The Road Back, Part 5: The Road Back
Let me preface this by saying that Seattle does not have a realistic chance of contending in 2010. If the purpose of playing Red Bryant at end is to reclaim a failed prospect and wring value wherever possible, that is a defensible decision. However, though Seattle lacks a realistic shot at contending in 2010, that does not mean Pete Carroll is coaching like 2010 is a rebuilding year, nor does it mean the Seahawks organization can justify starting anything but the best team possible to begin the season. If that lede alone angers you, frustrates or saddens you, you will not like the rest of this post.
Seattle did not have a great defense last year, but it was not as bad as it sometimes appeared. Losing Marcus Trufant hurt, and returning an injured Trufant to be burned weekly, hurt more. The entire secondary was a mess and hiring Pete Carroll is supposed to help that. Injury struck the linebackers again. The line was good at defending the run but couldn't create pass rush. That was the hardest fact to accept, because though Seattle lacked the talent to field a great pass-rushing defense, it had the talent to field a better pass-rushing defense than it did.
Jargon and lingo and scheme specifics and coach-speak obscure basic truths about defense in the National Football League. If we simplify for a second, think of only two divisions of a pass defense, the portion defending the receivers and the portion rushing the passer, we can see good pass defense is about creating time for the pass rushers by keeping the receivers covered and minimizing time for the offense by rushing the quarterback. That's it. There are infinite permutations that can be attempted to this end, but that is it, in black and white, that is the goal.
Seattle will rush four players on most downs and those four players will most often be Chris Clemons, Brandon Mebane, Colin Cole and Red Bryant. It doesn't matter if Clemons stands or squats in the four-point. It doesn't matter if Bryant is at end or tackle. When it's time to rush the passer, those four players will be entrusted to do so and if they can't, Seattle's pass defense will fail.
And they probably can't.
....
Field Gulls readership has grown about 300% each year since it was created. The single largest percentage growth was prior to the 2008 season. There was real reason for hope. Though old, Walter Jones and Matt Hasselbeck were returning from successful seasons. Patrick Kerney, Lofa Tatupu, Brandon Mebane, Josh Wilson, Leroy Hill..etc. There was talent and recent success. There was reason for hope and hope, only short of actual success, is the best tool for adding readers.
It wasn't false hope but it failed. A once-in-a-decade wave of injuries tore through the Seahawks and ended some careers. The team changed dramatically and 2009 didn't inspire nearly the same promise. Likewise, there was not a comparable jump in readership. We did not know what 2009 would produce but we knew it was very unlikely to produce a contender.
Since 2008, three months have been the most popular at Field Gulls: April, August and September. For the last two seasons, despite the season being in swing, November and December have suffered falling readership. There are different degrees of fair-weather fans and we all lose a bit of interest when the playoffs are unreachable and we all gain a bit of interest when a team plays well. Even in a micro sense, readership improves after a win, especially a big win, and drops after a loss, especially a bad loss. April is all about hope. It's all about the draft. August is all about hope. Everyone is performing well, everyone is taking to the scheme and every team starts on equal footing. The worst September feasible can not entirely kill hope for the season. It isn't usually until October that a team falls out of the chase.
And so you see, there isn't much incentive for me to deliver bad news. People don't want it, don't read it, don't tweet it, don't like me for writing it and stop reading when it piles up. From a professional standpoint, it is bad for the site. From a happiness standpoint, it is stressful. From a fan standpoint, it is dreary and discouraging. Sports fans want good news. Many even most sports fans struggle to enjoy their team when it is losing. Sports fans want to read that their team can make some noise every season. And because the NFL is particularly unpredictable, that message is particularly resonant among football fans.
It is sort of like Pascal's wager. If I started every season arguing the Seahawks couldn't win, people wouldn't like it, the "best" outcome is that the Seahawks do not win, and at most I have validated my position of bearer of bad news. If I started every season arguing the Seahawks could contend, people would like it, the "worst" outcome is that the Seahawks do not contend, but if they do, and if it seemed particularly unlikely they would have, then I am both fan and oracle and, most importantly, bearer of good news. So, my most practical and most successful strategy is to be guardedly optimistic every season. I sell a popular message before the season arrives, I cover my ass if things fall apart and I cash in if things break right.
This is the nature of new media. People can control where their news and opinions come from and insulate themselves with opinions that support their own, that reinforce their hopes and strike down their doubts. The most powerful media source now covering the Seattle Seahawks is the Seattle Seahawks, and there is never any lack of optimism about a company regarding its product. There is a never ending source of good news to be found at Seahawks.com, and when all is said and done, Seahawks.com will always outdraw Field Gulls 100 to 1.
....
Seattle probably can not contend this year. A big part of that is they lack the talent to consistently rush the passer. There is a cynical and opportunistic spin that uses jargon and lingo and coach-speak and scheme specifics to obscure this basic fact. There is a cynical and opportunistic spin that uses sloganeering and shaky statistics and rumor mongering and appeals to emotion to sell the lie of contention, and for obvious reasons. Success benefits everyone: Carroll, Schneider, the Seahawks proper, the fans, the media, ownership and the sponsors. It certainly would benefit me. I have a book I am attempting to sell and a surprise run would reignite the fan base and surely boost sales. Before the project got off the ground, before I signed or was even contacted, my publisher weighed whether to endeavor a book about a losing team, in the midst of losing, and nearly pulled the plug because losing is bad for sales. I know this because he told me. I know this because I asked him. Nothing I can write can help the popularity of Field Gulls or the sales of my book like a surprise playoff run.
But it's probably not going to happen. If you wanted to create a simple projection system, something very rough but no more or less likely to be accurate than your average expert or advanced metric, you could start at 8-8 and move up or down depending on two players' performances: the quarterback and the top pass rusher. Those are the two most coveted and essential players on each side of the ball, and great teams, almost without fail, have talent at quarterback and end or linebacker. In a lot of ways, I don't even mean essentially the quarterback and top pass rusher, but what those two positions represent: pass offense and pass defense.
Seattle should improve its pass offense. It added a supremely talented left tackle. It added Golden Tate and Mike Williams.
Seattle might improve its pass defense. It added a talented safety. It added a talented corner, depending on health. Trufant returns, and the difference between healthy Trufant and injured Trufant is striking.
Matt Hasselbeck and Chris Clemons are not a playoff pairing. One can hope but one can not meaningfully support Hasselbeck and Clemons leading or representing a top passing offense and a top passing defense. Rebound and/or breakthrough is not unthinkable, but it also is unlikely. It does not matter what the defense is called, what the coaching motto is, or how successful seeming the off-season, a team needs talent to win, and Hasselbeck and Clemons are just not likely to be that talent.
The last leg of the journey on the road back is the road back, met with patience. I don't know if Pete Carroll is a great coach. I know some will pillory me for writing this, but I do not assume any more of Carroll than I did of Mora this time last year. Do I care that Carroll's Trojans cheated? Not a whole lot. Do I think it is telling that even minor criticism of Carroll's connection with the scandal was met with angry and outspoken rebuttal? Only so much that it reveals how much fans need winning and how hostile they are to anything that threatens winning. Seahawks fans defending USC is, well, odd. If I may apply my own kind of spin, maybe the scandal illustrates Carroll will do anything to win. I wouldn't take umbrage with Seattle hiring the next Bill Belichick, so to speak.
