to make Wallace an able starter.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And the Wallace/Spiller scenario takes place when?
Next year? With Matt still on the roster? Or in two years? with a 31 year old Seneca? Or further out?
What are some possible reasons Matt isn't the starter for us next year?
by Anticitizen_One on Nov 2, 2009 5:14 PM PST up reply actions
This is hypothetical
My major interest is exploring how to build an offense around limited quarterback talent. The major reason Seattle doesn’t build around Hasselbeck is Hasselbeck is likely nearing his end. You do not create a system around a player that is on the way out.
If this is Seneca's prime
Can we realistically expect him to get better? Are there any examples of backup QBs having success taking over the starting position at 30 years old? I like Seneca, but arguing that he’s “entering a QB’s prime” doesn’t really help him all that much. Sure, he probably wouldn’t decline significantly over the next 3-4 years, but you also can’t expect him to make any big jumps in performance, either.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
Steve Young
had been a back up for years before supplanting Montana as the starter, I don’t see Seneca as a rival to Young but he’s been on a bench for years so I think he is a younger 29 than most QB’s at his age because of a lack of wear and tear over the years.
As for a big jump in performance I don’t think that will happen but like John says you make the line and running back situation around him better and then the team can win with him.
I personally think Seneca could stop gap at QB for two to three years while we developed a talented young QB as the eventual starter not sure who that would be in this coming draft, but we could save a lot of money at that position by not taking a Colt McCoy or Sam Bradford with a top five pick, instead getting a second or third rounder.
by A'Seahawks_Warriors on Nov 2, 2009 5:07 PM PST up reply actions
The idea of Seneca as our starting Qb terrifies me
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
They forgot El-ahrairah, for what use had they for tricks and cunning, living in the enemy's warren and paying his price?
Well he did go for a bunch of games without throwing a pick last year.
And all the land was in ruin, and burnination had forsaken the countryside.
Yeah, he also started a few this year
and looked like a rookie. A very bad rookie.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
They forgot El-ahrairah, for what use had they for tricks and cunning, living in the enemy's warren and paying his price?
by Wayward Llama on Nov 2, 2009 5:12 PM PST up reply actions
I like this idea
Especially drafting Spiller. But I think I’d rather build around Campbell than Seneca.
For this to work, Spiller would have to (as you said) change defensive alignments
and Seneca would need time to take advantage of more room in the deep middle.
If Spiller’s everything you hope for, I’m still not sure that the pass blocking is decent enough (or Wallace’s decision-making is good enough) for the Hawks to take advantage. You’d get 8 in the box and Seattle v. Philadelphia from 2008 type games.
On the other hand, if Spiller takes longer to adjust to the league, then you’ve delayed remaking the line and delayed acquiring a franchise QB. These may be necessary evils if a longer-term plan is in place, but it’s a massive, massive risk. Is Spiller worth the risk?
There’s possible upside here, but I can’t imagine this would be the best return on investment of any of the ‘winning with Seneca’ options….
Well Spiller is just part of the plan.
I assume if Seattle adds Spiller it will also invest in its offensive line.
'Invest' in its line?
Insomuch as they can still spend later-round picks on the line, yeah, sure. But assuming that they get both an impact rusher and a better line from the draft seems like what you book learnin’ folk call a deus ex machina.
I await the rest of the plan, or other variants of this plan, or new iterations of similar plans. Carry on.
I'd be way more interested in something like Brown and Hudley in the first
and then get Noel Devine in the second. Although even with a big investment in the o-line Wallace would still create a fair amount of his own pressure. I can’t really see it working though, any scenario where the Seahawks are a playoff caliber team with Wallace at QB requires Wallace to improve beyond what he already is. He makes his o-line worse, he’s inaccurate and half the time his greatest asset, his atheleticism, is as much a liability as it is a weapon.
If there were to go anywhere but pure wishful thinking
I would imagine Seattle would need to try it first this year.
Otherwise, it is a gamble that is not bound to payoff in huge success. There are no current successes with which to support this move, you would alienate an entire fanbase, and your leash would be excessively short.
Interesting hypothesis with Spiller, however. I would rather we take Spiller and keep Hasselbeck. The same advantages for Wallace are in play for Hasselbeck, and I’d argue that Wallace is no younger or better positioned to be built around either.
It is what it is...
This sort of looks like:
The Vikings in last couple of years. They couldn’t win with AP and that great O-Line of theirs. I fear that if we were to have Spiller and say pick up some O-Line depth, we’d have that Viking Teams circa ‘06 and ’07. As much as I like Wallace, he’s too impatient in the pocket and doesn’t have the field vision Matt has. I would opt for Jason Campbell as an upgrade over Wallace, but not by much.
