Seattle Seahawks Agonizing in Victory; Win on Stafford's Five Interceptions
Seattle won. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't exciting and the Seahawks never looked like a playoff team, but halfway through its season, Seattle is a game away from last year's win total. These are the slow steps to rebuilding. Seattle started behind by 17, but gutted out a win against a team it could have stomped. It's not satisfying but it's something.
The offensive line is still disorganized and Seattle's run game is a liability. This line needs practice together. The organization needs to thoroughly scrutinize its line talent. Much of it may not return next year. I doubt Seattle re-signs Damion McIntosh. Ray Willis is cheap enough to stick at depth, but does not fit Greg Knapp's system. Sean Locklear will likely stick. Max Unger is a Seahawks. The rest of Seattle's linemen better pick it up in the final eight. Some, like Mansfield Wrotto, may not make it through the season.
It is possible that Tim Ruskell has been shy about drafting talent on offense because he didn't know what offense to draft talent for. Whatever the explanation, Seattle is not renovating, it's building a new offense. What it can salvage from this year's unit is like recycled mortar from the Kingdome.
The defense is built. Seattle will cash in when the pick is right. It needs a young athletic defensive end. It could use another disruptive defensive tackle, but should entertain re-signing Cory Redding. There's holes to patch. The talent must develop for it to be great. This defense is young and talented and capable of looking elite if paired with a great offense.
That might take a while. Seahawks fan must be brave, because the tables will be flipped soon enough. Matthew Stafford is a 21-year old rookie playing for a team that finished 0-16 last season. If he pulls it together someday, these trials will make his fans love him. Seattle will get its Stafford soon enough. Matt Hasselbeck played fierce and his effort helped lead Seattle back, but scraping for yards against a bad defense is not some miracle turnaround or rebirth for the Seahawks offense.
It took 51 attempts to get 329 yards. 17 passes were to his backs or fullbacks. Hasselbeck played like the aging game manager I think he now is. Seattle won around him, but mostly because of Stafford's five interceptions (worth 225 or 300 yards* depending on your interpretation). It didn't win because of him. Hasselbeck dinked and dunked against the 30th ranked pass defense. He stared at his wide receivers like there wasn't a throw he could make. Hasselbeck checked down like he was facing a gifted young secondary. He was facing Kevin Hobbs.
(*Corrected from 350)
Today wasn't fun but it was a win. Remaking this offense will be a struggle, but it can't be pushed back anymore. The defense is starting to click. The Seahawks are branching two directions. The team is getting better as a whole, but worse at critical positions. I won't remember Matt Hasselbeck leading the game with a pick or picking his way back on top, but I will remember Hawthorne's two and Josh Wilson sprinting down field for six.
Game Ball: Josh Wilson recorded his first tackle a yard before the first down marker. Hawthorne would follow with a tackle for no gain to force the field goal attempt. Jason Hanson missed. From there he was pretty quiet. He might be seen tackling his receiver where he stood like against Bryant Johnson in the second quarter, but he wasn't seen much.
Detroit is a bad passing offense and Kelly Jennings could disappear in the folds of their failure, but for Wilson, this was step up time against a corps of tall, powerful receivers. He wasn't leapt over or bullied out. When Megatron went high over him on a critical fourth quarter pass attempt, Wilson stuck in and disrupted the catch. Today was a training wheels step towards starting, but Wilson kept it level and finished off flying. The Seahawks need Pistol to turn his quiet day with an "!" into the beginning of a beautiful career at right corner.
0 recs |
112 comments
|
Comments
Yep
The most important word.
"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 8, 2009 5:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Heater. Wilson. Babs.
Game balls to all of them.
I cannot believe Kerney is our sack leader.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 5:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
SNF thread please.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 5:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
You need to stop hatin on Hasselbeck.
by John Morgan on Nov 8, 2009 5:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He scares me
But he had a good game today. He got rid of the ball in time and avoided pressure in a normal manner.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 5:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He played captain check down against a laughable secondary.