Winning will not happen because of a coaching change. Hasselbeck and Clemons are probably not the horses to carry the Seahawks back to glory. Seattle will probably not make the playoffs this season, and unless Hasselbeck rebounds or Charlie Whitehurst develops, probably will not make the playoffs next season either. No one wants to read that. It is bad enough to be realistic about this season much less the next two. But that's the road back: solemn, craggy, lonesome and beset with detours and dead ends.
If you are a fan, this is being a fan. If you are desperate to win, the Texans start Mario Williams and Matt Schaub. I am happy to know this team is heading in the right direction. And when this path ends, and we arrive at winning again, we won't have to ask how we got there.
169 comments
|
11 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well done, sir.
A thoughtful well written piece. I appreciate your ability to be objective.
—
Hooper31
I'm thinking we're more in line for a 6-10 or 7-9 type season.
I for some reason hold to a weird belief that Hass will rebound this season because he won’t get injured. I guess I have a lot of faith in our OL.
Now with more lemon bars!
I lost all my hope after the Packers game and the throw to AJ Hawk
My hope for contention is to play like the Falcons or Ravens. In other words, play great defense (which implies this pass rush has to not suck), have a dominating rushing attack and do just enough in the passing game to win.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
by SSreporters on Jun 28, 2010 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I thought the "truth can set you free"...
The “truth” is – the “truth” mostly sucks.
Hass is an un-mobile, brittle, 10 to 15 yard passer. His first hard hit will reduce him to 50% and the second will marginalize him completely. As to the pass rush, our only real hope is watching our backup youngsters over run plays and get their BVD’s served to them on a platter.
HOWEVER, (not a “but” just a “however”) I’m still going to enjoy the season. I’ll enjoy watching our new left tackle make some brilliant plays between his game losing mistakes. I’ll enjoy watching Curry spice things up. Growing up is painful – I know – I’m 64 and trust me, the first 63 years were murder.
Go Seahawks!
by Mylegacy on Jun 27, 2010 3:36 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I'm right there with you! Let's watch the young guys grow and give our team's future hope!
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
The rebuilding process for a die hard, are like the 5 stages of grief;
1. Denial.
2. Anger.
3. Bargaining.
4. Depression.
5. Acceptance.
I would like to think that Seahawk fans, collectively, are at stage 5, by now. And if you are, it’s really can be a pretty exciting time. There are sure to be excruciating learning curves and teases of real development along the way. But from this spot, the future is far brighter than it was a year ago. And despite our enthusiasm to start ‘08, realistically, we were milling around somewhere near stage 1. What I’m saying is that the downward spiral has bottomed. These are the days that make those nights you go to bed before a playoff game, impossible to fall asleep without a smile. It’s coming. And the journey back up is going to be awesome. (Trust me. I was there with Knox. There with Holmgren. Here for Carroll. Patera, Erickson and Mora never had this feel.)
John says it best:
If you are a fan, this is being a fan. If you are desperate to win, the Texans start Mario Williams and Matt Schaub. I am happy to know this team is heading in the right direction. And when this path ends, and we arrive at winning again, we won’t have to ask how we got there
I'm gonna go calm submissive on your ass.
Fantastic article, as always John.
You never cease to amaze me. I’m glad to hear about the book. But enough of the man love.
I’ll admit I struggled as a fan making it through the 2008 season. I only became a fan in 2006 when I first got into the sport, but I’m behind this team fully now. Yeah, losing sucks, but as long as we’re progressing it’s all good.
Eddie Izzard ran 43 marathons in 51 days with 5 weeks of training. What's stopping you?
Nobody can predict how a team will fare -- good or bad. Before the season. Before any particular game.
It’s not nearly so simple as having a QB and a pass rusher. Teams throughout the history of the league have won in many different ways. It is futile at this stage to make any serious predictions, dire or otherwise.
The 2010 Seahawks are vastly different than the team from the past two years. It would be difficult to make it more different than it has been made. The particular combination of talent (and there is talent on the team), coaching and schemes make it impossible to determine with any degree of precision how that team will do in the coming season.
Sure, you can break down every position, every player, and attempt to say where improvements have been made and where new holes have been created, but that won’t add up to anything. Any more than the optimistic arguments made prior to 2008, even 2009 meant anything.
The fact is, nobody—not John Morgan, not PC, not Hasselbeck, not Schein, not any commentator, coach or player—can reliably pick who will win a particular game, let alone a division or the SB. Not until the teams meet in true competition will we know, one way or another.
So to take the energy to write such a pessismistic piece based on a simplistic formula of passing and pass rush serves no purpose, other than to gather the faithful in a hand-wringing, grateful acknowledgement that the word has been written, and it is good (even if it isn’t).
Uh...
So what’s a blogger to do, ’77?
I’m guessing that, like me, you come to the site to read the content, but it seems you’re suggesting that analysis or speculation about the upcoming season is pointless. So, what then? I love donuts and Red Bryant as much as the next guy, but I’m about up to my ears in maple bars and 330-lb. personal interest stories.
I’m not one to cut in line to kiss John Morgan’s ring, but I’m also in no hurry to bite the guy’s hand for doing his best to provide content that isn’t cribbed from all those vapid, MSM articles that are plagiarizing each other during the slowest football-news period of the year.
Fair question.
Generate interesting discussion, provocative perspectives, different points of view. What I am responding to is the conclusion, one stated more than once, with an air of predictive authority, that the Seahawks will not contend in 2010, i.e. make the playoffs.
I find this conclusion incredibly pre-mature, given the range of unknowns, both on the Seahawks and the other teams that they will face. We can all speculate, some better informed than others (and I include myself in the latter category) but there are too many opportunities for the Seahawks to be significantly better than last year to write them off in June.
Plus, I am not buying the Singletary-led 49ners as being a force, nor do I believe the Cardinals have improved this off-season, and the poor Rams are still very very poor.
So maybe John is right in his assessment, along with Adam Schein, but I don’t believe that consigning the Seahawks to a sub-500 season is justified based on what we know now.
Lets re-visit the question after the opening game with the niners. At that point, we’ll all have a better idea of how this new team will perform in 2010.
I don't believe backing into the playoffs because of a terrible division would make Seattle a contender.
By “contender” I mean realistic chance to win the Super Bowl.
Ahh...
Don’t disagree. I would be hard-pressed to consider the Seahawks as having a legitimate shot to make it to the SB. Anything is possible, but that would be a real stretch.
Winning the division would make a great season for the team and for us fans, I would say. Sure, they might fall short of that, but I wouldn’t want to settle for anything less than that.
If not for some heart-attack last drives and Josh Brown
Seattle would’ve picked in the top 6-7 after the 2006 season.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
by SSreporters on Jun 28, 2010 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Adrian Peterson was a huge question mark regarding injuries coming into the draft.
I would not have wanted the Hawks to draft him. Not to mention the fact that we had just committed $texas amounts of money to Alexander the offseason before
Considering how bad Michael Boulware was
And how thin we were at DB I think we would’ve drafted Landry.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
by SSreporters on Jun 29, 2010 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
I guess this is why I equated 'contending' with making the playoffs:
“Seattle will probably not make the playoffs this season, and unless Hasselbeck rebounds or Charlie Whitehurst develops, probably will not make the playoffs next season either.”
As stated below, the Seahawks have a fair chance making the playoffs, so this statement appears unnecessarily pessimistic.
I think it's not so pessimistic as much as it is realistic.
I mean, what evidence do we have that the Seahawks are more likely to end up in the playoffs than not? The general evidence thus far seems to indicate that the Seahawks are not making it to the playoffs this year.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Jun 27, 2010 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions
He's in for a fight and picking apart John's article
for some reason.
