Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Not all is lost in Seahawks’ first loss

Post by Todd Dybas / The News Tribune on Oct. 7, 2013 at 5:46 am with 181 Comments »
October 7, 2013 6:26 am

Good morning.

The Seahawks wake up today at 4-1. Around the Web are several stories touting the Colts as Super Bowl contenders. Though they lost, that speaks well for the Seahawks. They had two plays that led to a 15-point swing in Indianapolis: The blocked field goal that was returned for a touchdown and the safety that was not ruled a touchdown. Yet, they still lost by just six on the road against arguably the AFC’s second-best team (I’d take the Colts over the Pats and Chiefs, but not the Broncos).

To the links:

> Here’s my game story, focusing on the problems on third down, plus the Seahawks’ surprising inability to close the game Sunday.

> Dave Boling says there were lessons to be learned from Sunday’s loss.

> We took a look at Jermaine Kearse’s day.

> We also took a look at Bruce Irvin’s return.

> Our notebook talks about the play by Jeron Johnson that was ruled a safety and not a touchdown. Pete Carroll said officials told him that Johnson did not appear to control the ball.

> Here’s a photo gallery from the game.

> NFL.com says that was a statement win for the Colts.

> ESPN says the Seahawks’ first loss was a painful one.

> Here’s a video breakdown from ESPN.com

> The Wall Street Journal wonders where Russell Wilson and Andrew Luck rank among the best young QBs.

> NFL.com’s Judy Battista says the Colts followed Chuck Pagano’s lead and stepped up in class.

> SI.com notes that the Indianapolis rally was the ninth fourth-quarter comeback for Andrew Luck.

> Bob Kravitz of the Indianapolis Star says the Colts are legit Super Bowl contenders.

Leave a comment Comments → 181
  1. sluggo42 says:

    For those who say the officiating didnt change anything, I refer you to SB 2005.

    But like I said, Shit happens. We werent beaten.
    As crappy as we were at lots of things we still should have won the game, we were better, on the road, early, back east.

    I feel sorry for Tenn next week, its going to be a rough day for them.

    Lots of good points last thread.
    Bevell…. open your eyes mate. You’re slipping into crap mode again…

  2. Dukeshire says:

    The refs were only a factor because Seattle allowed them to be with their own poor play.

  3. sluggo42 says:

    Many of the failed third downs happened due to crap play calls, Im sure the better typers will expand on that as the day goes by. The running game was good early, and they suddenly decided to throw the ball as the main option, which led to RW running a whole lot. Without the aid of tape to watch, It sure seems to me that there should be somebody open after he leaves the pocket, but before hit crossed the LOS. do the WR’s go into block mode, hence not be open?
    I used to be a big Rice defender, but starting to wonder now. Does every team have a fantastic corner they all put on Rice? Why does Kearse get open the 2 plays he gets in the game for?

    Does RW have trouble seeing over the line? I hate to throw out a possibility that will be met with hisses from all, but that thought crosses my mind more than once or twice a game. Fortunately hes a great runner but we may just have a QB thats forced to run more than a tall guy just cuz he cant see everything that happens. If this is why he plays as he does, we just might have to get used to this style and to quit complaining about the deeper routes that dont happen. I’m not saying its a bad thing mind you, just a different thing. And that perhaps one of the reasons its successful, as nobody can do it like he can. Still a passing threat, but in a different way…

  4. yankinta says:

    The Refs were definitely a factor but that’s is still no excuse. I’m worried that the Best Secondary in the NFL does not have an answer for Bunch Formations….that was a bigger disappointment for me than the refs. But I do know I DON’T want that same crew to work our playoff games nor the Super Bowl..

  5. tchristensen says:

    The PI’s on Sherman and Browner in the 2nd half were killers and led to touchdowns. The Colts were picking on Browner and made him pay often,

  6. I still don’t understand why we didn’t pound them with Lynch more. They had no answer.

  7. JMSeaTown says:

    Sherman giving up on the catch where Earl turned Hilton back inside bugs me. Seems like the Hawks got burnt on a lot of blitzes too. FGs instead of TDs is the #1 reason we lost this one…

  8. yankinta says:

    MNHawk, I completely agree with you. I was questioning the play calls as well. Maybe our OC felt that the refs changed the momentum of the games with their one-sided calls, and we wanted to changed it back by going for the big plays…. I would have liked to see them stop the run first…

  9. CDHawkFan says:

    Yanker,

    Want to address 1) in your view Luck being somewhere in the 15-20 range of QB’s, and 2) a blow out vs Indy? Neither was evident yesterday.

    I only ask because you have a big mouth.

  10. Dukeshire says:

    The thing about Sherman “giving up” is that’s an impossible assessment without knowing if Sherman was supposed to be in man (that appeared to be zone) or if It was Thomas’ responsibility over the top. Either way, Sherman took off in pursuit as soon as he recognized the breakdown.

    The two plays that really bother me today are having to call a timeout on a extra point because they couldn’t get the right package on the field, and Sweezy taking an illegal man downfield because he didn’t know the play. Both are basic day 1 installs.

  11. yankinta says:

    CDHawkFan, Luck definitely played like a top 10 QB yesterday. But I don’t think he played better than RW, not even close considering RW’s Pass Protection vs. Luck’s Pass Protection,, and the last int for RW came at 4th and 10, at the end of the game (look up Hail Mary Rules for Ints)….

    It should have been a blow out. We should have been up 17-0 and the colts were losing confidence quickly….but the Refs kept affecting the game (Tate’s offensive pass interference/bogus call), which was a shame for all Football fans, even if they didn’t have a rooting interest and only wanted to watch a good game.