If he was 24 and not 34, I might call this a good game.
by John Morgan on Nov 8, 2009 5:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It was effective enough
He channeled his inner Seneca.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Great summary
Of Hass, he wouldn’t have gotten us back into to the game if we were playing anyone decent today.
I see a lot of fans on other boards over excited about his performance today we need to do something else at QB soon and build around that.
Campbell, Seneca or a pick but Matt’s at the end.
by A'Seahawks_Warriors on Nov 8, 2009 5:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hasselbeck's first pass was a no-doubter interception that was nearly a pick 6.
His next play (though no fault of his own) resulted in a lost fumble.
Seattle was down 14-0 before it had its third offensive snap. That same “behind the 8-ball” scenario happened just a few weeks prior against Arizona. Arizona is a better team and the Seahawks were in an unwinnable situation due to a black hole OL, but I can see how Knapp/Hasselbeck got very nervous of a repeat of the Arizona fiasco and called an extremely conservative gameplan to get Hasselbeck and the offense some positive momentum. Its not sexy, but it worked to the tune of 25 unanswered, and NFL OC’s aren’t privy to change things until they stop working.
I’m not arguing that today was a good game or a bright spot for the offense, but I do think that if the Seahawks had led 17-0 right off the bat instead of the other way around, you wouldn’t have seen 80 bajillion 4 yard passes Trailing by 17, even in the 2nd quarter, dictates a fairly ridiculous pass/run ratio to get back in the game, and with the created need to pass so much in an offense that often has not clicked, it makes sense that the team used such a “cheap” and unimpressive offensive strategy to get back in the game. To put it more succinctly, I think Hasselbeck’s decisions and gameplan that preceded them was as much a result of the game situation as Hasselbeck’s age and limitations if not moreso.
So, while I agree that Hasselbeck is no longer a true Franchise QB and anything that testifies to him needing a real successor is music to my ears, I don’t think we can really read too much into today’s performance as a reason for it. Now if Hasselbeck continues to throw 30 four yard passes for 5 games in a row, then he very well could be the next 34 year old Mark Brunell. But I wouldn’t judge that from 1 game in which he was down 17 points playing in an offense that has rarely clicked this season.
by kearly on Nov 8, 2009 6:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ah, there's that period that my browser magically deleted
…80 bajillion 4 yard passes [.] Trailing by 17, even in the 2nd quarter, dictates…
I even previewed looking for it, but could only find it after posting. : (
by kearly on Nov 8, 2009 6:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're right on.
In the paper today Hasselbeck said that Knapp told him after they were down 17-0 that Mora told him he wanted to change the game plan and throw the ball. I think a lot of these short little passes were designed plays to effectively replace the running game, more than just checkdown throws used as a last resort because he couldn’t find anyone down field.
by Mind of no mind on Nov 9, 2009 12:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
With that line
I was very happy with Matt’s performance.
by mrcoffee1969 on Nov 9, 2009 4:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I really like this article and agree with all of it
I kind of expected this kind of perspective from you, and I’m glad to see it. But I will say one thing about the implications of the game, and our passing day against the poor Lions.
They do know they’re bad, and Jim Schwartz knows what to do about it. They were staunchly cover 2 and quite exposed underneath. Checkdown passing against a bad defense does take the luster off the 76% performance, but it underscores how apt the strategic adjustment was. Since this was largely what Hasselbeck was called to do, I would only say he did his job very well. I know you’re not criticizing him for it, but I just wanted to point this out and offer him an exemption from getting docked for playing checkdown against such a poor defense.
by jacobstevens on Nov 9, 2009 10:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Forsett was great today
I want him to get his first touchdown soon. He’s always 2-3 yards short. Made some sick juke moves and finally had a good kick return.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 5:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
What does he have to do?
I’m glad that they cut Edge, but why did J-Force only get one carry? They cannot give him the ball enough. Hopefully they saw that he is dangerous in space today.
by supershane on Nov 8, 2009 6:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Knapp gave up on the running game
otherwise, Force might have gotten some carries. Jones didn’t get many either. It bordered on annoying what little faith Knapp showed in his running game, forcing Matt to make many unnecessary throws when runs were the smart call. We need Locklear back and Knapp needs to give the running game a chance to get going.