I agree: even though our offense and defense (on paper) both seem improved, I find it unlikely we overtake the 49ers. Hell, if Leinardt has a middle-of-the-pack (in regards to QB play) year, I don’t think we’ll overtake the Cards, either.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
Well, the 9-7 Cardinals certainly weren't SB contenders in 2008, but they made it to the big game anyway
For this Seahawks team I think just getting back to the playoffs again would be a huge success, and any wins after that would just be icing on the cake. I agree the Seahawks have next to no chance at being a true Super Bowl contender (which I would categorize as getting a #1 or #2 seed in the playoffs) but when talking about just getting into the playoffs, the Seahawks have a good shot to do so.
And if we were talking about just making the playoffs (which you did at one point in your post), then the NFC West competition is a huge factor to consider. I agree about your pessimism in regards to the Seahawks contention for a Super Bowl bid, but I’m fairly optimistic about our chances at winning the NFC West. If you want to write “happy posts” to draw in more readers to this site, then I think you can make that claim with a straight face.
Anything can happen once the playoffs start.
But to be fair to the Cardinals, they had a great passing attack and a pretty good passing defense. They set themselves up very well to have a great run in the playoffs.
Now with more lemon bars!
Agreed....but I still wouldn't have considered them as "Super Bowl contenders" in the way that John meant
They had a few lucky breaks on their road to the big game. The point is, once you’re in the playoffs anyone has a real shot to make it all the way. I consider the Cardinals to be an example of that, which isn’t a knock against them (in my opinion).
Agreed...I don't believe anyone picked the Cardinals to appear in the SB...
…or the Giants to knock off the unbeaten Patriots. In fact, if memory serves, after the first round of the playoffs that year, the Giants were given the longest odds of the remaining 8 teams to win the SB. An amazing performance from a wild-card team.
Ya I was just saying that they had a better chance of getting lucky then most
precisely because they had the tools in place to overcome their deficiencies. If you are going to be good at only two things, having a great pass attack and pass rush can really overcome having a mediocre team in other facets of the game.
Now with more lemon bars!
Both the SB Cardinals and Giants teams were far more talented than the 2010 Seahawks
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
One game into the season is not really that indicative of what's to come, either.
You’ll still have the problem of going off of what little evidence is available.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Jun 27, 2010 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions
True, true. My point was that regardless of the reports out of OTAs...
…or camp, or how many pre-season games are won (last year the Seahawks were undefeated, if I remember correctly) or how clever our arguments are, for or against success, prior to the season, until we see genuine competition (and I think the first game of the season qualifies) we won’t know how this version of the Seahawks performs.
Sure, if they blow out the niners, that doesn’t mean they are going to the SB, or if they get crushed, that doesn’t mean the season is lost, but the former certainly supports a more optimistic view, while the latter gives us more reason to accept John’s June judgement.
To be a fan
Is to have an opinion. I always enjoy reading yours, John. Much thanks.
It is what it is...
Given the improvement in supporting cast for the QB and pass rushers, and the adaptation in scheme to fit the available talent,
there is a legitimate shot at being better than last year. And better than last year means at least a couple more divisional wins, and a couple more road wins. Which delivers 9-7, good enough to win the division, and because of the sheer number of players brought in, fresh legs will be available in the playoffs.
At this point, I will take better than last year, with flashes of brilliance from the young guys to reassure for the future. And even losses that were winnable in the 4th quarter…which is very doable this year.
The Seahawks have a decent chance at making the playoffs.
But that’s mostly because our division is weak. We have no chance of going anywhere in the playoffs, and we are in no way a contender to win it all (which ultimately is the only thing that matters).
Now with more lemon bars!
So only one team out of 32 has a meaningful/successful season?
I think Oakland fans will be happy with 8 wins, and ecstatic with a play-off appearance. As will Detroit.
New England, San Diego, New Orleans and Indy will all be disappointed if they don’t make it to the SB, but lots of other teams, and their fans (including us Seahawk fans) might be thrilled with something less.
We want to see good, entertaining games, and make the playoffs. I actually think the four teams that make the championship game should be considered successful, but of course not everyone agrees.
I want to feel like the Seahawks can win any game of the season, even when they don’t. I want to see competent play, intelligent play-calling, exciting break-away runs, and pass plays that cover more than seven yards. I want to see interceptions, big hits, opposing QBs slammed to the turf, and touchdowns.
Is that asking too much?
No.
But I still think it’s a failed season if we don’t win a SB. That’s the ultimate goal. Anything short of that is a partial success at best, because it’s a step towards the ultimate goal of winning the SB.
Doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy every win, regardless of how it impacts our future. And how much I hate every loss, regardless of how it may help our draft position.
Now with more lemon bars!
I am really tired of the whole "NFC west us a weak division" routine. If media on the east coast says it, then its true. Talk about an appeal to authority. The facts are the NFC west has done extremely well when it has mattered since 2005.
The division is getting stronger every year. How many other teams are loaded with the talent of the 9ers and Cardinals? Just last year 3/4s of the cardinals secondary went to the probowl. 9ers have crabtree, gore, davis and 2 first round lineman this year.
NFC west is a good/tough division and I will not think otherwise because mike florio or todd mcshay says different.
I havn't watched any NFL commentary by a talking head in over two years because they
usually don’t say anything beyond truisms, with outdated views of a team’s ability. That doesn’t change the fact that this year, the NFC West should suck. We have 0 QBs that are in any way proven except Hass, and he looks like he’s about ready to retire. The 49ers fate hinges on their QB play, and they simply don’t have anything that’s proven. The Rams are the Rams. And the Cardinals were being carried by Warner. Leinert has failed despite numerous opportunities. The strength of our division is the run game, and run games do not win games by themselves. However, this division COULD get very good in the next couple of years.
Now with more lemon bars!
2009 NFC West wins (total): 24.
Every other division in the NFL won 30 or more.
Our division is weak. It has more talent than before, but thus far that talent has not translated to wins.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
Unless the Seahawks bring in a sheer number of players to play after 16 games (or they end up with a bye week in the playoffs), the Seahawks will not have fresh legs available in the playoffs.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Jun 27, 2010 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
You can say that about every team in the NFL
All teams have a 53-man roster….hell, I’d be THRILLED with a playoff appearance where the Seahawks lost because they “didn’t have any fresh legs available.” That’s still a successful outcome for me, considering the past two season.
So would I.
He’s just pointing out that fresh legs doesn’t actually mean anything. Because getting new players in the off season doesn’t somehow make them more fresh for the playoffs.
Now with more lemon bars!
Improvements:
1 – Bates over Knapp
2 – Okung over Locklear (although I expect, like John, that Okung struggles in 2010, perhaps mightily)
3 – Washington/Forsett over Jones/Forsett
4 – Housh/Williams/Tate over Housh/Burleson/Branch
5 – Thomas/Milloy over Grant/Babs
6 – Healthy Trufant/Jennings/Wilson/Thurmond over hurt Trufant/Jennings/Wilson/Lucas
7 – Hasselbeck/Losman/Whitehurst over Hasslebeck/Wallace/Teel
8 – Pete Caroll over Jim Mora
9 – healthy Tatupu/Curry/Hill/Hawthorne over hurt Tatupu/ineffective Curry
10 – stable offensive line over five guys who don’t play together until the season starts, and then shuffles every game
11 – John Carlson/Chris Baker/Anthony McCoy over John Carlson/?