    I only answer because you sound naive…. :)

  12. Dukeshire says:

    The play calling issue I have was that Indy clearly had an answer the the read-option: crash the DE, the QBs indicator that he needs to keep the ball, and kick that sides LB to the edge. It negated those plays with regularity and Bevell continued to go to it. The rest of the league will take note as to how effective that defensive scheme was vs read option

  13. yakimahawk says:

    Duke,
    You are not implying that was Shermans fault, correct? Like others on this blog…They we were in safety deep zone I beleive which was 100% on earl to get his ass over there and he overplayed the middle and got sucked in like last week. That may be the only 2 mistakes you see Earl make for the rest of the year. He is a very smart player and the LOB will be back!

  14. yankinta says:

    Dukeshire, I agree with you on the first one but I don’t agree with Sweezy penalty. That’s was a Read Option play where RW had the option pass or throw after reading the d-end and keeping the ball. I think that’s more of Sweezy not being patient enough or not reading the play correctly. He was too aggressive and possibly cost us the game….

  15. Dukeshire says:

    Russell Wilson hits a wide open Tate and Tates PI later is irrelevant. This loss is all on Seattle.

  16. HawkFromDay1 says:

    The bunch/stack formations give the WR free(er) releases – that’s hard on us since we press CONSTANTLY.

    Thought this was a pretty decent road performance with some bad breaks (the FG block [pretty perfect Colt's bounce], the safety/non-TD, and a busted coverage or two).

    I think the film will look pretty decent – Colts couldn’t run on us, we ran the ball pretty well, didn’t turn it over (except for FG block and late pick) and turned them over once on the fumble.

    4-1? Yeah I’ll take it.

  17. FleaFlicker says:

    Agree with both of Duke’s points. In any game there is going to be some effect from the referees. When you battle a team dead-even, that margin can be tilted by even a single call. If you want to win, you need to win.

    We had decent run blocking and pretty horrible pass blocking. RW put too much air under a couple big opportunities (like Tate being wide open for a guaranteed TD). Confusion on assignments in the secondary.

    This team played their hearts out last week in Texas. Can’t help but think they were still a little bit mentally/emotionally spent. No Unger, Okung, Giacomini, Miller….that’s four starters missing on the line. And this team was still a score away at the end.

    Give me a healthy offensive line and Percy Harvin and we roll Indy. And every other team out there.

  18. Dukeshire says:

    It was read option, and perhaps it was due to impatience. But then that says he’s fundimentally unsound, which is just as bad in my view. Athleticism aside, he’s inconsistent at best and a liability at worst up there. He cannot afford those mistakes. Either way, the read option is a basic camp install and he simply has to know his assignment.

  19. ChrisHolmes says:

    Outside of the refs (which I’ve railed against enough already) I was pretty disappointed with Bevell’s play calling. He’s too enamored with the read-option.

    Early on we ran Marshawn really well. Then Bevell started calling the read-option. That frustrated me. It just wasn’t effective outside of one or two plays.

    And I thought the Colts answer for it was really smart. They started spying a LB on the free QB/RB combo, which allowed the DE to just choose a singular target and not worry about thinking, but instead drive on the target.

    I’m no defensive guru, but it looked to me like the DE and LB were working in tandem, and deciding who the DE’s target would be before the play. If the DE decided to target the QB, the LB spied the RB. If the DE decided to target the RB, the LB spied the QB. It was effective at stopping the read-option. I thought it was a great strategy for neutralizing that play.

    The only way I’d run the read-option in the future is if the play is called in conjunction with a pass play, so that Russell can audible at the LOS as to whether they are running the read-option or the pass play. Kind of the way Peyton Manning runs his offense (he gets three plays, 2 passes and 1 run, and the decision is made at the LOS).

    Otherwise, I think the Colts showed us the way to stop the read-option. And we need to abandon it so that Russell can start focusing on being a premiere QB with a more traditional offense, where he can use his legs to escape broken plays…

    Because RW is a smart kid. Has a cannon for an arm. He’s accurate (though he does float some, I think due to adrenaline, and he needs to work on that). Sure, our line isn’t giving him a lot of time, but he can get the ball out fast (and did at times yesterday) and we could run some more traditional bootlegs from under center. I want to see more of that… more runs from under center, more bootlegs, and more screens. We need to help our OL out right now.

    The read-option… just looks like a dead-end to me. It’s over. Russell needs to be spending his time and reps practicing reading defenses on pass plays, knowing exactly where to go with the ball when he has 3WR, or 4WR, or 5WR in the pattern. You watch Peyton Manning… guy can’t move, can’t run, and doesn’t get sacked. Why? Sure, his line protects better than ours, but he knows where to go with the ball… I know RW is 23 and has a long way to go, but I feel like all this read-option nonsense is stunting his development. And it starts at the top. Bevell has to be the guy to start turning away from that offensive gimmick.

  20. ChrisHolmes says:

    “It negated those plays with regularity and Bevell continued to go to it. The rest of the league will take note as to how effective that defensive scheme was vs read option.”

    Exactly. Bevell seems way too enamored with the read-option.

    If I had a QB who couldn’t throw well, like Terell Pryor, okay, maybe I run the read-option more, lean on it a bit more. But we have RW. It’s time to let that play go….