And I’d be happy if Force gets the call to start. But I’m ok with Jones as well.
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Nov 9, 2009 12:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Forsett AND Rankin
make for a “pick your poison” return team.
by mrcoffee1969 on Nov 9, 2009 4:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
John do you have any thoughts on Rankin?
Looked decent on the few kick returns he had.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 5:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He looked slow
I didn’t see much else.
by John Morgan on Nov 8, 2009 5:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I thought as well.
4.40 speed BS.
by redwolf75 on Nov 8, 2009 5:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He looked like a smart runner, though.
Unlike Burly who obviously thinks going backwards is going to help the team.
A Mariners fan in Seattle
by Coach Owens on Nov 8, 2009 5:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Slow is too strong of a word for me
But I do agree that he didn’t look 4.40 fast. Although Rankin is fairly large for a RB. 6’1" 205. Same height as Ryan Grant. The larger an object, the more deceptive the speed. But even factoring size, he didn’t look 4.4.
That said, I was very pleased with his performance today returning kicks. He looked good enough to stick for the rest of the season, and if he continues to excel, perhaps longer. God knows, the Seahawks need a return man that doesn’t suck and isn’t a starting WR/CB.
by kearly on Nov 8, 2009 6:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
John, in you guestimation,
how much longer will Grant be around? Do you think the future SS is already on the roster? Is he as much a liability back there as he appears to be? (Maybe it’s me, but missed tackles and late to the ball way to often)
I'm gonna go calm submissive on your ass.
by Dukeshire on Nov 8, 2009 5:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Remember that he's still basically playing out of position.
I thought he looked fine though.
A Mariners fan in Seattle
by Coach Owens on Nov 8, 2009 5:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
His pass-rush skills are depressing. he just plays patty cake with the other team.
"Superhero like even"
by censor1979 on Nov 9, 2009 5:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How important is pass-rush for a SS?
How many teams blitz the S on a regular basis, outside of the Steelers and the Cards?
"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 9, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't the Eagles blitz everybody at some point?
If we count them, we’re up to 3 teams. That’s slightly less than 10% of the teams.
"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 9, 2009 10:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jets, GB, Ravens
all blitz the SS quite a bit.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 12:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So that's five 3-4 teams and one 4-3 team
We’re still a long ways from saying that its critical for a SS to be able to blitz, especially in a 4-3 cover-2 defense.
"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 9, 2009 2:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What? He does Blitz and he looks pathetic doing so.
It is critical to have a desire to make plays, which he lacks when blitzing the quarterback. I’m just saying, don’t use him as a pass rusher, which they do.
"Superhero like even"
by censor1979 on Nov 11, 2009 6:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair point
But I do think it’s important to blitz the SS every now and then, if just to mix it up. You never know, we could have a Bernard Pollard vs Tom Brady situation
by rex92 on Nov 9, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This win was not worth it
We are not a good team. We need a franchise QB. We need to lose games like the Lions lost today. We are a team that has no identity. Sad.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 8, 2009 6:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I am rewatching the game
Seattle regressed. What a sad state to be in. An aged offense with an up and coming offense. Say hello to 1992.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 8, 2009 6:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Err, Aged defense with aged offense
Detroit is growing. Seattle is regressing. Ignore it if you must.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 8, 2009 6:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah our defense is ancient
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 7:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Reed, Mebane, Hill, Tapp, Hawthorne, Wilson...
OLD!
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 7:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How many teams
get down by as many as 17 points to ANY NFL team and come back to win by a pretty convincing score? Not many. I am among the best at talking down my Seahawks but they done good today and sometimes it pays to be a good winner.
by mrcoffee1969 on Nov 9, 2009 4:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's not a convincing score
When you get an INT for a TD to seal what was still a close game.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 9, 2009 7:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Lions committed suicide
Seahawks didn’t deserve to win by 12, but I’m glad they started balling in the second half
by rex92 on Nov 9, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think not losing to the Lions is always worth it.
by stupidquestions on Nov 8, 2009 6:50 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
This makes the most sense of any comment I've read the past two days.