That’s an awful lot of improvement, and even though the rookies will struggle their first year (Okung, Tate, Thomas, Thurmond, McCoy) we would all rather have them on the field than the alternatives from last year.
The defensive line, as John has pointed out, remains the stark weakness of the team, and perhaps the Achilles heal that prevents true contention. But even so, it will be nice to see the Seahawks compete in more games than they did last year, and make some kind of play-off noise, if we are lucky.
Good point about
competing this year. Yeah losing sucks period. But if the team looks like it is competing you can stomach it. However, when the team looks ill prepared and gets beaten down, that is intolerable. Will the Hawks make the playoffs this year? Who the hell knows right now, but as long as they compete, look prepared and bust their asses each week, I can live with the results.
That's an awful lot of subjectivity, not to mention that there is a heck of a lot of contingency involved for us to even make the judgment that there's an improvement.
For example, for us to say that the combo of Washington and Forsett is an improvement over the combo of Jones and Forsett is contingent on Washington’s play after his injury. We do not know where he’ll be at and how well he’ll play, or if he plays anything close to the way that he’s played before he was hurt.
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Jun 27, 2010 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions
To your point, I would add the assumption that Williams actually makes the team...
…and contributes like he appears to be able to. There is a fair chance that he doesn’t, and if he does, that he doesn’t.
As far as Washington goes, while it seems probable that his leg will mend, that doesn’t necessarily mean he will be the same player on the field. Perhaps he becomes less aggressive, or simply less effective (for whatever reason) than he used to be.
Or maybe Forsett really isn’t as good as I believe he is, or maybe Jones continues to get the carries despite the feeling that he is mediocre (or worse).
Or maybe Okung struggles so much Hasselbeck gets creamed in the first game and Whitehurst/Losman takes over and they live up to their back-up/bust reputations.
Or maybe the team suffers unpredictable and devestaing injuries, an almost inevitable certainty.
All this is genuinly possible, and contrasts the worst case with the best case. Most certainly what actually happens falls somewhere inbetween, leaving us somewhere closer to a mediocre season (or worse). But hope springs eternal, and John’s article is simply a sprinkling of harsh reality over our hopeful dreams, and I get that.
What about Forsett's improvement over Forsett?
In the sense that Justin is a year more experienced now, and looks to get a lot more touches this season than last. Sometimes inertia in of itself is an improvement…..and getting Washington to take further snaps away from JJ is a plus, too.
I think Forsett getting more carries counts as a genuine improvement over last year.
If Washington comes back to his former self, the Seahawks have three playmakers capable of making something out of nothing, or more out of something (Forsett, Washington, Tate). That’s three more than they had last year.
While Forsett’s big plays probably net 10 or 15 yards, Washington and Tate have the potential to make it 30 or 40 at a time (or more). With Willaims on the outside, Housh and Carlson should be more successful (again, if Williams is all he is cracked up to be).
I have very little confidence in Branch (I could be wrong) but hopefully we see Butler step up and contribute.
And I am intrigued by what I hear about Anthony McCoy, and while he may not see much action this year (along with Thurmond and Chancelor) we can expect them to make their presence felt more in the coming years.
Yup, there is plenty of things to be optimistic about this season
And I also think that Washington’s recovery from his broken leg won’t have that much of an impact on the running game either way, since he would only be used as a third-down back regardless. With Housh, Tate and (a possibly rejuvenated) Mike Williams around, we also might not depend on Branch and Butler too much this season, either. We have established good depth at both RB and WR positions, which means we shouldn’t need to rely on anyone one player to succeed.
Bottom line: the 2010 Seahawks are night and day better compared to the 2009 version.
In addition to the draft and FA additions, what may even be more telling is how Lendale White and Reggie Williams were acquired and then released.
PC preaches compeition at all positions, while the past couple of years seemed to be fueled by a certain amount of momentum, slotting players in positions traditionaly held as opposed to any genuine movement.
Cutting TJ Ducket was just about the most dramatic thing Mora did, as I recall.
PC seems to mean it, and the players seem to believe it. If you mix these guys up and truly grade their performance, then make your decisions based on that performance, that should lead to improvement (assuming your assessment is sound).
White and Williams were both high-draft picks with experience and personal history in the region (USC/UW) and that didn’t prevent them from being sent on their way. That bodes very well, in my opinion, for the upcoming season.
I'd say they are night and day more full of potential.
If Williams turns into that great possession reciever, Tate is a big play receiver, then Housh and Carlson will have single-coverage all the time.
Unfortunately, that means some if’s have to turn into something. I love having hope, and I think that what the Seahawks brain trust is trying to put together will work perfectly if the players can execute and realize that potential. But I’d say it probably won’t happen this year, and don’t have a problem with John stating this. But he also has given us a good picture of the hope we can have at LT and FS, and his quest to give us the clearest picture of what to expect from each player, and the system as a whole is what keeps me coming here.
Nailed it on the head: at this point, it's all about potential
We won’t know if the 2010 season are night and day better than the 2009 Seahawks until after the 2010 season :)
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
But!
That potential will be WAAAAAY more fun to watch than last year. Last season we watched knowing that it was the end for a lot of those players. Besides Forsett, who were we watching that was making positive strides towards their future as a Seahawk? Hawthorne perhaps? Curry did some things, but it wasn’t really stepping forward. Even Mebane wasn’t really better, so much as still beastly, but held back by Cole’s lack of pressure on the QB. We have a lot of growth to watch, it’s going to be much more entertaining.
Cole won't be hindering Mebane anymore?
Did I miss something?
No, he will.
We have a lot of other positions that should be fun to watch though.
Curry, Wilson, Hawthorne, Butler, Unger, Forsett, etc
Were all players that people were excited to watch. Turned out, only Wilson and Forsett had good years.
Let’s hope more of the new players we’ll be watching (Tate, Okung, Thomas, Chance, etc) will have good rookie years!
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
While I agree overall
It’s not improvement (per point) until we’re some games into the season. It’s too easy to be overly optimistic. Will Housh/Williams/Tate be an improvement over Housh/Burley/Branch? What if Housh is significantly slow coming back from his injury, Williams never gets up to NFL speed and Tate struggles his rookie year? It’s as likely as anything.
Still, overall I agree, there’s a lot of positive signs all over the place. But wait and see how exactly it pans out,
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 28, 2010 4:45 AM PDT up reply actions
While I enjoy the optimism
It’s not exactly fair to call this year’s healthy players an improvement over last year’s not healthy players. Last year’s injuries weakened the team, whereas this year’s hypothetically-healthy players haven’t had a chance to get injured yet because they haven’t played any games. It’s not even training camp yet. Of course the offseason crew is going to look better than the crew that finished out last season: every team in the league looks better now because every team in the league is healthier now.
Point being, you have to expect a certain degree of attrition. You just don’t know where it’s going to hit until it hits. Forming expectations from a set of best-case scenarios is fine if you want to be optimistic, but if you want to be realistic, you also have to consider the downsides and assume some of them will occur, too.
Strength and conditioning
With the new regime in place we also have a new Strength and Conditioning coach who is one of the best. He concentrates more on drills to make you football ready instead of just regular strength drills. This should help in keeping more of our players on the field during the season.
The future is looking better
Just as a point of clarification, I don't think Okung will struggle in 2010.
