If you've been anywhere in the sports-blogosphere you've probably read this quote:

I'm supposed to be outraged by this, but I'm not. For one, who cares? And for two, I can read. And because I can read I know that Bob Costas isn't talking about me or any of the bloggers I respect. He's talking about the rather massive group of bloggers who are losers, who do you use the access and anonymity the internet provides to be jerks and who don't have responsibility to an employer, or code of ethics or even their own name. If HawkPunch69 thinks "Timmay" Ruskell is an idiot and an ahole and cheaper than Carl Weathers and wants to share his misspelled, illogical opinions to the world, the internet allows that. And calls it blogging. I'm cool with that, but he is not me, is not any of the hundreds of skilled, intelligent writers who run blogs.

Maintaining a hive mentality, thinking an attack on any blogger is an attack on all bloggers, no matter how ignorant or puerile those other bloggers may be, is not the path to respectability. Respect will be earned writer by writer, post by post. So can we call off the blogger-Jihad? Calling someone an "asshat" every time they criticize bloggers for being "school yard bullies" is sort of self-defeating, don't you think?

Doug Farrar (Football Outsiders/Seahawks.net) emailed me this counterpoint to my list of reasons I don't think the Seahawks should sign Grady Jackson. Now, naturally, I don't agree with all of his points, but it doesn't seem sporting to argue them when he doesn't have a chance to defend himself. For clarity I've italicized my original points. If the Jackson signing ever moves past square one, we can revisit this discussion, but for now, without further adieu, here's his counterpoints:

1. He's 34 nearing 35.

Fair point, but if you're looking to do a short-term fix in rotation (which is all the Seahawks should be looking at right now), he's not a bad option. Jackson hasn't missed a game since 2004 - that's never a sure predictor, especially at his age, but it's worth mentioning.

2. His agent is Drew Rosenhaus, so he's not going to sign cheap. Seattle has roughly ten million in cap room, would you rather that be spent on resigning Tru and/or Lock next offseason or on Jackson and whoever else we can then afford?

I'd rather they did all three. The Seahawks will most likely have even more cap room next season, as the current CBA mandates a base dependent on a percentage of revenue. John Clayton has estimated that it could top out at $120M when all is said and done. Besides, Jackson's age and post-trade deadline status really do affect his market value.

3. Jackson becomes redundant the second Tubbs returns.

And the thought of Marcus Tubbs returning and starting in the NFL again is a bit like the thought of Metallica making a truly great album once again - it's theoretically possible, but history's really against it at this point.

4. Brandon Mebane has earned the chance to start; Jackson isn't going to accept playing only sporadically behind the rookie.

Brandon Mebane has earned the chance to start, but the Seattle coaching staff has (hopefully) earned their paychecks by being smart enough to realize that any defensive tackle in rotation has a better chance of lasting the season, especially if said tackle is the only one with his particular skillset. Mebane is a good (potentially elite) zero- or one-tech, but he's a bit of a hybrid three-tech as well in his pass pursuit. Seattle has to go with something more than one legit nose tackle and a bunch of personifications of the Tim Ruskell Midget Defense Theory (Rocky Bernard being the obvious exception, but he's another Swiss Army guy).

5. The Falcons defense was no better at stuffing short yardage than Seattle. That's especially important to note because the Falcons defensive line is very similar to Seattle's. With a one a gap, penetrator at left defensive tackle, and a pair of well rounded ends. Seattle has allowed 73% of power runs to be successful, Atlanta has allowed 73% of power runs to be successful.

The only problem with the general rating is that it doesn't specify who was doing what and when. If we look at Jackson's specific FO metrics for the 2006 season, he ranked 30th in the NFL in Stop Rate against the run, but his yards per rushing play (0.9 YPP) was second behind only Fred Robbins of the Giants among defensive tackles.

6. Seattle is very good at stopping runs up the middle and behind left tackle: 8th and 5th respectively. Atlanta is 14 and 21st.

Right, but where would they be without a legit nose tackle if (God forbid!!!) Mebane got hurt? Where will Atlanta be in a month?

7. Jackson has limited pass rush ability, making him a poor fit for the system.

I'm not sure it makes him a bad fit for THIS system - Tim Ruskell would put 15 pass rushers on the field at the same time if he could, but there are guys flying in from everywhere, especially on passing downs. Someone has to man the point, soak up blockers, blah blah blah (insert other nose tackle clichés here).