Rec’d. :D
by Misfit74 on Nov 9, 2009 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
We’re already a joke to the rest of the country. Giving the Lions their first road win in over two years would make it ten times worse.
I actually bought a Betancourt t-shirt.
by Hopefulmsfan on Nov 9, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont want to get into a fight over this comment.... but this is absolute JUNK.
Losing games (intentionally?) is never worth a draft pick. Winning is about attitude and chemistry…. NOT drafting blue chip athletes.
Ever wonder why some teams continually draft high year after year, and never get out of the rut they are in? While other teams constantly draft 20-32 and seem to turn everything they touch into gold (Pitt)? It’s attitude. It’s belief.
To imply…. well no…. to STATE that you want Seattle to develop losing habits in exchange for a higher draft pick is what turns franchises into the clippers.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 8, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I pre-apologize if this comes off harsh... but I just cannot accept this thought process.
By this methodology…. anything short of a SB championship would mean we would be better served by losing games. Sorry, but no!
Adversity will never go away. You fight and you overcome.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 8, 2009 11:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
While I agree that intentionally losing is not desirable
winning games in any sport in any league revolves around talent. Attitude and chemistry are byproducts of winning. Teams with good talent win, and teams that win are perceived to have all the “intangibles.”
Right now you want to see the Seahawks play to win so the coaching staff and front office can evaluate the talent that is currently on the roster and properly determine what talent needs to be brought onto the roster in the offseason.
by BrianL on Nov 8, 2009 11:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What he just said....
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 9, 2009 12:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you two are both right.
There are true elements to both sides of the argument.
by redwolf75 on Nov 9, 2009 5:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Matt Hasselbeck is good.
"Superhero like even"
by censor1979 on Nov 11, 2009 6:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Great game.
Hawthorne continues to impress and Babineaux has surely let fans forget Brian Russell. Queestion though John. I was listening to Seahawks radio and Steve Raible was talking about how we need to get both Hawthorne and Tatupu on the field playing next year and could we potentially move to a 3-4 scheme? I’m not saying I want it to happen but it seems like the only way we could get both of those guys on the field playing.
by Seahawksfan23 on Nov 8, 2009 7:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Apparently a lot of our defenders are mismatched in a 3-4.
by redwolf75 on Nov 8, 2009 8:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not so sure
I think we’d be ok at LB (though those are easier positions to fill). I think the big question is whether we’d be able to put together a 3-4 DL. We play a fair amount of 3-3 front, but mostly in obvious passing situations.
"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 8, 2009 9:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I was thinking the same
But we could have Colin Cole at NT, Mebane and Redding at tackle.
by Seahawksfan23 on Nov 9, 2009 7:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Heavens no!
I’m not even convinced Cole is starter material. The man is as slow as Darren Sproles is short.
And all the land was in ruin, and burnination had forsaken the countryside.
by Cheddar28 on Nov 9, 2009 7:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the Heater is what we see
then it might be beneficial for the Hawks to use Tatupu as draft day trade bait. We could get a late 1st rounder or early 2nd rounder for him. Tatupu is falling off anyway. I would much rather have another 1st round pick than have too many talented LB’s on this squad.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 8:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or cut Hill.
And move Hawthorne outside.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 9, 2009 8:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Could do that but....
I thin the FO should be looking for more ways to stock up on draft picks so we could fill the much needed holes.
We NEED to draft a DT, OL, and then a QB all in the first and then draft a RB in the second.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 9:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mebane was a 3rd-round pick
"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 9, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair we can't count on another Mebane like steal in the 3rd.
by redwolf75 on Nov 9, 2009 5:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We can't.
The Seahawks do not have a 3rd round draft pick in 2010.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Nov 9, 2009 10:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How do we know Heater can play outside?
by Misfit74 on Nov 9, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Its easier to transition to the outside then it is to the inside.