  21. yankinta says:

    I agree that the loss was all on Seattle but Tates PI was Bogus and it affected the game. The Refs should never affect a game,, especially if those calls change momentum of the game. At that point it’s a shame for all of us Football fans. I don’t think any of us want that same crew to work our playoff games at all…. let me know if I am wrong about that. :)

  22. Dukeshire says:

    Chris – That’s essentially my point. The Colts had a LB spy Wilson on the read option (not unlike Houston the week before having a spy for Wilson). But the Colts gave their DEs the freedom to crash the RB without concern for Wilson’s running because they had LB responsible for contain. Very simply and very smart on their part.

  23. Dukeshire says:

    The refs effect nearly every close game. Just as they did in Seattle’s favor the week before.

  24. yankinta says:

    ChrisHolmes, I wouldn’t say that defensive scheme was effective against read option play at all. Just look at how many rushing yards our QB had and our RB had… :)

    But I agree our OC should have kept running the ball down their throat (non-read options plays),, even after the refs changed the momentum of the game a few times…

  25. Interesting third party assessment: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/10/07/refo-sea-ind-week-5/

    I think the Colts should give the game ball to Ron Winter.

  26. yankinta says:

    lol, how did the refs affect the Houston game? Educate me please…

  27. Dukeshire says:

    Nearly all of Wilson and Lynch’s yards came from play other than read option. Indy did a great job defending it.

  28. Dukeshire says:

    It’s a pointless exercise to have any reasonable discussion with you. You’re already in “educate me” defensive mode. Lose the attitude for once.

  29. yankinta says:

    What??? lol we must have been watching a totally different game. smh…

  30. yankinta says:

    No, really, educate me. I really don’t understand how you could compare the ref affecting the outcome of the Houston game versus the Colts game. Or maybe you just like to argue with me for some reason… :)

  31. ChrisHolmes says:

    “ChrisHolmes, I wouldn’t say that defensive scheme was effective against read option play at all. Just look at how many rushing yards our QB had and our RB had…”

    Then you weren’t watching the same game I was watching.

    We had a couple yards off the read-option early. Then they stuffed it.

    One thing to note is that there’s a difference between the read-option and a simple hand-off from a shotgun set. We had a lot of simple hand-offs, and we got yards from those because we run-blocked well. I thought I could hear John Lynch incorrectly calling a hand-off a read-option play once when it clearly wasn’t a read-option play. It was just a hand-off from a shotgun set.

    Some of the NFL announcers are pretty dumb. Lynch sees the QB in shotgun hand the ball off and he automatically thinks it’s a read-option play…

    The read-option is a different play and the Colts negated it with a very simple, very effective scheme. Bevell kept going back to it with DIMINISHING results, to the point where RW got tackeled behind the LOS on that last 4th down…

    It’s a play that needs to die so the offense can focus their attention on other stuff.

  32. Dukeshire says:

    I’m going to do a Bruce Irvin breakdown tonight and a read option rushing yards vs all other plays and let the facts, as yank loves so much, speak for themselves.

  33. yankinta says:

    ChrisHolmes, I guess I have to go look for an article supporting what I said but that’s too much work for me to do, just to prove you wrong….so you win. :)

    I’m more concerned about defending Bunch Formations. When we face Speedy WR’s and we are unable to press because of their formations,, then our Secondary becomes an average Secondary. The same questions were asked after the Denver Pre-Season game,, but Sherman and DC said it was just a mis-communication on their part,,and it’s easy to fix. I really do not agree…. I think that’s our Defense’s biggest weakness, especially when we can’t have a consistent pass rush!!

  34. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I wonder how well the Colts,( or any other team for that matter ) will be able to contain the read option when we get 5 of our offensive starters back?

    Having Miller out really handicapped this team yesterday imo, and they still out gained them in their house.

    You know you have a good team when they can make so many mistakes in a game on the road against one of the top ten teams in the NFL and still almost come out with a win.
    This team still has a lot of work to do but I see things coming together very nicely for them towards the end of the year.

  35. ChrisHolmes says:

    I’d like to see that Duke.

    I wish I could afford the all-22 film. There’s stuff I’d like to analyze myself… I’ll have to check my budget. I’d really like to spend some time analyzing passing routes and RW’s decision making processes.

    I am really interested in your breakdown though. Please do it. Because from where I was sitting, the read-option running plays look like they did not account for much (there was one play that RW ran to the right, against Mathis, where he kept it, early in the 1st quarter I thought, and that accounted for some yards, but that seemed to be the extent of it).

    It was our standard rushing plays that got the chunks, from what I saw.

  36. Dukeshire says:

    You don’t have to look for an article, just re-watch the game. Or, admit that you don’t know everything (at least to yourself), especially scheme related, and that you might learn something from someone else. That’s what’s great about this blog, when it’s at it’s best: there are a lot of smart football minds here and we can all learn from one another.

  37. yankinta says:

    ChrisHolmes, I do remember that during one read option play, our Rookie Willson forgot his block assignment, where he actually run by the LB he was supposed to block,, maybe in 2nd or 3rd Qtr…. RW had like 20 yards to gain if that LB was blocked…. in that particular read option play, I don’t think that’s Colts D stopping us, it’s our Rookie that stopped that big play.

  38. Dukeshire says:

    ChrisHolmes – I have the Game Rewind, which has the All-22. It’s a great resource. I’ll post each of those breakdowns tomorrow morning, for sure.

  39. yankinta says:

    Dukeshire, lol I never said I know everything. I just know some things really well. :)

    p.s, I’m still waiting to hear how you could compare the ref affecting the outcome of the Houston game versus the Colts game…

  40. No kidding, UO’s TE Colt Lyerla just quit their team and the school he said to go pro (after being suspended by the team from playing at Colorado). If I was PC/JS I’d bring him in for a look before he goes directly to PHI.