Guy is plug and play. He isn’t ideal for a ZBS, but I think he is the most talented LT since and maybe before Joe Thomas, maybe more than D’Brick..and since I am projecting wildly, my mind equates Okung with Pace and Trent Williams with Walter. 2010 was a fantastic class for tackles.
by John Morgan on Jun 29, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
He didn't struggle when he was thrown into the starting LT job as a freshman at OK state
And he is a smarter and tougher man now, plus he already has (almost) all the physical tools to dominate right now….I agree he’ll start off just fine for the Seahawks.
Seahawks.com = White House press secretary
Field Gulls = Colbert/Stewart
Thank you John.
Easy decision.
by trippsixxes on Jun 27, 2010 7:21 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Where do you rate Eric Williams on this scale? (not a loaded question - genuinely interested in your opinion)
Williams is like a bowl of Kix cereal.
I’m sure my parents approve. I’m supposed to like it… but I don’t.
Either way its pretty bland.
Well said.
Though I still read his articles, because I’m starved of Seahawks news.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
In keeping with the reporters analogy...
I guess that would make Williams the Gwen Ifill/Bill Moyers of Seahawks news.
You know the news you’re getting is accurate, there just aren’t enough shiny things to keep me interested.
By that analogy, does that then mean Pete Prisco = Fox News?
Or any number of other football columnists out there that seem to have habitual dislike for the Seahawks.
He's also got a hard-on for the Arizona Cardinals.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
by SSreporters on Jun 28, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions
To truly be a contender in this league,
you have to be dominant in some aspects of the game and be good in all others. The 2005 Hawks had a dominant running game and a dominant front 7. We crushed the run and ran the ball on whoever we wanted. In 06 and 07, we had a dominant passing attack and pass rush. The reason the seahawks will not contend (and likely will not make the playoffs) is because though we will be passable in most aspects, no objective analysis will show us as dominant in any single aspect.
This is true across the league. The colts have the best passing attack and an excellent pass rush, the ravens have a stifling defense and great running game, the Cardinals have (had) a dominant passing game, etc… Until Seattle can dominate some aspect of the game, we will not be real contenders. I think the defense is close and adding Alex Gibbs gives us a chance at a great running game, but it likely will still be a couple of years until we have our bread and butter identity again.
by Fightfightfight on Jun 27, 2010 7:35 PM PDT reply actions
I agree with your hypothesis
But to get to your conclusion you have to put on your Great Karnak hat and open up an envelope. Both the passing and running games could be great. They probably both will be average to good, but since we haven’t seen them, who knows. Our LBs could be great. They have shown it before. So while I agree that the signature or a true contender includes a “great” aspect or two, we don’t know yet.
Well actually
we have seen them. As much turn over as there has been this offseason, many of the key cogs in the passing game remain the same. Same QB, same #1 receiver, 3/5 of the line is intact. I am not saying it won’t be better than last year, but the chances of it being any better than average are slim to none. Golden Tate will have rookie mistakes, Housh is a year older with a surgery under his belt, Matt is fragile, Okung likely will give up rookie sacks.
The running game has a chance because Alex Gibbs can wave his wand and make any running game better. However, it is not likely that Seattle develops a dominant running game on the backs of Force and Leon, as much as we like them. I’m not saying its impossible, just unlikely. I do think it will be much improved, however.
The defense is close, with a lot of great pieces in place and only missing a couple key positions, namely someone to pair with Bane and a true edge rusher. Hopefully Clemons/Curry/Foley/Reed can apply the pressure necessary, but again, it is not overly likely to happen. However, it should be a run killing defense and the secondary has a very bright future.
by Fightfightfight on Jun 28, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
The personnel we know, the scheme we don't
The scheme is nearly as important as the personnel. Scheme’s can take average players and make them great. That’s what Gibbs’ magic wand is. So when I say we don’t know, I mean that we don’t know what they will do with our personnel. I agree with everything that you say above about our personnel, but they can be used well and made good, or used poorly and look really bad. Since we haven’t seen this coaching staff do squat yet, we just don’t really know what we have.
That's a pretty good, fair analysis of things.
I think our run game could be top 15 with the combination of: 1. improved o-line talent, 2. improved coaching talent, 3. better running back talent, but it’s unlikely it’s dominant. Unless Matt has a revival year and plays pretty well to help open the run game, it’s unlikely it’ll be better than top 15.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
The fundamental irony with Seattle, and teams like it...
is that for the most realistic fans this team is playing for the future. Yet playing for the future—traveling the long road back—almost always involves playing a new QB, or at least looking forward to one.
Part of enjoying the long road back—and it can be enjoyable—is in feeling like the team is showing actual progress. It’s harder to do that when feeling like we’re just going to have to start all over whenever the new QB shows up; you know, the one who is going to lead the next serious contender.
A big part of me feels like, why are we screwing around with this? We need to be playing Whitehurst to see if this guy can play. Even if he doesn’t start he needs to see snaps this season.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
If Whitehurst was Bradford or Stafford, I might agree...
…but by several accounts, Losman is out-performing Whitehurst, and Hasselbeck outperforming them both.
So while we know Hasselbeck is not the future of the franchise, I am not sure we know who is.
You think that if you put Bradford or Stafford in OTAs with Hasselbeck or Losman
They would not be outperformed?
I’m sorry, but I’m pretty sure they will be.
And we knew when getting Whitehurst that we were not getting a player with a history of NFL starts and the accompanying polish. Hasselbeck outperforming him is no shock. Losman outperforming him is just the opinion of one journalist, but even that’s not shocking.
Eh.
Haters gonna hate.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 28, 2010 4:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Two things:
1 – I was responding to:
“A big part of me feels like, why are we screwing around with this? We need to be playing Whitehurst to see if this guy can play.”
This written in the context of being on the road back, and not necessarily attempting to contend this year. If the Seahawks had an acknowledged franchise QB in the wings, ala Bradford or Stafford, then I would agree: put the guy out there, let him and the team take their lumps (Peyton Manning, John Elway), and plan on winning it all in the next year or two.
As it is, playing the best QB out of camp makes sense, IMO, and that means Hasselbeck in 2010 (or so it seems).
2 – I don’t understand this:
“Haters gonna hate.”
I haven’t discerned a lot of needless hate in this thread, so just curious what you were referring to.
I'm not sure what you're saying...
Right now, Whitehurst is our first plan for taking over from Hasselbeck. As such, he is the nominated “franchise” QB, just not at the value and level of promise of a 1st-overall pick. This can change during the next draft/FA period, obviously, but for now, considering how much PC/Schneider targetted Aragorn, he’s our heir apparent. Hence: put the guy out there and see if he can do it. Being outplayed in OTAs doesn’t change that, because that’d happen to any rookie QB too. Question is not if he’s better than Hasselbeck now, question is if he can show enough in the season to make the FO think he can take over next year. Because right now, he’s all we have to start next year, and while it’s certainly possible that we’ll draft a QB, a smart FO needs to have another plan ready.
Haters gonna hate is in reference to the general predilection on Field Gulls to dismiss Aragorn, without him having taken a single snap in Seahawks uniform. John Morgan doesn’t even mention him in the piece above.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 28, 2010 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions
I give Aragorn as much chance as I would any 3rd round QB pick who hasn't managed a game time snap.
I.E. just a little, but not anything even close to “reliance”.
Yip, same here, more or less
He’ll inevitably get snaps when Hasselbeck gets hurt so we’ll see him anyway
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 28, 2010 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
Whitehurst is mentioned in the post
Seattle will probably not make the playoffs this season, and unless Hasselbeck rebounds or Charlie Whitehurst develops, probably will not make the playoffs next season either.