Hill was a MLB is college. Plus having Hawthorne on the outside would let use his excellent blitzing ability more often.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 9, 2009 10:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather see Heater outside.
His lack of intangibles (when compared to Tatupu) and coverage skills aren’t as much of a problem at OLB.
by redwolf75 on Nov 9, 2009 5:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cut Hill?
He’s gotta be worth something in trade value.
by thebyron on Nov 9, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hill won't be worth much unless he can stay healthy for an entire season.
Your trade value get hit when your injured a lot.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's why we have to hope he can last the rest of this season healthy.
And show the other 31 teams how good he is. Any draft pick is better than cutting him if we can get it.
I actually bought a Betancourt t-shirt.
by Hopefulmsfan on Nov 9, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
While Hawthorne has put up more impressive stats
I get the feeling that Tats makes the guys around him better.
"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 9, 2009 10:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i think that's Curry doing that.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 12:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Do we have to have the "switch to 3-4 defense" every year?
Never going to happen unless we bring in coaches that come from that background. Also, with a 3-4 you need a monster pass rush linebacker, of which none of our guys fit, maybe a DETapp, but that just means we’re still only using 3 of our current linebackers.
The zone blitz is as close as we’re going to get.
by B.B.Finnegan on Nov 8, 2009 8:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone who wants to switch to a 3-4 should look at how the Packers are struggling.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 9, 2009 8:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
see my post about a hybrid 4-3/3-4 as a transition.
on http://www.fieldgulls.com/2009/11/6/1119776/wild-speculation by Ninjasocks
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 9:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or the Cards or the Niners in recent years
"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 9, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You just made me realise something
Is Babs playing well at FS or just playing well compared to Brian Russell?
by rex92 on Nov 9, 2009 11:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lately he's been looking like a legit NFL safety.
There’s been some adjustment time needed, but it’s looking like it might just pay off with Babs.
by BrianL on Nov 9, 2009 1:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Love the Hawks...but
I was at the game today and was saddened by the reality that the old spirit in the stands was just not there. The Hawks beat a dreadful team and were painful to watch. Many of our past stars have grown old and are on the way out. David Ruskell has not planned for the reality of attrition and aging and we are now in a situation where our downside is much greater than our upside. With the game still on the line—at least 15,000 seats or more were empty. The twelth man is losing his strength and patience. Its going to be a long few years until we can replace the aged with a team that is young enough and strong enough to compete
by Professor Dan on Nov 8, 2009 8:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
David Ruskell. Yep.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 8, 2009 8:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody wants to hear your complaining
You should figure out who plays runs the team and takes the field on Sundays before you start claiming the end is near.
"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 8, 2009 10:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope Tim fires this David Ruskell Character soon!!!
He’s killing us.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 8, 2009 11:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ah the days when we were noobs
Don’t be too hard on the prof. He was busy thinking about quantum physics when he wrote that.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 8:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know. It was a home game against the Lions, and we didn't win convincingly, but with some bad luck
we were spotted the Lions 17 points and then our defense pretty much dominated while our offense did pretty good if you forget the fact that we had to settle for FGs too often. I don’t want to read too much into any one game though. Jacksonville and St. Louis obviously aren’t indicative of how awesome we are. But neither are some of these other games. Even the Eagles lose to the Raiders. The fricking RAIDERS.
by LantermanC on Nov 8, 2009 9:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
An encouraging win, but ultimately
The only thing this game proved is that we’re not as bad as the Lions.
The defense, without question, kept this team in the game. If they didn’t have to defend two short fields moments after a nine-minute opening drive, this very well could’ve been a blowout.
Red Zone offense is quite worrisome – six trips and only two TDs. Neither of which came from further out than 3 yards.
Mare and Ryan must have switched bodies today. All three of Ryan’s punts ended up inside the 20, including the punt to the Detroit 5 in the game-deciding drive. Meanwhile, Mare struggled to reach the end zone, and the coverage unit did him no favors.