  41. ChrisHolmes says:

    “I wonder how well the Colts,( or any other team for that matter ) will be able to contain the read option when we get 5 of our offensive starters back?”

    Starters won’t matter with the defensive plan the Colts showed. It just takes two guys. An athletic, speedy LB and let the DE crash his target. It’s a simple defense that largely takes our guys out of the equation.

    And that’s the thing: the read-option is a college level gimmick play. It’s designed to get positive yards for a college QB in a simple way by eliminating the QB’s need to read the defense. Instead of having to read the entire defensive front and the entire defensive field to determine what to do with the ball, the QB just needs to read the DE. Simple. Hand-off or run for it. Read one guy. It’s the same idea as offensive plays and systems that only ask the QB to read half the field; it’s designed to simplify the QB’s thinking.

    Well, Colts showed us, it’s also simply defended.

    The thing is… there are already ways – more effective ways I think – of running similar plays and getting better yardage, than with the read-option. If you want to put pressure on the defensive front (and not just the DE) then run screens, bootlegs, draws, in conjunction with your power running attack and play-action passes out of the deep pocket. You put all those elements together and you can keep an aggressive defense off-balance.

    But Bevell doesn’t call a game that way. He’s not using all the tools in the offensive toolbox. He’s just leaning on the read-option and RW’s athleticism.

    You take a standard bootleg play that is run from under center, run action play-side, bootleg backside, with WR running horizontally across the action… Now that’s a play that is effective with a normal, non-mobile NFL QB, but you go and you run that play with a guy who has Russell’s athleticism… lookout! And you have something potentially explosive; something netting positive yards without the same level of risk to the QB that is inherit in the read-option play. And that’s a play that you can call either way at the LOS. If the play-side defense shows a formation that is susceptible to the run, you run it play side. Just handoff and take the yards. If the play-side defense shows you a front that says the bootleg will be the better option, you run that. Either way the defense doesn’t know what’s coming based on formation… You have options at the LOS.

    RW is a smart guy. He needs options at the LOS. Not just options at the “mesh point” of a read-option play. But options prior to the snap… So he can look at the defensive alignment and choose the best play.

    The read-option is done. It’s over. There are better plays in the playbook. It’s time to load them up and use them.

  42. Dukeshire says:

    My point there, is that as an example, the personal foul where Baldwin got slammed to the turf. That was a *huge* call in the Hawks favor, and doesn’t always get called. Right call or wrong call is indifferent for the purpose of my point. My point, again, is that in close games the refs nearly always have some influence. The Houston game was no different.

    The call against Tate was bad, I agree. But only Seattle’s play allowed that to effect the outcome.

  43. ChrisHolmes says:

    “ChrisHolmes – I have the Game Rewind, which has the All-22. It’s a great resource. I’ll post each of those breakdowns tomorrow morning, for sure.”

    Duke, sir, I look forward to it :)

    You just turned a crappy Sunday into a decent Tuesday. I’m going to enjoy your breakdown.

    Might be enough to force me to get Rewind.

    Last thing: this might be a dumb question, but I assume Rewind lets you watch from a browser? I have no cable/satellite TV. Just internet.

  44. “and Sweezy taking an illegal man downfield because he didn’t know the play”

    I was wondering about that play, and whatever the reason for Sweezy’s error on that play – it was a major blunder. Took away a big play at a key time.

    We made some mistakes on defense, and for sure some key calls didn’t go our way – but to me there are two causes for the loss – our offensive line play, and Indy’s QB.

    Yes, we piled up a bunch of rushing yards, but you can’t give the O-line credit for a single one of RW’s 102 rushing yards, and while the run-blocking was decent enough most of the time, the pass-blocking is such a glaring liability that it changes the game. The 2-12 stat on 3rd down is just another indicator of the same – Russell has zero time on almost every dropback. If he wasn’t such an adept scrambler, there’s no way we get 28 points. I keep railing on McQuistan, and I know it’s not his fault, etc., but almost every team we play is going to have at least one good pass rusher, and of course they’ll line him up against our LT on passing downs. Watching Matchis run by or spin around McQ time and time again drove me crazy. And you have to think it’s getting into Russell’s head. He knows he won’t have any time to watch the patterns develop.

    And as to the 2nd reason – Luck is very, very good. Made some really great plays under rush pressure. He is as advertised.

    When is Okung coming back??

  45. GeorgiaHawk says:

    The 49ers used the read option 16 times in the first three weeks and gained just 26 yards.

    It certainly is not a bread and butter play for teams to use anymore imo but I don’t want to see it scrapped altogether just yet. Just use it smarter and less often which is what they didn’t do against the Colt.

  46. Dukeshire says:

    ChrisHolmes – It does. I watch them all from my computer. Also, NFL might offer a break on the price as the season wears on. Just a thought.

  47. pabuwal says:

    Yank – you have to admit – Hilton and Luck owned the Seahawks Defense yesterday. It got to a point early in the fourth quarter where it felt just like the Detroit game last year (with Titus playing the role of TY) and the Seahawks had zero ability to stop the Lions in the second half of that game as well.

  48. GeorgiaHawk says:

    ChrisHolmes-I agree that it looks like Bevell is not using all the tools in the offensive toolbox. He’s just leaning on the read-option and RW’s athleticism, But when alot of the tools in the toolbox are made in China, and some are broken it doesn’t give you a lot to work with sometimes.
    I’m not trying to defend Bevell though, just trying to make more sense of things.