Okay, I understand what you are saying now. We have a different understanding of Whitehurst's status.
I understand PC having upgraded the #2 QB spot (Whitehurst for Wallace) which I applaud. I didn’t see Whitehurst as being the heir-apparent (ala Bradford/Rodgers), but if he is, then I completely agree: Whitehurst should start the season with Hasselbeck backing him up, because if Whitehurst is the future, now is the time for him to get in his journeyman snaps, along with Okung and Thomas.
by Hawksince77 on Jun 28, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
It depends on how much future you think he has
I think we bought a competent stop gap who might have a little more upside than your average 3rd rounder. The coaches like him and want to use him in out years, but I don’t think they are worried about him getting lots of snaps this year. If we stumble early that could change. The greatest effect you will see is when looking at HBeck in the offseason and positioning for the draft. We will see if Whithurst is long term future, or just a competent place holder for a couple of years while we develop whoever we draft next year.
The issue is that Whitehurst isn't signed for very long
just two years I think, right? So, they need to figure out quick what they have. It may be an academic, as someone else mentioned, the likelihood of Hass playing 16 games has gotta be < 5%.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
I think its one with a team option
Probably more of a play against the new cap, but you are correct. They have to decide next off season what to do about the QB position long term. That probably means we should see Whitehurst in more than just the preseason.
Does this surprise you, though? It shouldn't.
Losman has started a lot of games in the NFL, so it’s pretty obvious he’ll out-perform Whitehurst, a guy that hasn’t made a throw in a regular season NFL game, while in camp.
I guarantee you he’d outperform Stafford, Bradford and other rookie/soph QBs in camp, too.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
By the way
this is definitely one of the most well written sports-related articles I have had the pleasure of reading. Thanks for all the great work John!
by Fightfightfight on Jun 27, 2010 7:36 PM PDT reply actions
Great Read
Though it makes sense that readership drops when we lose. I actually come here more during the regular season to get recap and analysis of the awful games I couldn’t bear watching.
by Moresoftness on Jun 27, 2010 8:08 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
This season is just one huge tease.
Warner retires, the Niners don’t seem particularly improved over last season, and we’re slobbering over Carroll, Okung, Tate, et al. It’s very tempting to say the division is wide open and we have just as much chance to win the division as the two teams that finished ahead of us last year. Of course, when you actually look at the nuts and bolts of the team, you realize that we probably have as much chance to win the division as the Rams. (Not saying the Rams are better or even as good as us, but I’m sure they’re better than the last two years.)
I personally think the goal this season is simply to improve. Not even from a record standpoint; if we finish 5-11 again this year but the team manages to stay in most of those games, as opposed to last year when we seemed to be down 14-0 before the coin toss those last four weeks, we can at least say that the team isn’t embarrassing its fans. It’ll be tough keeping this perspective on a week-to-week basis while the record fluctuates, especially if they appear competitive in the losses, but knowing that a playoff run wasn’t a likely outcome to begin with will help combat the notion as the losses stack up that the season is somehow slipping away.
FG's second favorite football-illiterate semi-troll.
Personally I'll be looking at player improvement over team score improvements.
Not trying to nitpick, but that’s where my focus will be. How well do all our young players improve? How does the OL gel? Does Spencer finally take that leap forward and become a dominant center? Things like that. Real improvement amongst the younger players will draw me in.
Now with more lemon bars!
Same here - that's what gets me the most excited
Seeing our new, young players grow and start to play good ball.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM
by Nick Andron on Jun 29, 2010 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, I'm glad you are comforted by your own knee-jerk pessimism
I have looked at the nuts and bolts of the Seahawks, and we are a superior team to the Rams in almost every way (which isn’t saying much). The Niners and Cardinals might have a better chance at winning the division than us, but not by a whole lot. In my opinion.
The Rams are one of the few teams in the NFL (I can't think of another one off the top of my head)...
…that I would assert have zero chance to make the play-offs. That poor franchise is snake-bit, and with a new franchise QB and a porous O-line and no receivers, it looks like another season of handing the ball off to S. Jackson and hoping for the best.
The perenial bottom-feeders (Oakland, Detroit) actually look much improved, IMO, so outside of the Rams, not sure who to pick to be picking in the top five next year.
So to compare them with the Seahawks seems to me (agreeing wholeheartedly with JL White)...
…just this side of ridiculous.
I wasn't comparing them to the Rams.
I was merely saying that a team that’s won six games the past three years eventually has to hit rock bottom, and I think they have. They’re still going to finish last in the division, but not with a 1-15 record.
As for the division, the NFL is a passing league, and Seattle’s two biggest weaknesses are QB performance and pass rush. That does not bode well for any sort of playoff hopes. If they manage to prove me wrong and finish ahead of Arizona and/or SF, then fan-f’ing-tastic. But let’s avoid setting ourselves up for a massive disappointment by saying that the NFC West is a three-horse race. It isn’t.
FG's second favorite football-illiterate semi-troll.
Plenty of teams have made the playoffs with less-than-stellar QB and/or pass rush play
I’d say the Seahawks have as much chance as winning the NFC West this year as the Cincinnati Bengals had in winning the AFC North last year. And that was a season AFTER the Steelers and Ravens faced each other in the AFC Championship game. I didn’t see Carson Palmer put up Pro Bowl numbers last year, and Brandon Stokely can speak about the productivity of their pass defense.
Actually, the Bengals do have a few really good (and young) players that established themselves last season….and a few Seahawk players could breakout this season that we’re not expecting to, as well. I’m not buying any Super Bowl tickets this year, but I’m not giving the Seahawks as much chance to win the West as the freakin’ Rams. That’s just ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous?
Just because a particular team is better than another doesn’t mean they have any better of a chance to win a division when they still have two opponents they have to leapfrog. The Chicago Bears last season were also better than their doormat 4th place division rival. And they also had as much chance at the division last year as the Seahawks do this year, which is very little if any. Granted, the Packers and Vikings were much better teams than the Niners and Cards, but you’re still talking about making up wins and losses over two teams. And I don’t see the 49ers or the Cardinals – even without Warner – having regressed enough over the season for Seattle to threaten the pecking order, despite the offseason improvements they’ve made.
FG's second favorite football-illiterate semi-troll.
And not to get too far off the subject
But that Brandon Stokely play was a total fluke. Once that ball gets popped up in the air, anything can happen.
FG's second favorite football-illiterate semi-troll.
Only half the teams that made the playoffs in 2008 made it back in 2009
There really is no ‘pecking order" in the NFL….remember “Any Given Sunday?” Where were the 1999 Rams in the NFC West pecking order? All teams start out at 0-0 on opening day; the Cardinals and Niners do not have an inherent advantage of winning the division, and I don’t see anything about those teams that puts them head and shoulders above the Seahawks.
I still say the Cards and Niners have a better chance at winning the NFC West, but that doesn’t mean the Seahawks have less than 1% chance at winning (which I feel is the likelihood of the Rams winning it). I’m going to need some hard evidence that those two teams are that muich more superior to Seattle before I think differently (which also take into account that huge, HUGE losses of Kurt Warner and Anquan Boldin).
But the Bengals had the 28th-best pass offense & 21st-best pass defense DVOA in 2008
I don’t think it was widely assumed before the 2009 season that Cincy would rise up to 15th and 10th (respectively). Hindsight is 20/20; if we knew only what we know of the Bengals before the 2009 season began, I’d say the Seahawks have a better chance of winning the NFC West this year as the Bengals had in winning the AFC North last year.