8. Jackson is about as popular as the plague. Why bring a question mark into a team that has extraordinary chemistry?

Ruskell's going to get a lot more intel from his old friend Rich McKay (not to mention a certain secondary coach) than we could ever hope to have. There are things about Ruskell's free agency work that give me the heebie-jeebies, but his emphasis on character isn't one of them. If he goes after Jackson at all, I'm not even worried about that.

And though it's not been one of your contentions, I've been laughing my a** off at the idea that "if he's not good enough for the Falcons, he's not good enough for us." Atlanta's FO has had some remarkably spectacular personnel whiffs of late. Maybe if he's not good enough for the Falcons, the Falcons don't know what they're doing. Or, maybe he's a liability for a rebuilding team and an asset for a squad still in the hunt.

9. Grady Jackson is not the difference between Seattle winning the Super Bowl or not.

Sure, but you don't generally get difference-makers at that level off the waiver wire or in a mid-season trade. You get pieces that help. You get a Booger McFarland, and your run defense starts to turn around when it needs to. You get people who can help YOUR specific team, and fill holes that YOUR team has at that point. Maybe that pushes the Seahawks over the line in the one game they need to win for a home field playoff game. Maybe a pissed-off Jackson with something to prove is the guy who stops Marion Barber dead in his tracks in the Divisional round.

I think we may be seeing what Grady Jackson could do for the 2007 Seahawks a bit differently - you may be looking at a longer-term albatross, and under those specific circumstances, I'd agree. But there's tremendous value if you can identify those players who can, on a short-term basis, and for their own longer-term prospects elsewhere, make it happen for your team right now. I just think there's a way to come at this that makes a great deal of sense for the Seahawks, and it's something that I'd like to see happen under the right circumstances.

I have to get out of the house right quick today, and not much is happening, so I thought I'd weigh in briefly on what seems to be two of the hotter subjects in Seahawks land recently: Grady Jackson and the eventual replacement for Shaun Alexander.

Since we tend to notice images before text, you likely already noticed my little graphic. That's my hint to the illiterate or lazy that I am not on the Jackson bandwagon. I haven't time to mince words or be cute, so here's a brief numbered list in descending order of importance of why I don't think the Hawks should bother signing Jackson.

1. He's 34 nearing 35.
2. His agent is Drew Rosenhaus, so he's not going to sign cheap. Seattle has roughly ten million in cap room, would you rather that be spent on resigning Tru and/or Lock next offseason or on Jackson and whoever else we can then afford?
3. Jackson becomes redundant the second Tubbs returns.
4. Brandon Mebane has earned the chance to start; Jackson isn't going to accept playing only sporadically behind the rookie.
5. The Falcons defense has been no better at stuffing short yardage than Seattle. That's especially important to note because the Falcons defensive line is very similar to Seattle's. With a one a gap, penetrator at left defensive tackle, and a pair of well rounded ends. Seattle has allowed 73% of power runs to be successful, Atlanta has allowed 73% of power runs to be successful.
6. Seattle is very good at stopping runs up the middle and behind left tackle: 8th and 5th respectively. Atlanta is 14th and 21st.
7. Jackson has limited pass rush ability, making him a poor fit for the system.
8. Jackson is about as popular as the plague. Why bring a question mark into a team that has extraordinary chemistry?
9. Grady Jackson is not the difference between Seattle winning the Super Bowl or not.

Anyway, I notice a lot of people around Seahawks Insider go nuts whenever a huge defensive tackle is available, and one with a decent reputation like Jackson seemed to create quite a buzz when he was cut. Perhaps I'm in the minority, not evaluating players based on weight and reputation, but I can't see what all the hubbub is about. It's dumbfounding to me that so many people think that Marcus Tubbs' value is vested in his size. Tubbs is a three technique defensive tackle, with the size to play nose and the speed to be a threat in passing downs. In 2005 he record 5.5 sacks--his potential is nothing short of pre-injury Kris Jenkins. Jackson isn't going to replace Tubbs' productions just because he happens to be pushing four-bills. The Hawks shouldn't and won't sign Jackson.