  49. The thing about Sherman “giving up” is that’s an impossible assessment without knowing if Sherman was supposed to be in man (that appeared to be zone) or if It was Thomas’ responsibility over the top. Either way, Sherman took off in pursuit as soon as he recognized the breakdown.

    Disagree totally – it was Earl blown coverage – but Sherm was NOT running full speed to catch up to the play after the fact – compare his speed and effort on that play to the speed and effort after his INT last week. Not even close IMO. (watching it live)

    If it had been he would have had a CHANCE to make a tackle when ET turned him back inside

  50. thursday says:

    I certainly understand wanting to blame the refs and in a close game, just about anything swinging the other way can swing the game. However, I don’t personally like blaming the refs because that puts the game and win out of the Seahawks’ control. And I think they had plenty out there that they could control and failed to do so.

  51. Southendzone says:

    Pabs, totally agree that was deja vu from last year’s DET game. Tough to watch.

    Hawks were within a hairs width in probably 6 different plays from winning yesterday. My biggest one was huge 1st down pickup from 3rd and 22 from the 7 yard line by INDY on the BB pass interference call.

    That was totally set up by Luck getting the Hawks to jump offsides with a hard count which was SO OBVIOUS it was coming, Luck is smart enough to know there’s NO WAY ON EARTH they are gaining that 1st w/o a penalty. Hawks should know this too, plus he’s already been hard counting all day. Huge blunder.

    The Sweezy penalty was brutal as well. Overall the refs screwed us a little bit but we should have been able to play through it given our 12-0 lead.

  52. yankinta says:

    Dukeshire, WOW really? Right call or wrong call is indifferent to your point? Then I guess we’re speaking different language. Plus, I have never watch a game where a CB Slamming a receiver to the floor like the Houston game,, and not getting a flag. Maybe you can point out to a game in particular and I will go look it up…. I think the rest of the “Smart Football minds on this blog” agree with me on this. :)

  53. yankinta says:

    pabuwal, I do admit it. In fact that was my first post (where our Secondary’s inability to stop speedy Receivers without the Press, i.e Bunch Formations)…. but you have to admit the ref crew’s incorrect calls changed the momentum of the game more than a couple of times….even the announcers pointed them out….

  54. montanamike2 says:

    I can live with one or two blown calls and winning past adversity but like i said about 6 calls! Don’t get me wrong Indy played lights out in the second half but i think we should have won imo.

  55. yankinta says:

    thursday,, I do not blame the ref for the loss. The loss is on us. But their incorrect calls affected momentum shifts in the game. All I’m saying is, I can speak for everyone, when I say we hope this same crew do not get work our playoff games….

  56. montanamike2 says:

    posted at the same time.

  57. pabuwal says:

    Remember, Clemons banged Luck in the head on the strip sack while the Colts were near FG range. The Seahawks then took the ball and scored a quick 3 as well. So that was anywhere between a 3-6 point swing as well.

    Maybe Duke can chart this – how often do Browner and Sherman hold the WR (or tug at the jersey) with the ball in the air? I am guessing its much larger than most of us think.

    I thought we were past this, but the Seahawks Defense played a decent Offense on the road and were owned in the 4th quarter. I think this was just an aberration due to the back to back early games.

  58. sluggo42 says:

    So interesting, so I’m the only one that thinks that RW’s height affects the passing game?
    I say this because when I watch Payton, or even Tannahill, they get the ball out quick. Super quick to all sorts of guys. But I never see RW doing that because he can’t see them. RW is scary in his ability to squirt out of the bubble and run, which the big tall guys can’t. Its a different way to play the position, and effective in its own right. But I think thats why we dont see any of the quick hitters, and why everyone is questioning our WR/s.
    So, getting RW into positions where he can see them as somebody just suggests with some roll-outs and having a TE/WR rolling the same way where if the LB is keying on RW, he can then throw to somebody. But a blind run OPT with nobody as an outlet to throw to is not going to get it, unless we can get a guard to pull to remove that threat.

    Dont get me wrong, I’m not complaining, but rather trying to understand his strengths and weaknesses. He can run like no other, but he can’t see what others can, so we can’t run the “normal” passing scheme of other teams, and we should understand how that limits the plays that the WRs get

  59. ChrisHolmes says:

    “Hawks were within a hairs width in probably 6 different plays from winning yesterday. My biggest one was huge 1st down pickup from 3rd and 22 from the 7 yard line by INDY on the BB pass interference call.

    That was totally set up by Luck getting the Hawks to jump offsides with a hard count which was SO OBVIOUS it was coming”

    That’s the play I have the most problem with, not because of the offsides though. Because even with the DL jumping, it’s 3rd and 17 after the penalty. I still don’t think they pick that up. I think they punt. Instead, they drove the field and scored a TD. I think the game shifted dramatically on that one call.

    And the problem I had with that call is that last week Golden Tate got his feet tangled up with a defender on a long pass play and it was a no-call. “Incidental Contact”. No flag.

    I’m fine with that if that’s really the call…

    This week, they called it P.I.

    That sort of inconsistency is just maddening to me. And it swung the game a fair bit.

    But even still, Duke and some others are correct here in saying that, essentially, we could have overcome those flags if we’d made a play or two somewhere else.

    Just to show you guys the math: if we would have scored TD’s instead of FG’s yesterday, it’s 44 points on the board.

    44…

    We had our chances. We should have won.