Palmer didn't play in 2008.
2009 was the worst passing offense that a full season of Carson Palmer has ever produced, so if anything it might have been on a bit of the low end of expectations.
Good point...but I (for one) didn't see the Bengals finishing ahead of the Steelers and Ravens before last season.
Especially after losing perhaps their best receiver in T.J. Houshmandzadeh. And how many QBs lose some of their ability after a big injury? I just didn’t expect Palmer to rebound as well as he did.
Whether you predicted them to have a good pass offense/defense or not they ultimately did.
You can’t use them as an example of teams that “have made the playoffs with less-than-stellar QB and/or pass rush play”. And sure, maybe Matt Hasselbeck stops shitting himself in the pocket and Nick Foley is the Jeff Garcia of defensive ends. But thats a lot more far fetched than expecting Carson Palmer to recover from injury and be average or expecting some of the young talent the Bengals have on defense to mature.
I would say that there was improvement if Matt had a consistant pocket
An average line and healthy WRs would be a momumental improvement over last year.
Fricking virtual keyboard...
There’s alway’s a chance.
by paul2 on Jun 27, 2010 10:42 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Love Field Gull
But sometimes I come on over and just hear crickets, guess I actually have to start being more active here. BTW, those who do post, great work.
I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.
John you have a typo
You do re-read your own work, right?
‘It’
by paul2 on Jun 27, 2010 10:38 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
No malice intended-
-You are consistently belligerent, however.
by paul2 on Jun 28, 2010 11:04 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
No I'm not,
those are fighting words (Get it?).
I didn’t say you were malicious, I said you embodied the hole of an ass, unnecessarily. If you see a typo, would not it be better to say “Dear John, I think you may have meant [This] instead of [That]?” rather than ask the rhetorically snide question “You do re-read your own work, right?” Of course he does Comic Book Guy, there’s no reason to be a dick about missing something that small. And then you can’t even tell him where it is? Call it belligerence if you want, I call it letting you know that you’re be un-purposefully rude to a good guy who provides you a free service. People who get aroused off correcting others baffle me.
Took a bit of detective work to figure out that clue
but I think I fixed the typo. Sentence beginning with “it” instead of “if”?
I don't expect them to win
I expect them to compete in every game and every play. The thing they’ve lacked the most is heart and it started right after the bears playoff loss in 07. I hope PC and company can instill some fight in these guys.
Nonsense, Poopy-Pants!
??? We did lose to the Bears in 2007.
Packers was in 2008 where after 14-0 we pretty much quit.
Fricking Marcus Pollard.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
by SSreporters on Jun 28, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
You learn to play in all conditions
Our defense was such a liability on the road and it showed. It was probably Jordan Babineaux’s worst ever game in a Seahawks jersey.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
There is a pronounced advantage for cold weather teams hosting fair/warm weather teams.
And the way Seattle was getting blown off the line, I think it’s safe to say the snow contributed.
That game was the first time I noticed what a great tactician Mike McCarthy is.
Since then I’ve come to wonder why he doesn’t have a Belichick-lite reputation. He’s a fantastic game coach.
by jacobstevens on Jun 28, 2010 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions
We weren't even in the game vs GB
We went up fast then took it deep the rest of the game. What I’m saying is that this team hasn’t fought like it did vs Bears since then. We got blown out earlier that year by them then during the playoffs we go to their place and fight tooth and nail to try and win. I haven’t seen that since not even in 07. Packers loss was us giving up.
Nonsense, Poopy-Pants!
Your assumption of the 2007 season is wildly incorrect.
Week 2 @ Arizona: Down 17-0 on the road the Seahawks came back to take the lead in the fourth quarter and would have won had it not been for a freak fumble.
Week 3 vs Cincinnati Down 20-17 with two and a half minutes to go, the Seahawks rally for the win after converting a big 4th down on the final drive
Week 11 vs the Bears Down 10-0 in a blink of an eye, the Seahawks comeback to win by 7.
Week 12 @ St Louis Down 9-0 in equally fast fashion, the Hawks come back from a 19-7 half time deficient on the road with an all or nothing defensive stop from the 1 yard line on the last play of the game
Wildcard Playoff vs Washington Up by 13 early, the Seahawks went down to a Deadskins team that was riding an extreme amount of emotion 14-13 in the fourth quarter and a fluke kickoff error put Washington in a great position to extend the lead. The Seahawks stopped them on a FG try, overcame a key interception by Hasselbeck and eventually drove down the field to take the lead. Two key pick-sixes by the defense iced the game.
The fact that the 2007 squad isn’t considered as one of the greatest Seahawks teams of all time is one the biggest injustices in Seattle sports history.
by Robert on Jun 28, 2010 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
I fricking loved the 2007 season
While we weren’t down for most of the game can we include the Eagles game?
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
by SSreporters on Jun 29, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
People don't realize that had the snow not started and we were able to beat the Packers like it very well looked like we would
we would have hosted the NFC Championship game for the second time in three years against a New York Giants who viewed Qwest Field as it’s very own house of horrors.
Also I'm pretty sure Hasselbeck was playing hurt after the Washington game
The most annoying thing about 2007 was that we could’ve easily gotten a first-round bye. We lost 4 out of our 6 games by 3 points, and in a few of those games we had some horrible clock management.
Oh how I miss the days of a healthy DJ Hackett, Burly, and Bobby Engram.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
When did we ever have a healthy Hackett?
That guy was always nursing something.
Agreed on having a healthy Engram…
Yep. Absolutely. 2007 was probably my favorite playoffs since 1999 and the Music City Miracle/Longest Yard.
2005 was great for the Hawks, and bittersweet, but such an awesome year for the playoffs 2007 was. And I’ve never forgotten how deceptively close we came to preserving the Patriots’ perfect season in the Super Bowl.
Joe Gibbs’ last game. (Last game I attended). A great game. Trufant pick at the end.
Jags beat the Steelers on that Garrard 4th down run. Very good Titans-Chargers game, very good Jags-Pats game.
Giants shock the Cowboys, and then that eternal game in Lambeau, a classic of classics. Then came the “Flee to Tyree” and the greatest upset ever.
by jacobstevens on Jun 29, 2010 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Also week 1 we looked like utter crap and were down 6-0 early
Then all of a sudden Shaun has a good game and Kelly Jennings recovers a fumble. We win 20-6.
"Fedor is in major trouble! FEDOR TAPS! FEDOR TAPS! FABRICIO WERDUM WINS BY SUBMISSION (TRIANGLE CHOKE), ROUND 1!" - Brent Brookhouse, BloodyElbow.com
by SSreporters on Jun 29, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I became a fan in 1992 and stayed loyal through the mediocrity of the 90's and early 2000s
I think the current lousiness of the current team is tougher to deal with considering the semi-recent success of the 2003-2007 Seahawks, and I can imagine it would be very difficult for those who became fans during, say, the Super Bowl run, or right before or after when playoff appearances and division championships were annual events.
Periods of reloading are tough, but necessary, and you must commit to it when you are bad.
It's disturbingly easy to screw up a rebuilding process
and doom a team to a decade of terrible play. See: Raiders, Lions.
I don’t think we are going in that direction though.
Now with more lemon bars!