Onto replacing Alexander long term. I'm not going to delve into particular player evaluations, other than to say that I absolutely do not like Tashard Choice (who seems like that disastrous mix of slow and boom and bust), think Felix Jones is a fine talent who may need to be paired with a short yardage back, like any rational man, love Jonathan Stewart's rushing ability (though he has an otherworldly line to run behind) but wish he had better skills as a receiver, am high on Yvenson Bernard but worry about his heavy usage, same story, Mike Hart, and wonder with a loaded draft, a continued de-emphasis on premier backs in the NFL, what team is going to kill their budget to sign Michael Turner. Turner was a fifth round choice, he's not an ordinary fifth round choice for sure, but much of what he's done, like much of Marion Barber has done, or Maurice Jones-Drew has done, is a matter of being spelled regularly and playing behind a great run-blocking line. Still, teams don't learn.

The Hawks desperately need some young blood at running back, but they don't need a superstar to replace Alexander. They need a back who can catch, block and split carries with Maurice Morris. I'd much rather see the Hawks spend their first three picks on a tackle, quarterback and guard then a highly touted rusher. If the Hawks could swing a draft that went something like this: Gosder Cherilus, Colt Brennan, Jeremy Perry and then an Yvenson Bernard or Arian Foster in the fourth, I'd be thrilled. That might be asking a bit too much, but the point is, Seattle shouldn't make it a top priority to sign a running back just because Alexander is so bad. If Seattle could find a coach savvy and modern enough to truly believe in a committee, a superstar rusher is not only not needed, but a waste of a pick that could be put to better use.

The Vikings are reportedly shopping Mewelde Moore. Moore, 25, is buried on the Vikings depth chart. Minnesota is 1-3 (but with a +8 point differential) and looking towards next year, where a good draft, including a franchise quarterback, could quickly return this team, that is talented on both lines, to respectability in 2008 and contention soon thereafter. Reports are that they are seeking a third round pick for Moore and Moore's only known suitor, Tampa Bay, is offering no more than a sixth round pick. Both the Vikings and the Bucs have every reason to compromise. The Vikings are receiving zero value from Moore as-is, while Tampa Bay is now down to only their former fullback, Ernest Graham, to shoulder the rushing attack of a playoff bound squad. The NFL trade deadline is October 16th.

I've long been a fan of Moore. He's a great receiver and a productive rusher, compactly built and though never so entrusted in the NFL, set school records for touches at Tulane. If Seattle traded for him and split carries between Moore and Maurice Morris, Seattle's rushing attack would be improved. Greatly. Morris is a one cut rusher that gets productive yards but lacks big play or receiving ability. Moore is a scat back type, with great second level speed and excellent hands and yards after catch ability. The two, with Morris only 27, could give Seattle a very effective and very cheap running back committee for the next two years. Cheap is important because Seattle has bank tied up in Shaun Alexander. That would also free up our draft for any number of other needed positions: offensive tackle, cornerback, quarterback, pass rushing tackle, defensive end, safety, guard...you get the drift. In this wondrous world of pragmatic-only GMing, even Alexander would have a place: In the red zone. I honestly think that if Alexander could surpass ten rushing touchdowns this season he would be satisfied in a third string role...

Yeah right. And here's the rub, Seattle already has and has had the players they needed to do exactly what I'm talking about. Alvin Pearman is not as good as Moore, but style and skill wise, he's Moore's doppelganger. Pearman got one touch before being placed on IR. Morris is being promised more touches this week, a near self-fulfilling prophecy against a Saints team Seattle should blow out. I'll plotz if he rushes the ball more than five times in the first half. No, there really isn't a good reason for Tim Ruskell to trade for Moore, despite all the very good reasons to do just that, because Moore won't play. That's really a shame, because Moore is even a Ruskell guy. A hard worker, he earned a double major at Tulane. A community guy, he received the Community Service Award for Business Ethics his senior season. He's even a bit of a brain, a member of the National Honor Society and a Mathematics Merit Award Winner. Academics is one of the reasons he picked Tulane over more prominent football schools like LSU and Southern Mississippi.