We need to find a replacement for Hasselbeck sooner rather than later. Apparently he injured his shoulder making the tackle on his interception during the first play. I have a bad feeling that one more bad hit like the one he suffered in Week 2 might end his career.
A win at Arizona next week puts this team one game back in the division. I’d like to think that a gritty, come from behind victory like today’s will give this team some momentum, more so than a 41-point bludgeoning of an underachieving Jacksonville team that was missing its biggest playmaker. At the very least, we’re tied for second in the division, and there are second-place teams that are further behind their division leader than we are (GB, CHI, ATL, HOU).
by Hmph on Nov 8, 2009 9:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We need to find a replacement for Hasselbeck sooner rather than later.
“Apparently he injured his shoulder making the tackle on his interception during the first play”
Yes, He looked just horrible the rest of the game.*
*This is a sarcasm tag.
by mrcoffee1969 on Nov 9, 2009 4:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Never said he looked horrible.
What I’m saying is that we have an aging quarterback that seems to get hurt at the drop of a hat. He will likely never play a full season the rest of his career, and the older he gets, the more fragile he’ll become. Knowing that Seneca is almost certainly not the answer, we have to plan for the rapidly inevitable.
by Hmph on Nov 9, 2009 8:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hasselbeck hurt his shoulder on the first play so the short pass fixation has a rationale behind it. Of course, the fact that he hurt his shoulder on the first play of the game reinforcest he point that Dude’s Getting Old, soooo
by kow on Nov 8, 2009 10:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Please use the subject line.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 9, 2009 8:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just watched this game on Game Pass (it's my ONLY option in Thailand)
I didn’t see anything agonizing after the first 2 offensive snaps for Seattle. Down 17-0 before they even really took the field on offense was a large hole to dig out of, but what I saw after that initial shock was….
-A Seattle Defense that largely dominated another lower echelon team.
-An offense that didn’t hang it’s head and roll over.
-I saw guys that gave up on plays (as John documented last week), do an about face, and finish off guys with tenacity this week. I’d have to go back and look at the time, down and distance, but the (burelson screen?) I saw TJ get nasty and drive block his man into the turf after the initial contact.
I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I was left fairly pleased with how they came back and won this game (albeit against Stafford’s worst game as a pro yet). The defense again looked pretty dang impressive in smashing yet another bottom feeder.
Question John (well anybody I suppose): What do you think it means when a team is capable of smashing bad teams regularly, and getting smashed by good teams regularly? I can understand beating bad teams, and losing to good ones…. but why the massive disparity in effort and margin of victory in doing so?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 8, 2009 10:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'd suspect it means they are an average team.
I would point out that when we have lost, it has been games that could have been close or were close but certain events happened that allowed the game to spiral out of control. Good teams take advantage of those events or can withstand them, and our good opponents did exactly that (and we could not). And we did the exact same thing to bad opponents. Not sure if this is too vague or not but it’s late and I need sleep.
by Fear on Nov 9, 2009 12:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know where your comments are coming from.... but
In average teams you’ll see the OCCASIONAL blowout loss, or the occasional blowout win… but with this Seahawks team, it appears they beat the bejesus out of bad teams and get thoroughly ripped by good teams with regularity.
My perception may not represent reality, and there are far more variables to it than I have presented, but it is interesting to me nonetheless.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Nov 9, 2009 12:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This year there's a wider disparity across the board.
What I mean is that the bad teams are particularly bad and the good teams have been particularly good.
And all the land was in ruin, and burnination had forsaken the countryside.
by Cheddar28 on Nov 9, 2009 7:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
this season on a whole has been unorthadox
to say the least. but beating two crappy teams by shutout victories and squeaking by the worst team in the NFL are not notable when you get beat by more than 20 point two weeks in a row.
We need to trim a lot of fat from this defense and offense. Call the butcher because this is gonna take a seasoned professional to handle this trimming.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 8:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree with this analysis of Hasselbeck's game.
