Seahawks Lose to Vikings 20-7: Some Quick Reactions

that after he was drafted, people were talking about Legree like a potential starter. He’s a division-II player, and those guys are lucky to get drafted. Still, I now find it strange that he isn’t getting many snaps at all in preseason. Who could have imagined we would have too many safeties on this roster??

Curry’s problem has been with reading offenses and chasing blockers. Ripping off a guy’s helmet is a completely different kind of issue that we’ve never seen from him before or should expect to see again.

During his debut game against the Rams, he got in it with Stephen Jackson several times after plays.

Is he playing both? I also look forward to learning more about this.

For clarity, the play I was referring to was on a wide, outside run/swing well away from the line. He did ‘contain’ but seemed content to be blocked rather than shed and tackle or pursue. It’s a theme, or sorts, for Curry that I’d like to see changed.

but Dick LeBeau is on a whole different plane of reality than Gus Bradley.

…that it might be a good opportunity for TJax to experience some success.

…but at some point it will become apparent that TJax cannot consistently play the position at an average NFL level.

Until then, let the excuses continue to fill blog-space.

But let me ask a question… and this is hard given the way TV games are presented, rarely showing downfield coverage… but has T-Jax executed a play to his first option yet? or even his second option? it seems like the minute he feels pressure, he’s checking down or scampering out. i can’t remember seeing a 3- or 5-step drop and then THROW. That is some thing i’ve seen Charlie (and Portis, even) doing. of course, they’re doing it against 3rd team secondaries. but really, had T-Jax had one play executed that wasn’t a check down? how is it possible that nobody is EVER open? this offense isn’t about dropping back and waiting for options is it? maybe it is, maybe i’m missing the boat. Thomas, can you set me straight here?

I am suggesting that starting CW against Denver won’t provide conclusive support for one QB or the other.

Even if CW starts the game with the firsts and plays well against Denver, that won’t conclusively prove he is the better QB.

In two games, CW has played well. In 2 games as the starting QB, TJax has played poorly. I am asserting that this pattern is likely to continue based on the nature of TJax’s poor play, along with his professional history. I am also pointing out that all of the excuses for his poor showing last week no longer apply (or apply to a far lesser degree). It also seems that CW has turned a corner of sorts, and is showing consistent competency he hasn’t shown in the past (although we have seen flashes before).

Bottom line: whether CW starts next week or not, the coaching staff has the same (re)decision to make. They have to judge what they have seen, how the players have performed, and place that judgment within a complete context you and me don’t have (game situation, play called, full-field analysis, commitments made, etc. etc.)

“…but your posts about the QB controversy are a little hard to take seriously at this point.” “I can’t help but point out how lopsided your approach to this has been so far.”

With all due respect, why make any personal comments at all? Even if you have read every post I have ever made regarding the QB position with the Seahawks (highly unlikely) you would be hard pressed to find any that are simply unsupported assertions or pure hyperbole. For the most part, I don’t write anything unless I think I have something new to contribute to the (football) discussion.

I am a long-time fan who lives a long ways away from Seattle and claim no more authority then the next casual fan who watches the games and reads internet articles and blogs, and occasionaly comments. Does it matter to me (or anyone else) how seriously or not seriously you take what I write, or how lopsided you think my comments? The answer would be no. I want to read and write about football, as do most people here. Am I ever right about anything? Maybe, who knows. It doesn’t matter to me, one way or another. I don’t have to be right, and won’t ever take offense to a disagreement, especially one that has been reasonably argued or that brings new facts/observations to the discussion. I welcome it.

The personal simply seems out of place.

that’s been here since before Pete, you’re not paying attention. In the base defense, the goal is to have big corners that play aggressive man press coverage with ET (or maybe Legree) playing deep middle field. When we played soft zone coverage last year it was because (a) we didn’t have the personnel for it and (b) the personnel we did have were often injured (Nate Ness started a game for us). You can’t play aggressively with your corners when they suck.

The 7 DB “bandit” package is one of the more exciting elements of the scheme. It allows for complex blitz schemes and coverage packages, enabling the defense to play aggressively.

and bates not is because we knew we could get bevell in here, and T.jax knew the offense. Nobody on defense would know the new odefense (cause no top defensive coaches were available willing to be defensive coordinators and also having a good/young couple players to bring in.) I’m thinking a new coordinator will be in store. If not, i have no hope for our team no matter the roster changes. Bend dont break defenses dont work. Theladt one to make it to the superbowl using it was the hawks in 2005 but it mainly worked cause of the domination presented by the offense making other teams one dimmensional as they played catch up. I love Pete and J.S, but the smashmouth, line-in-the sand defenses are the ones that win. Pats, Steelers, Ravens, Jets…. they all have wonderful defenses, none are “bend dont break.” In my opinion, a “bend dont break” scheme sounds like “We’ll let you march down the field, but once you get in the redzone, good luck.” the problem is, with the developing talent in the league within wide outs, tight ends, and Qbs, defenses cant shut everyone down when they’re giving up the short passes. There’s too much ability after the catch to effectively use this type of defense. It might have been effective in the past, but the N(ot)F(or)L(ong) is changing and a defense that can make a big play to turn the tide AND consistantly force 3 and outs and quickly end drives is a must. We’re developing the athletic freaks to be able to do that so i cant see the bend dont break staying.