Moore has never been seriously injured. When I started writing this my attitude was resigned, as I'm typing this sentence my attitude is blossoming into full on pissed. Moore makes so much sense for so many reasons. He improves Seattle in 2007 and beyond. Even if Seattle served up a third round pick, it could be justified given that Seattle must look to draft a running back next year anyway. I've done my best to stay above all the hand wringing that's been done about Shaun Alexander. To me, his play has been predictable. All the sentimentality, loyalty and contrarily character assassination and doomsaying that's punctuated both ends of the Alexander argument is little more than foofaraw. He's just not a very good running back anymore. Any and really all reasonable forecasts predicted that long before even the preseason. What's noteworthy, though, is just how bad he has so quickly become. His name, his contract and his impact on the Hawks' gift shop should not be held above the Hawks chances of title contention, but they will be. All I can think, however futile, is to spread the word, make some noise. We demand more than a broken down once good running back, we demand more than a one dimensional offense, we demand more than complacency in light of a crumbling contender, we demand more than a first round exit and another offseason watching our stars grow old, our window close.

Seahawks Fans Demand Moore.

Continue reading this post »

Actually that's misleading I'm going to attempt to make this pretty short. First let's remove the Bengals game. Let's remove the whole season and start with what we knew about Alexander entering the 2007 season.

• He's 30. If the local media hasn't pounded this in yet, very few running backs stay productive after 30.
• In 2005 he had 370 rushing attempts in the regular season and another 60 in the post season. If you've never heard about the "Curse of 370" or research into how very high numbers of rushing attempts affect running backs you can look here. I'll give you the gist though. Throughout the history of the NFL running backs who have exceeded 370 regular season carries face injury or decline the following year. Most, nearly all are out of the league in a few years following the high workload. Victims include: Earl Campbell, Terrell Davis, Jamal Lewis, Jamal Anderson, Curtis Martin--Larry Johnson had 416 last season.
• In 2006 Alexander had a very down year. This coincided with two events, first Seattle lost the services of otherworldly left guard Steve Hutchinson and second he suffered a cracked bone in his left foot. By the end of the year the 2007 line was set, with Rob Sims finally unseating Porkchop Womack and former first rounder Chris Spencer replacing then 36 y/o Robbie Tobeck. Alexander's performance rebounded. Against the Bears excellent run defense Alexander put up his best game of the year converting a full ten first downs and scoring two TDs. Fans, bloggers and Seahawks rejoiced.

That brings us to 2007. Given Alexander's age, high work load and recent injury it was understood that Alexander would have to defy odds to once again be a top tier rusher. It also must be understood that steep decline was possible.

• Alexander rushes for 105 total yards on 27 attempts. That's a solid fantasy showing. In reality not counting first down or touchdown conversions he had 12 rushes of two or fewer yards and a fumble. He recorded only four first downs.
• Alexander rushes for 70 total yards on 18 attempts. Fantasy owners wonder where his dominance of the Cardinals has gone. Alexander records 7 rushes of 2 or fewer yards, three first downs and a touchdown.

At this point some legitimate concern has arisen from serious Seahawks fans. His superficial numbers look good, but despite facing two mediocre rush defenses, Alexander has posted a -7.1% VOA. This same week the Hawks next opponent, Cincinnati, is allowing 216 yards to Jamal Lewis. Lewis posted a -9.9 DVOA on the Baltimore Ravens the previous season, journeyman Mike Anderson behind the same line posted an 18.0 DVOA. Against the Steelers fourth ranked rush defense from 2006 Lewis rushed for 35 yards on 11 carries, this last week against Oakland's 16th ranked rush defense he rushed for 56 yards on 15 carries.

By almost every account the Bengals rush defense is pitiful. They are then stripped of their starting middle linebacker and their starting left outside linebacker. The linebacker unit is so stricken that former free agent and bowtie salesman Dhani Jones, he of one of the worst run defending reputations in the NFL, is forced into action and records 7 tackles.

• Alexander rushes for 100 yards on 21 carries. He records 4 first downs and 9 carries of 2 or fewer yards. That's pretty bad by itself...

But when one considers the quality of the Bengals rush defense, Alexander's age, his injury history and his performance over the first three games of the season (12 first downs, two touchdowns, a fumble and 28 of 66 rushes for two or fewer yards) and the clear visual evidence that he's slow out of his cuts, being chased down from behind, hesitant to hit the hole, unable to break arm tackles and falling over regularly without any provocation (this is happening at an alarming rate) it's flying in the face of reason and evidence to say he's played well or projects to play better for the rest of the season.