John talks about the low yard-per-attempt numbers and all the passing to the backs as some kind of sign that Hasselbeck is an “aging game manager”. I remember him saying at one point during the game in the game thread that he thought Matt didn’t trust his receivers.
This could be true. But I think, today in particular, circumstances forced much of this situation, not some kind of distrust in the WR’s.
The game was 17-0 very early. Not only did it force Knapp to move to more passing in an attempt to catch up, it allowed Detroit to go into a soft shell defense so as to keep everything underneath. I can’t prove this entirely, but it sure looked to me like Detroit was dropping quite a few DB’s VERY deep and allowing a lot of short stuff up to ten yards from the LOS.
This means, quite frequently, that Matt (especially if he doesn’t have a ton of time) has to check down. There were a couple of longer throws, at least one of which came on a 3rd and two or so, meaning that Detroit was probably playing up tight (it was a pump and go route, too, so we even KNEW that they’d be biting short).
Another long pass didn’t count as one because we got an iffy PI call on the DB.
Now, there may be evidence that Matt doesn’t trust particular receivers. But I don’t know why this would be particularly true NOW, especially given that I think this batch of WR’s and Carlson is probably just as good if not more reliable than any we’ve had in a long time. Remember the drop years? KDrop? Now THEN I would expect Matt to be going WTF I’m not throwing to you.
by djafrot on Nov 9, 2009 1:02 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
It took 51 attempts to get 329 yards. 17 passes were to his backs or fullbacks. Hasselbeck played like the aging game manager I think he now is.
When you say “aging game manager”, I’m assuming that’s euphemism for “you think he can’t throw the deep ball anymore”.
Dan Marino in his prime- with his inhumanly quick release- could have that O-line protecting him..and even HE’D have to resort to that kind of chucking and ducking.
He’s not getting the TIME to throw 40-yard darts downfield. It’s not that he’s incapable of it.
by ModBombThrower on Nov 9, 2009 1:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Hasselbeck has just about never been good with the deep ball.
Even when he was healthy.
Fire Bruce DeHaven.
by SSreporters on Nov 9, 2009 7:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yesterday he was.
You won’t see it on highlight reels but he lobbed a great pass up to Housh in the endzone (can’t remember when in the game…) and Housh was just well defended and couldn’t latch on. Add in his deep ball to Burleson on 3rd and 4 and suddenly his deep ball isn’t so depressing.
And all the land was in ruin, and burnination had forsaken the countryside.
by Cheddar28 on Nov 9, 2009 7:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Please use the subject line.
abender20 hates freedom.
by Scruffy Lefty on Nov 9, 2009 10:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Finally watched the game
Was finally able to watch the game and I think it was less “ugly” than some make it out to be. Remove the bad early start that put us down 17-0 and our defense gave up 3 points and our offense marched for 32 in 3 quarters. Stafford definitely helped by pulling a Vinny Testeverde by making more completions to us than his receivers but Kelly Jennings doesn’t make the two interceptions Hawthorne did (snark). So I say defense gets a B. They didn’t get off the field a number of times when they should have, but I place a lot of that at Kerney’s feet who really doesn’t look like much of a threat anymore (his caused fumbled was a oops I dropped the ball).
On Offense – Hass had horrible protection and his passing lanes were obscured on numerous occasions. If the dink and dunk is advancing the ball why stop dinking and dunking to gamble by throwing a long ball that wastes a down that could have been a forsett run? they couldn’t stop the short pass underneath or the screen very well at all. Tsun Tzu says go after your opponents weakness and exploit it while the opportunity is there. Not to mention the short plays have the added benefit of running the clock down like a run play would, something we used to suck at and I seem to remember allowed many a teams to come back or stay in the game despite the number of points we put up. Hass knew he couldn’t toss anymore INT’s and knew we could roll over them in the short game, and we did. Now if he needs to stretch the field and does the same thing to opposite effect, shame on him. I just don’t see the shame in an effective clock burning comeback.