    What I hope comes out of this is some honest assessment about the defense and what they can do better, and the offense and the play calling. We’re not using all our offensive tools. I hope someone at Seahawks HQ honestly assesses the read-option package and decides to start weening us off that package so we can implement some other stuff that should be more effective.

  60. pabuwal says:

    Wilson’s height does negatively impact the passing game. But like we said before, during and after the draft, what he brings to the table everywhere else more than makes up for that.

  61. jawpeace says:

    The worst thing about yesterdays lost, me not starting Hilton on my Fantasy team.

  62. “Disagree totally – it was Earl blown coverage – but Sherm was NOT running full speed to catch up to the play after the fact – compare his speed and effort on that play to the speed and effort after his INT last week. Not even close IMO. (watching it live)”

    Watching it a couple times – what I think happened re Sherm’s lack of hustle on the back-end of the play – honestly, I think he assumed that Earl was going to make the tackle on Hilton. It turned out to be a bad assumption, and of course it’s not the right way to finish a play, but I do think it was that rather than laziness. It’s an explanation, not a excuse, but that is what I think happened.

  63. WiscCory says:

    After the first 10 minutes, I thought the Hawks were on their way to a blowout of Buffalo proportions. However,

    – Seattle missed the knockout punch once they allowed the FG block.
    – Indy adjusted and played well.
    – Yankinta was wrong. Shoulda would coulda, but you were wrong!
    – LOB failed in coverage and a few missed tackles
    – Hawks playcalling was good from my point of view, in offsetting the potential pass protection exposure, however should’ve given Beast a few more touches in the second half.

    This sucks. However, maybe a little humility is what Sherman needed. Talent isn’t questioned, however separation is in the preparation, right?

    Learn, don’t blame the officials, and move on.

  64. “I thought we were past this, but the Seahawks Defense played a decent Offense on the road and were owned in the 4th quarter”

    Luck was better than decent during that part of the game. His playmaking was the difference; and we still had our one last shot w/the ball to win the game. Some games we make that drive and pull the game out – didn’t happen for us yesterday.

  65. WiscCory says:

    Jaw – me too. BUT, why in the hell would you start a WR against the Seahawks??

  66. Southendzone says:

    Chris Holmes,

    totally agree with you on the Read-Option and what the Colts were doing to stop it. They are obviously scraping that LB (#50)over the top of same side as the DE who crashes in on the RB.

    Once you see them do that 2 or 3 times, you have to move to a play that is going to exploit that tendency. I don’t know what that play is, but our coaches should.

    I like the read option and think it gives us a lot of flexibility esp when he fakes the handoff and ends up throwing it, but it has to be adaptable.

    There’s an article somewhere on Grantland about how to defend the RO and it mentions that LB tactic specifically. It was from last year end of season or shortly after.

  67. yankinta says:

    WiscCory,, lol, yes I was wrong but sounds like you were thinking Yankinta was Right!! at least for the first 10 minutes, while shaking your head…. please admit it, that’d make my day… lol :)

  68. good thoughts PDway :)

    Yankinta – Plus, I have never watch a game where a CB Slamming a receiver to the floor like the Houston game,, and not getting a flag.

    While I can’t give you specific examples of plays it does happen – Baldwin drew the flag because the ref had blown the play dead. Both guys were in a stalemate and he blew it dead and was actually running to spot the ball and THEN he got slammed. So it was an “after the play” type of penalty

  69. abqhwkfn says:

    Wilsons height is irrelevent. The problem comes from poor pass pro and poor wr play. The wrs are never open when the ball should be released. Then the pressure comes and its a scramble. Please let Rice walk. He is useless. Let Kearse take his spot. We have no go to wr. A bunch of #2 wrs. With a legitimate #1 WR our above avg #2s would be great. I hope Percy can add something but I dont see him has a #1 WR.

  70. MoSeahawk12 says:

    I agree the refs played a hand in all of this, especially on the Tate PI BS call, however we’re up 12-0 and Indy has nothing going on. They’re deep inside their end facing 3rd and what 18 or something? We probably stop them there and they punt from their end zone giving us the ball around mid field at worst. Clem jumps offside and then Luck being smart throws one deep knowing he has free play. Why in the hell does Browner even need to touch the receiver let alone shove him down? That was just stupid and yes the pass was uncatchable, but that was in plain view of the refs and unnecessary. That was what a 38 yard penalty? Gives the Colts a huge play and life. Browner doesn’t make a stupid play there and they punt, we probably score again as their D was gassed. Now instead of being up 12-0, we might be 15-0 or 19-0 and the Colts are completely out of their game plan. I think that was the turning point of the game. Well before the refs jumped in and added to it. Browner hurt this team yesterday, multiple times.

  71. ChrisHolmes says:

    “Super quick to all sorts of guys. But I never see RW doing that because he can’t see them”

    You’re making an assumption that I don’t think is accurate.

    Brees is the same height, essentially. He can get the ball out quick when the play calls for it. The OL is schemed to create throwing lanes. Watch Manning too – he’s still throwing through lanes most of the time. Every QB in the NFL will tell you – no one throws over guys who are 6’8″ banging each other in the trenches, and throwing hands up to block passes. It’s throwing lanes.

    Wilson has lanes. And a couple times yesterday he *did* make some very fast reads and throws, as the plays allowed.

    But watch our WR’s; we’re not running a lot of quick routes, and our guys are having trouble getting open on certain plays.