I understand that many Seattle fans think it's Alexander or bust, but consider that all four teams in the NFC/AFC championship games from last season had two rushers with 150 or more carries. Maurice Morris may have zero star potential, but in four of his five years he has recorded a DVOA of 10% or above. Morris, 27, is in his athletic prime. I have yet to see a single rational argument that Alexander should continue to see the vast majority of carries going forward.

It is not my intention to bash Shaun Alexander, nor by any means do I wish for him to fail. The Hawks are a potentially great team, but face a steadily closing window. One that snaps shut the second Walter Jones or Matt Hasselbeck are significantly injured. One player is disproportionately hurting his team through his poor receiving, his poor blocking and to a lesser extent his poor rushing. That player is Shaun Alexander. It's only five attempts, so discount this wholly if you will, but Leonard Weaver and Morris have combined to average 4.8 yards per attempt. Alexander sits a little under 4.2 yards per attempt. That doesn't say Weaver and Morris are better than Alexander, but only that they have played better when given the opportunity. If Seattle wants to compete for a Super Bowl birth, Weaver and Morris must be given more rushing attempts. I can't divine whether they will succeed or not, but I can tell you that if nothing else is tried, if Alexander is given 90% of the carries for the rest of season out of bullheaded loyalty, the Hawks, barring a miracle, have no chance of competing. It's just that simple.

In the process of producing my posts I always have to scrap some ideas because of insufficient information or just because they don't really fit anywhere. I think some of them have a right to be aired though as a sort of disconnected stray thoughts post. Here are some of my thoughts for Sundays' contest.

• The Cincinnati Bengals have allowed 6.1 yards per rush on the season. Their linebackers are easily some of the worst in the league. MLB Ahmad Brooks is doubtful after suffering a pulled groin. It's basically put up or shutup time for Shaun Alexander. For a cutback rusher, this is some kind of dream setup. Alexander must not only produce against the Bengals, he must be a force.
• It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Hawks' corners face some mismatches this week. The level of mismatch is scary though. Chad Johnson is adept at the double move, something I have yet to see Marcus Trufant master. T.J. Houshmandzadeh is a physical receiver that knows how to break tackles and screen the defender when covered tightly. Kelly Jennings is a slight cover corner who falls off tackles and couldn't outmuscle Todd Pinkston. It's beyond imperative that Seattle generates rush against the Bengals, but they also must be able to stop the rushing attack. Favorable down and distance will embolden the Bengals downfield passing attack. And a struggling rush D will force the safeties close. That's a frightening scenario.
• The key to winning a track meet is to simply run faster, longer than your opponent. All indications are that Sunday's matchup will be a shoot`em up, first to forty, offensive slugfest. For Seattle to stay ahead Walter Jones and Sean Locklear must be able to contain the Bengals defensive ends, Justin Smith and Robert Geathers. Smith is a complete end, and easily the best Jones has yet faced. It's arguable whether him looking improved last Sunday was just facing inferior competition. Smith should let us know early. Geathers is a speed edge rusher. Sean Locklear certainly has the athleticism to stop him, but simply can't take plays off. Seattle needs to protect Hasselbeck if they want to keep up with the high-flying Bengals.

"What it is controlled cool, in a way. Always have the situation under control, even if losing. Never betray an inward sense of defeat." -Arthur Ashe

"One botched play and our season's over." -Coach Owens

At a time like this, with the circumstances of the Hawks' first loss almost ponderous in their enormity, fans can be excused if they lose perspective. Losing perspective and questioning a team's heart is natch for the mercurial sports fan, convinced of a win after a dominant quarter or a loss after a blunderous two. More than a few of whom thought it was over after the Cardinals had staked a 17 point lead in the second. Things sure looked grim at the time, the Cards were dominating field position, had just ended an almost breezy TD drive of 3:31, and with 5:50 left in the second quarter, the Hawks had been outgained almost three to one: 174-60. Seattle's offense was fresh off the second of two three-and-outs in their last three drives. Shaun Alexander had rushed for five yards on six carries. Clancy Pendergast looked Belicheckian in his ability to know the Hawks' calls, stuffing the box on runs and blanketing receivers on passes. But the Hawks battled back. Had it not been for guts, heart, nerve, determination, grit...Seattle wouldn't have been able to break our hearts in the waning minutes of the fourth quarter. A broken season does not a broken heart make, though.