This
While I don’t dislike the idea of Seneca as a caretaker (and don’t think its unlikely), I don’t think you can win in this league without a franchise QB. Teams like the 49ers, the Vikings, the Redskins and the Bears have had trouble succeeding without a passing game.
I could see us winning with Seneca, but I could also see us turning into the Skins/Titans/49ers.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
Seneca Wallace + Win = error (does not compute)
Child please...
by Airborne Hawk Guy on Nov 2, 2009 7:21 PM PST reply actions
Spiller is electric
But the ~12th overall pick seems too rich for half of a running attack.
If Ruskell is really adopting an Alex Gibbs system run game, then its not absolutely necessary the team have a blue chip RB. Denver had Terrell Davis and Clinton Portis, but also got great results out of Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, and Tatum Bell. Heck, they even briefly had success with Ron Dayne.
I like the thoughts coming out in this thread- the Seahawks do need to increase the potency of their run game. My preference would be to draft talent that creates an above average run blocking OL (I like the suggestions of Charles Brown and Rodney Hudson), while finding a passable power back and a passable speed back with later picks or in later drafts. Finding a good speed back later could be hard, but good power-backs can sometimes be found very late. Brandon Jacobs and Marion Barber were selected in the 4th round, and Ryan Grant was a UDFA.
The offense isn’t a one-offseason fix. But the Seahawks do have the ammunition this offseason to help the running game take its first big step.
This line is one, maybe two pieces away from being really solid
I say get at least the one, and make a play for Berry if possible.
Of course, if Locker comes out, it has to be him.
ummm...
Isn’t this the game plan for every team in the NFL, regardless of who’s at QB?
Besides that, it all sounds great in theory, but you still have to rely on Seneca making a read and not staring down his receiver while doing so. He tends to freak out if he even smells a defensive player.
I’m not ready to throw Matt in the trash pile yet. He still has a few years in him and is the only guy on our offense right now showing any fire and grit.
Just my opinion
But Matt does not have a few years in him I think he’s the second best QB on this team behind this blocking. Sure if we had a great line like 05 Matt would be fine but I think he’s done ever being good in Seattle.
by A'Seahawks_Warriors on Nov 2, 2009 10:14 PM PST up reply actions
I obviously love the Spiller example used here. :)
I wonder, though, what this template would look like if we implemented a runner possibly similar to Jonathan Stewart…like Jonathan Dwyer. He’s more of a pounder that also has speed. I don’t know if he has that breakaway ability for the pro level. He is said to have good timed speed, esp. for his size (I’m looking at you: Speed Score).
Here are some guys from a friend’s current RB list (stevea). The point being, is that there may be some guys that can be procured in the 2nd round that could have a dynamic impact, too. Not to say that is the route I’d prefer, but should we miss on an elite back in the first, there could be gold beyond the first round. Ryan Matthews seems to be really rising up.
RB
1. (1) C.J. Spiller, Sr. Clemson (5’11", 198, 4.40)
2. (2) *Jahvid Best, Jr. California (5’10", 198, 4.42)
3. (3) *Jonathan Dwyer, Jr. Georgia Tech (5’11", 235, 4.48)
4. (4) *Evan Royster, Jr. Penn State (6’1", 213, 4.52)
5. (NR) *Ryan Matthews, Jr. Fresno State (5’11", 220, 4.49)
6. (7) Charles Scott, Sr. LSU (5’11", 235, 4.59)
7. (8) *Joe McKnight, Jr. USC (6’0", 190, 4.41)
8. (9) Toby Gerhart, Sr. Stanford (6’1", 235, 4.53)
9. (6) *DeMarco Murray, Jr. Oklahoma (6’0", 214, 4.47) Injured
10. (10) *Noel Devine, Jr. West Virginia (5’8", 176, 4.31)
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*.
People keep talking about the likes of
Campbell and Wallace as stop-gaps, but stop-gaps before what? With two first-round picks and a deep draft class now is the time that we have to invest in a QB to shape for the future. Matt has another year left in him, if we draft O-line and QB with the two 1st rounders, then we get immediate help in the trenches and time for a QB of the future to spend a year learning behind a consumate professional in Hass. There is generally a far less significant drop in talent from the 1st to 2nd/3rd rounds in RBs than there is in QBs. The likes Of Lesean McCoy or Glen Coffee certainly would have helped out our stagnant rushing game this year
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