    Bevell’s offense is not a traditional West Coast, 3-step drop, short-passing game designed to take the place of a running game. It’s just not. That moniker that you hear the NFL talking heads lay on Bevell’s offense just isn’t accurate.

    Bevell’s offense is very much a more traditional offense. It’s power running with play action. Vertical routes. Shot gun spread formations. I mean, I’m not sure Seattle ran ONE play yesterday that Bill Walsh would say was a “West Coast” offense play.

    And I’m fine with that, personally. I’m not a big West Coast offense guy. There are concepts within the WC offense that translate to all offenses for given plays (dropback footwork tied to route length and timing can be used on plays outside of a WC playbook).

    In fact, I quite like a lot of Bevell’s playbook. I like the 4WR and empty sets from shotgun, especially if you are using multiple route combinations on both halves of the field to give your QB a chance to beat man or zone coverage. I like the I-form and 2TE stuff in the running game, especially if you’re going to add in bootlegs, screens and play action off that stuff. And with our running game, you can really sell that stuff well.

    Problem I have is that Bevell is not using these formations to their full effect. We’re not seeing the degree of bootlegs we could be seeing, because read-option plays are vultering the play call opportunities. We’re not seeing as many play action passes as we could because, again, the ineffective read-option is sucking up play call opportunities.

    And I’m not sure what Bevell is doing with his route combinations on 4 and 5WR spreads (you can’t see it on TV, only the all-22 would tell you).

    And where is the screen game? Jesus, have we not learned how effective of a weapon that play can be when a guy like RW drops back to pass? Why is that not part of our arsenal?

    Anyway, back to the original point: I think RW’s height is a not factor. I think it’s a host of other issues. The OL doesn’t give him time to pass when we’re running route combinations that take time to develop. We’re not calling many fast-delivery pass plays either. I thin if you want to question something and figure out why the offense doesn’t seem to be explosive or consistent, I’d point the finger at Bevell.

    Don’t get me wrong: I like him and a lot of his offense. But I think he could hone some stuff… I’m not sure he’s taking advantage of RW’s skillset the way he should be. I think he’s too enamored with RW’s ability to run the ball.

  72. WiscCory says:

    Tell the truth Monday.

    Yank, you were wrong in your prediction, and I don’t think about you during the games.

    I do think you bring some spice to this board, however my Seahawks fandom doesn’t revolve around you, bro.

    I do wish you were able to boast about being right today. Oh well….

  73. yankinta says:

    xcman,, really?? as Obvious as the Baldwin play?? Where the Ref blew the call from within 5 yards and CB still playing 3 seconds after the ref blown the dead,, without anyone else nearby??

    I guess I want to believe you but I don’t think it was that Obvious as the Baldwin play…..

  74. TallyHawk says:

    Tough loss to take. There were more than enough plays the Hawks didn’t make that the refs had nothing to do with. Should’ve won but didn’t. 4-1 would’ve sounded great before the season, still sounds pretty good now.

    Yakinta, you do not speak for everyone here

  75. Southendzone says:

    Ok I looked up that old article. Here’s a description of techniques used to defend the Read Option, and one tactic that SF used to beat this particular defense, you bring a FB into the formation along with the RO play.

    http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9508313/after-offseason-searching-nfl-coaches-know-how-defend-read-option

  76. yankinta says:

    WiscCory,, Darn!! so close!! lol :)

  77. I know i’m a broken record, but I don’t think it’s Wilson’s height, and I don’t necessarily think it’s the receivers (as always, it’s very tough to tell if guys are open on the normal tv coverage you get) – it’s just a fact that on most pass plays, and on every must-pass play (e.g. 3rd and more than 4 yards), Wilson has zero time in the pocket. Guys are getting immediately beat on the O-line, and it’s killing our plays. These back-ups can run-block, but we can’t pass-block at all. I don’t think it materially changes until we get Okung back, and to a lesser degree Giacomini and Unger. I just hope Russell isn’t too shell-shocked at that point. No way we want him running for 100 yds again this season.

  78. yankinta says:

    TallyHawk, so it’s not true for you? You do want that same ref crew to work our playoff games?? wow.

  79. Commenting on another part of the game – – I thought Clemons looked good yesterday, active on the pass rush. Didn’t notice Avril at all, and Bennett was less of a factor that he had been in prior weeks.

  80. Dukeshire says:

    pabuwal- Absolutely right. That should have been a personal foul on Clemons, but wasn’t called. When people like yank complain about officiating, they fail to acknowledge those things as well.

  81. yankinta says:

    Dukeshire, lol, yeah that was as obvious as the baldwin play from Houston game,, smh…

  82. Skavage says:

    I don’t want to say I am glad we lost but I will say I am glad we will see us slide down the so-called “Power Rankings” across all these NFL web sites. It will give us an opportunity to run under the radar for at least a few weeks. In the mean time let the Saints run up front for the NFC.

  83. from Grantland (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9784782/bill-barnwell-week-5-nfl):

    “Independently of how well they played, the Colts did have a number of notable calls go their way in this game. A 28-yard Golden Tate catch was written off by a phantom pass interference call on Tate. A third-and-22 incompletion that would have given the Seahawks excellent field position was whistled for a 39-yard pass interference call on Brandon Browner on a pass that wasn’t remotely catchable.1 Another third-and-10 on what ended up being the game-winning drive was converted on a very questionable Richard Sherman pass interference call, while Darius Butler broke up a pass on Seattle’s desperate final drive by reaching around Sidney Rice and launching off his hip to break up a pass. (The Colts did have a bad call go against them when Chris Clemons strip-sacked Luck on a play when Luck was hit in the helmet and should have been granted a roughing the passer call.) The Colts weren’t lucky to win, by any means — both teams played well, and somebody had to get these calls one way or another — but it was a truly dismal officiating effort.”

