David Hawthorne: Pretty Boy-seeking Missile
Today I finish up with last weekend's game notes. I rewatched the second quarter last night and I had an absolute blast. Here are my notes and highlights.
We left off with Seattle pulling close on one of those Greg Knapp third-down deep passes that drive folks crazy. A block in the back penalty would pin Dallas at their eight to start the next drive. Things looked up. Seattle needed its defense to hold field position and get Matt Hasselbeck the ball back.
Miles Austin responded with a beautiful catch on the right sideline. He was double covered and reached out nearly out of bounds to grab the ball. It's worth noting that Austin looked every bit the real deal, exploding out of the blocks and running tight routes.
That got Dallas out of jail. On the next play, Dallas pulled out its left side and directed fullback Deon Anderson at right end Darryl Tapp. Tapp has to win this, but doesn't and that allows Felix Jones a clean release through the hole -- Flozell Adams and Kyle Kosier blocking into the second level. Adams destroyed Aaron Curry and Jones was picked his way towards the third level. Jordan Babineaux hit him before the marker but Jones twisted for the first. It could have been worse. It should have been worse.
Brandon Mebane pressured up the middle and Leroy Hill was in position and aware of the pass on a high floater that overshot Martellus Bennett.
Dallas again targeted the Seahawks right side and doubled to stampede through Colin Cole. Deon Grant was controlling the right end and made contact with Jones at the line, but Jones spun right through Grant's tackle and reminded me again why I've stumped so vehemently for him to be positioned at free safety. Ken Lucas made a saving tackle that forced third down after a gain of nine.
Marion Barber converted the first. He was the up back.
Seattle overloads the right and Curry comes free around right end forcing Tony Romo up into the pocket. Seattle struggled with getting edge rush but failing to establish interior pressure, but this time Red Bryant plows through the right guard and forces and incomplete pass. Babineaux can be seen covering Jason Witten streaking up the right hash mark. However Seattle did it, the Seahawks shut down Witten.
Well, mostly. Patrick Kerney was taken down and that tripped Bryant and eliminated much of Seattle's rush. Cory Redding got a parting shot, but the pass was accurate and Witten received for 18.
David Hawthorne is an excellent blitzer, a stand out blitzer from the mike position. Seattle dropped its right end and overloaded the offensive right, but it wasn't a team effort that felled Romo. The goal was to free Hawthorne. Curry and Redding attempted to engage and force the Cowboy interior offensive line left. That plan was for Hawthorne to rush unabated between right guard and right tackle. Instead, Marc Colombo was squatting in Hawthorne's rush lane and Heater had to power through the giant right tackle to sack Romo. He did. That is a big league sack and Heater a major addition to Seattle's pass rush.
Romo scrambled for ten to put Dallas back into a manageable third down. Nick Reed was pwned.
The drive concluded when Lawrence Jackson pressured Romo and forced an incomplete attempt to Patrick Crayton. The resulting missed field goal put Seattle in business at their 38. Grand opening. Grand closing.
0 recs |
25 comments
|
Comments
best part
David Hawthorne and Lawrence Jackson bringing pressure when starters couldn’t.
by Hancock.Brett on Nov 6, 2009 1:34 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps it is time to make then starters
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 6, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It is promising to have young players beginning to blossom.
Only about half the defense would I fight to keep. Those are two of them.
by Misfit74 on Nov 6, 2009 1:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I wouldn't mind Hawthorne being on the trade-block if there is interest around the league.
by Misfit74 on Nov 6, 2009 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah definitely
If he has a good season this year we could definitely put him on the trade block for a legit draft pick cuz we all know Tatupu’s gonna be the starter no matter what. Unless Seattle decides to put Hawthorne at outside linebacker but that’s another story.
by Seahawksfan23 on Nov 6, 2009 5:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Which brings up another question...
If Ruskell is so good at procuring linebacker talent, and he seems to be, why does he keep paying them tons of money? There are teams that LB is a fairly fungible position. The Dallas SB teams of the 90s seemed to always let their linebackers walk, simply to plug another one in.
by Misfit74 on Nov 6, 2009 7:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well you don't always want to change ur linebacker core every year
And I totally understand what your saying and the Dallas 90’s team did let a lot linebackers go and bring in more but I don’t think Seattle would want to have different starters at the linebacker position every year because we have a powerful group of linebackers and probably the strongest positions in our team.
by Seahawksfan23 on Nov 6, 2009 8:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Because Seattle didn't have this problem last year.
Ruskell showed some foresight by signing Hill to an eminently trade-able contract.
by John Morgan on Nov 6, 2009 10:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if heater keeps playing like this we end up getting a second rounder for him.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 2:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hawthorne is a keeper
Hill is an injury prone monster that may render a pick. 60M tied up in line backing with our weak DLine is appalling.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 6, 2009 3:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Funny how
since you’re not Fearless Frog, no one has a problem with that statement.
by jacobstevens on Nov 6, 2009 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
WHAT?!
That has to be sarcastic.
Hill has played in 58 out of 71 games and the most games he had missed in a single season prior to this one was 4.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 6, 2009 3:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lofa's feeling the heat
(via Sando)“Dave has taken that next step, and I think the only thing left for him is just experience. I’m not happy he’s getting it, because that means I’m on the shelf. But I’m very proud of the linebacker he has become. He’s made the transition from just being a big hitter to being a linebacker.”
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 6, 2009 3:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
A little ambiguity in the title
It could be read as saying that the Heater is a “boy-seeking missile” and “pretty”. I know we’ve all got a man-crush on Hawthorne now, but that might not be what you intended.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 6, 2009 3:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
"Pretty boy" modifies "seeking"
thus Pretty boy-seeking missile.
by John Morgan on Nov 6, 2009 3:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
There's nothing incorrect in the title
I just think there’s some giggle-inducing ambiguity.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 6, 2009 3:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't mind me
I am teaching myself grammar and never feel too sure about my decisions. It might have been better to write “pretty-boy-seeking”.
by John Morgan on Nov 6, 2009 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We have a grammarian out there that can give me an official answer?
Now I am thinking about it.
by John Morgan on Nov 6, 2009 3:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think whiskey chainsaw is the man for the job
and I think that the funny version of your title might require a comma between pretty and boy.
"Its not that I can't read and write, its just that I don't like to read and write."
-Charlie
by ninjasocks on Nov 6, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm ain't no grammarian: but...
Compound modifiers are often separated from their term with a hyphen, just the way you did it. Thus, in “pretty boy-seeking”, both the pretty and the boy refer to seeking. Whereas if you said “pretty, boy seeking” the pretty and boy seeking would both refer to Hawthorne.
But I may not never be right-unless its the other way or other words are soppused to go after. Kinky.
by John Edwards on Nov 6, 2009 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You are correct, sir!
As far as I know… but then, my typical grammar advice is, “just rewrite it until it sounds correct.”
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 6, 2009 6:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's mostly right, I believe.
You’d use “pretty, boy-seeking” (with hyphen) if you wanted to apply those two descriptive terms to Hawthorne. John’s title is grammatically correct.
by thebyron on Nov 7, 2009 3:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Whoa gettin a little off subject here guys....XD
Couple of Questions for John which are kinda off subject. What are some of your thoughts on Rank. And how do you think he’s going to fit with the offense. I know only time will tell, but I just wanted some early thoughts from “The Man”
A week ago, such an assertion would seem absurd. But as of Saturday evening, it's not ridiculous to now call Oregon the Pac-10's new frontrunner.
by NW_BRED on Nov 6, 2009 5:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 


