I will not miss a Seahawks game this year
regardless of the course of our season. Even the Rams got to see Stephen Jackson bowling people over and a near-win against New Orleans. Even the Bucs got to see Josh Freeman win some games. Even Detroit got to see their rookie QB throw 5 touchdowns to beat the Browns.
The point of all that is: I can be realistic about my team and still love them to death – so being convinced that we cannot contend isn’t gut-wrenching.
Though they sink through the Sea, they shall rise again...Death shall have no dominion...
Remember that Freeman and the Bucs beat the Saints in N.O. late last season, too
Any Given Sunday, and so on and so forth.
Realism is good.
This isn’t brain surgery, or about a fast and easy solution to the astounding damage in the Gulf of Mexico, or about life and death. It’s just football…which can be lots of fun no matter what. I’ll watch every Seahawk game I can too…and enjoy as much as possible. If the Hawks hit 8-8…that’s still loads better than the year before. And that’s the bottom line. Sure…a Super Bowl victory would be really nice, and so would a 30% raise at work. Neither event is likely to happen this year.
Even if the Hawks end up with exact same record as last year they should be infinitely more watchable than last year.
Golden Tate!
Golden Tate, E Thomas and Mike Williams
They are making next season worth it, even if its a 5 win gruelfest.
And...
Okung, Washington, Thurmond perhaps, the offensive line in a true ZBS, Trufant healthy again, Josh Wilson continuing, Curry in perhaps a different role, or with more experience. Hawthorne or Hill? Trufant Healthy? Chance getting a shot? Olindo Mare is still around, and apparently on fire. Lots to look forwards to.
I think where I stand is real
But I look at our improvement as moving from no chance, to maybe good enough to compete if we get lucky with injuries and others don’t. Last year that wasn’t true, we probably wouldn’t have competed anyway. The best we should be hoping for is a 7-9 to 8-8 team, but with a couple of less injuries, we might be 9-7. Add in a couple of key opponent injuries and we could look at 10 wins. Its not inconceivable. Its hope. Last years coaching staff took my hope away for a time. Its back. Its not a super bowl its just hope.
I'm hopeful too.
I’m just saying there are times when I feel more sober (not literally) and think “Man, this year doesn’t look fantastic necessarily” but, my flavor of fandom being what it is, I always fall back on knowing that the Hawks will be a source of joy for me.
Though they sink through the Sea, they shall rise again...Death shall have no dominion...
83 Deja vu
I know most of you were not around for the 83 season but this team has a strong resemblance to that team. A new coach taking over a struggling team that no one gives a chance to compete for several years. An aging franchise QB about to be replaced by a unproven backup, and an exceptional draft. Very little proven talent.
So is PC Chuck Knoxs? no Chuck Knox was a proven NFL coach. PC is a proven college coach and a great motivator. But he has surrounded himself with a staff of proven NFL coaches who also are great motivators.
Is there a Curt Warner on this team? No but If Leon returns to pre injury form and Force improves from last year they can be a very formidable tandem.
Is there a Steve Largent on this team? No again but man for man this is a lot better recieving group than 83 and it can be one of the best groups of 2010.
The 83 team had a lot of questions on defense just like the 2010 team.
It will take every player to play to the top of his skill level to do what the 83 team but I believe we have a coaching staff that will get the best out of every one on the team. They seem to be making good decisions and setting a scheme that works towards the talent they have.
So will we have a winning record, make the playoffs, the Super Bowl? Who knows but I will be there watching them all the way to the end. What ever the results are.
The future is looking better
If you look back through the archives
This entire “The Road Back” series was about similarities to the 83 season, though John kind of went away from that point to more general thoughts in this conclusion. Funny you’d hit the same note more or less coincidentally.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 28, 2010 4:37 AM PDT up reply actions
OOPS
Guess I should of looked back instead of just reading this part. It was a very good series even if I hope John’s ending conclusions are wrong. To me the 83 season will always be the best not only because it was the first playoff appearance but because it was so unexpected.
The future is looking better
This was a great series of articles, John
Your assessment of what drives media – and this is as true for sports media as it is for sites that follow television series, films, music or games – paint a sad but accurate picture.
Still, you could think of Field Gulls as filling a niche that Seahawks.com never can. Us commentators are probably only a fraction of the total readership so it’s hard to say how representative we are, but it’s not exactly a hard sell to us – I think – to say “We’re not winning much this year, so just enjoy watching the young talent develop.”
I know I will.
Well put V...
I’d also add, as others have, that the “plot” for the season simply moves from “The Quest to win it all” to “The Quest to find this team’s identity.” That’s actually a fairly intriguing plot, and an easy sell to the die hards for analysis who show up here.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
If John were to nitpick, he might say we "shouldn't win much this year."
He avoids absolutes, because he can’t predict, and rightfully so. But your premise is completely correct, and there is enough potential to see a little growth or a ton of growth. But there feels like almost no chance of seeing no growth.
Hope springs...... unless we are injured
Until we are shown different this team is improved and our division isn’t. With that, we have a chance, there is hope. We can argue the exact definition of success, but everyone will agree that it is better than last year and we have a great chance at that. I think the greatest determiner of our success, within the division, will be based on injuries. If we are clean and the others aren’t we will do well. If we are injured we will not have chance at the division. Injury and how it effects your depth is the difference between and average team and a good team, its also the difference between a good team and a great team. We won’t have a chance at being good let alone great, unless we can break the key injury cycle that we have been in over the last 3 years.
Unfortunately...
lots of the injuries that Seattle has faced are either pretty random (e.g., Lofa, Pistol) or are signs of age-related decline (e.g., Trufant, Hasselbeck). It’s the latter that makes it easier to speculate that this team isn’t going to be very good.
One thing I like a LOT about the new FO is that they’re pretty active in managing the bottom of the roster. That’s about the only thing you can do for random injuries. Often, after a starter goes down, it’s when the 3rd and 4th string guys have to carry the mail as regular backups and special teamers that you see huge drop off.
Well, Carroll and Schneider have kept the bottom of the roster churning, constantly looking to upgrade the last few positions. To me, that’s wise. One area where bad teams can quickly gain ground on the best teams is by shedding dead weight at the end of the roster. I love that our FO recognizes that the end of the roster is low-hanging fruit. You may just find yourself a player, but you also send the clear message that the team is constantly looking for ways to get better.
At least there’s that.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
This is how bad the Seahawks are. "Sure our starters suck, but our front office has done a great job at finding third stringers!"
And really, how good of a look are the Q/PM getting at some of these guys that are in for a week of mini camps where they’re buried on the depth chat and get sporadic reps before they get cut? The churn is only because the FO wants to think they’re proactive like non-stop in June.
Any more insight from the FO meetings that you clearly have been through
I think dc’s thoughts are valid. They may not end up being correct, but they are possible.
I didn't say they weren't possible. I just doubt that the FO is able to meaningfully evaluate these players they're bringing in for a week or two.
When you are talking about 3rd and 4th stringers
I would be willing to bet the number one thing that they are evaluating is personality and work ethic. I bet they figure that out fairly quickly. For the higher profile cuts, that has been the MO so far.
wow - an honest opinion?
Honesty… in media? unheard of. I really enjoyed reading this article, because it didn’t talk down to me or try to delude my thinking one way or another. an honest, straight forward opinon piece WITH some back up material to answer the question “How can you think that?” – and no requirement to agree with you.
This was a quality piece. thanks very much. it’s a rarity out there in the blogosphere.

by 


