Every Super Bowl winning team in the last three years has lost a close game late: A sucker punch, a befuddler, a game "good teams don't lose". Peyton Manning and the Colts watched Rob Bironas nail a 60 yard field goal to ice a week 13 loss to the Titans in 2006. Steelers' fans could be forgiven if they questioned their teams' heart in 2005. After suffering a week three come from behind victory by the Patriots on an Adam Viniateri field goal within the two minute warning, Pittsburgh would watch its 2005 squad lose two more in overtime. A year earlier it was that Pats squad that was recovering from a perplexing loss. Wunderkind quarterback Tom Brady threw an interception to the then 2-11 Miami Dolphins to set up a late Derrius Thompson TD reception. Brady's response, "It was just a bad play."

As it was when Alexander ran into Matt Hasselbeck and Mack Strong whiffed on his block, a bad play. It does not mean that the Hawks are chokers or losers or can't get it done when they need to. Just as allowing 431 yards doesn't erase the Hawks defensive dominance over Tampa Bay. A Buccaneers offense that spent Sunday carving up one the NFC's title entrants from last season, the New Orleans Saints. Had Seattle been blown out, or a key player injured, perhaps some of the rampant pessimism among the Hawks faithful would be warranted, even justified, but though tough losses sting extra, they count no more in the standings. So man up Seahawks fan, time to show a little heart, the season isn't lost and it's way too early to give up on true contender in the soft NFC and the ever softer NFC West.

The mass of NFL analysis reminds me of this line from The Simpsons: "Excuse me, but 'proactive' and 'paradigm'?  Aren't these just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important?" In other words, it's hackneyed gobbledygook. When you hear an analyst use phrases like "physical", cite player versus team stats, talk about a team's need to score early or mention a team's need to establish the run game or conversely stop the run game/force the other team to pass, you can safely stop listening, stop reading and do something else.

Any defense that is playing well is always playing "physical", have you ever heard someone say "boy the Hawks' defense is really dominating out there, must because everyone is playing so soft, arm tackling and giving big cushions in coverage." No, because playing good defense is playing physical defense. Period.

Player versus team stats are less than meaningless. Does anyone think that despite the high turnaround in talent and coaching in Arizona that Shaun Alexander gains some sort of boost just from playing a team with a red bird on its helmet. Player versus team stats are the product of small sample size and meaningless coincidence. Any time someone sites such a stat you can ignore it.

Do I even need to explain the score early thing? Does anyone not understand that staking a lead improves the chance a team will win a contest? Regarding rushing, teams that are winning rush the ball more. Teams that are losing pass the ball more. Rushing the ball more often does not make a team win more often, it's just something coaches do when they have a lead because rushing more effectively kills the clock and is less likely to lead to a disastrous turnover. Saying that a team needs to prevent the run, force the other team to pass, establish the run or not rely on the pass is tantamount to saying that a team needs to end the game with a pare of kneel downs. You're using effect to describe cause--it's backwards.

Football has more than it's fair share of this garbage floating around. Do yourself a favor, tune it out. If you're curious as to some other findings regarding football's most bandied truisms, take a look at this page. It's a little dated and I hope to update it soon, but it still might help those who have been raised on the wisdom of player-analyst (and really has any word been more bastardized the past few years than analyst?) cut through the crap.

I was stopping by Football Outsiders as I often do and came upon this link to Robert Weintraub's story about the most valuable positions in the NFL. The problem here is that it's too absolutist. The most valuable position on one team can be considerably less valuable on another. With so many different strategies at play, how can one assume that a single standard can be given for the value of all positions in all schemes?

It's a fun idea to work with, though. I thought I would try my hand at defining the most valuable positions for Seattle in both Mike Holmgren's offense and John Marshall's defense.

Mike Holmgren's Offense

John Marhsall's Defense

I'm interested in everyone's opinions.

There are some days I just feel like packing this blog in, handing it over, and joining a knitting circle with a bunch of other spinsters. Today was almost one of those days.

WTF?

I mean, seriously. WTF?

Continue reading this post »