One last thing…everyone stop with the just run Forsett instead of JJ gambit. What makes forsett good is that he is a good change of pace guy. Put him in his starting role and you no longer have that flexibility since he’ll just be another mediocre rush first RB. He needs JJ or someone else to be the effective player he is.
by illwillbli on Nov 9, 2009 7:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
The offense didn't score 32
The defense scored in the last minute of the game to put us up 32-20.
Lets get Schmitt Faced!
by Pessimistic Optimist on Nov 9, 2009 10:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
The offense only scored 25 points while playing from behind a 17-point deficit. Total losers.
"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 9, 2009 10:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm assuming you replied to the wrong person
I was correcting him. He said the offense scored 32 which it didn’t.
Lets get Schmitt Faced!
by Pessimistic Optimist on Nov 9, 2009 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
but still, 25 isn’t the end of the world either.
by illwillbli on Nov 9, 2009 4:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Lions were blitzing quite a bit so the initial rush had to be subdued with check downs.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 9, 2009 8:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm extremely happy to have worn my neon green Josh Wilson jersey to the game yesterday.
It’s 1-0 at Qwest!
by BrettJMiller on Nov 9, 2009 10:53 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Went to my first regular season game Sunday.
I’m now 1-0 in regular season games, and 2-0 in all games. Clearly, this means you guys should all buy me season tickets and the Seahawks will never lose again!
by Fear on Nov 9, 2009 11:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting take.
What I saw was a team that was once again was not prepared to start a game (I’ve seen this 6 of the 8 games), a defense that still gives up way to many 3rd downs and big plays, and a offense that has an O-line that is below average and a running game that SUCKS!
The good things I saw was a QB that didn’t freak out and led the team on some nice drives and let his playmakers make plays with the ball in their hands. Also I saw DB’s that were making plays on a QB that is still young, but alot better than the 5 picks he threw, so you really need to give the DB’s some credit. I also saw a guy named David Hawthorne, who is a future “full time” starter if he finishes the season out like he has started this year (it will be hard to keep him off the field next year).
A few things I would love to see over the next few weeks (outside of wins) is a O-line that stays healthy and starts to gel, so the coaches can really see what they have for next year. A defensive front four that puts SOME PRESSURE on the QB (starting this week), they just aren’t getting it done. Third could we please see more of Forsett, the guy just make plays (sometimes fumbles) when he gets the ball, just split 50/50 with Jones. Fourth give Matt some time, he has to dink and dunk when he has 2-3 seconds to pass, show me someone who gets 3-4 seconds I will show you a guy that gets some 20-30 yard gains once and a while. Lastly (but not last), please get he team prepared to START a game. The calls look bad a times from the coaches, and the players look lost when they see something new. Make adjustments during the game, let Deon and David change calls when they see the need to, and alow Matt to run his game, I worked for Matt this week, what about next?
This team is better than 3-5 and win on the road against a very good Cards team this week would be huge. If they win by 1 or 20 I don’t care, they just need to put 60 minutes together this week. It will start today (Monday) and end with a good gameplan and the players and coaches showing up on Sunday.
by JustinWF on Nov 9, 2009 12:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I thought it was gonna be a hat trick!
Man when i saw that ball floating ever so gently over the middle of the field for the umpteenth time yesterday. I thought for sure when Heater fully extended to get a paw on that ball it was gonna be his third of the day. But hey he still affected the pass to cause an incomplete..
My honorable mention this week has to go to Josh Wilson. And well the whole Seattle secondary i know it was the 22 ranked detroit pass offense with a rookie Quarterback and yada yada. But to stay intact and only allow 3 points in 45 minutes after allowing 17 in the first 15 i know turnovers and good field postion for detroit helped with that… To face what seemed like an early blowout loss at home. To completely turning the momentum for your offense to make plays. Showed me the defense is coming along just fine.
"The Seahawks are old but they are healthy. The Seahawks are young but they are desperate. Let's go kick the Cards in the mouth" - John Morgan
by NW_BRED on Nov 9, 2009 2:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 


