  84. montanamike2 says:

    Another week will help Irvin get back while he’s learning on the job. This loss isn’t completely on the refs.

  85. montanamike2 says:

    Good post pdway.

  86. ChrisHolmes says:

    “I like the read option and think it gives us a lot of flexibility esp when he fakes the handoff and ends up throwing it, but it has to be adaptable.”

    Southendzone – thing is, I’m not even sure we have those plays in our playbook. When was the last time RW faked a read-option hand off and threw the ball?

    The read-option, as it sits right now as part of our package, reminds me of the Wildcat when other teams (outside Miami) started to run it. Part of the “threat” of the Wildcat was that the guy receiving the snap *could* potentially throw the football. It forced defenses to respect the passing element of the formation, and that made it so that the defense couldn’t cheat it’s guys to the LOS and just crash down on the runner.

    Well, then teams like the Jets started running it without any threat of a pass at all, and defenses decided to just flood the LOS with defenders. Guys started getting tackled in the backfield and before you knew it, the Wildcat was dead.

    We’re seeing the same exact thing with the read-option, and part of the issue is that defenses just are not respecting the passing element of it, in large part because no one is passing out of that formation anymore.

    And I think there’s a couple of reasons for that.

    First, I think QB’s and OC’s recognize that, at least at the NFL level, defenses are too fast to pass out of the read-option. At the collegiate level you can get away with a passing game based off the read-option because your QB is a superior athlete and not likely to be harmed after keeping the ball at the mesh point.

    But in the NFL, the whole idea of throwing off the mess point is a nightmare waiting to happen. You’re asking for your franchise QB to go on IR. The defenses at the NFL level are just way too fast. You’re intentionally leaving the DE unblocked, and you’re going to throw off that? From a position where you’re QB is facing the DE?

    You’re much better off, if you want to throw off that *style* of action (looks like a run, but it’s a pass), by running a traditional bootleg or play action pass, where you have a smaller chance of letting a defender come free and kill your QB.

    The second thing I think is that QB’s and OC’s recognize that if you’re going to actually pass the ball at the NFL level, there are simply 200 better plays in your playbook for that to happen. I think that’s precisely why the 49ers didn’t run the read-option against Green Bay in the opener: they knew the GB pass defense could be exploited, so why waste a play call on a read-option pass when you can just drop back and run a much better, much more effective pass play?

    Look at our pass plays this year. When has RW been the most effective? I don’t have chart, but from what I’ve seen, he’s been really effective in the pocket on a straight drop back from center or a shotgun snap. He knows he’s passing in that situation; he’s able to read the defense, decide the best target for the ball, manipulate safeties with his eyes, and deliver the ball on time. And if the pocket breaks down, run it.

    I might be wrong on this, but I think RW’s best runs have not come off designed read-option plays, but when he’s ran out of the pocket on a designed pass play where the OL has broken down its pass protection. That’s when he’s killed defenses.

    If I were Bevell, I’d focus more on the passing game plays and less on the read-option. It’s just taking away a chance to run a better play, IMO. You get three plays for a first down. Stop wasting chances on plays that aren’t optimal.

  87. yankinta says:

    pdway,, Thank YOU!! Now I hope all this noise from people wanting to ignore (ignorant people) will quiet down now…. No one is complaining. But we do not want that same Crew to work our games in the future….

  88. Lynch has been dinged up all year, and it’s obvious to me he is a touch slower. He appeared gimpy in the second half, and I think Seattle went to the pass because of it. There’s nO way Seattle abandons the run unless Lynch is gimpy.

    The lines inability to pick up 2-3 yards on third down has led to Seatle abandoning even trying to run the ball on third down–except that failed qb keeper. It’s been several games since Seattle tried a run on third and 2 or more, unless I’m mistaken. And 90% of the time, even in short yardage the pass.

    Which is an indictment of the line. My problem with that is that too many of their third down passes seem designed to go to one guy, with only one outlet–and the plays are only designed to gain five yards even if the work perfectly. Bevells play calling in the red zone–really inside the 35–has always been iffy; this year it’s terrible. Way too conservative; why can teams with lesser qb and WR’s throw more TD’s?!

  89. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I didn’t like the officiating too however the Seahawks made way to many mistakes to win a game on the road against a good team with a top 10 QB that is the best in the NFL right now with 4th qtr come back wins.
    We are lucky to get out of this road trip 1-1.

  90. Too Much Read Option this game.
    If they keep it up Wilson will eventially get hurt, he took a couple of big shots today.
    Also think Wilson was keeping the read far too often this game essentially trying too hard. He also needs to work on his passes this year, seems a lot are sailing high, which sooner or later will end up being intercepted.

    Need to get th O-line blocking better on everything ASAP. Lynch and Wilson making them look better than they are, replacements or not they need to do better.

    As for comparing the Houston slam down that was after the whistle to Tates BS Offensive PI yesterday is DEAD WRONG and an apples and oranges comparison. One gets called nearly every time, the other rarely if ever gets called with the minimal contact that occured. Wasnt like he pushed off like the 2 point conversion the colts had.
    Officials changed the momentum of the game numerous times withbad calls starting with the failure of calling possession for a TD on the blocked punt. HUGE 12 points a 2 or 3 score game with FG’s to a 17 point or 3 score lead. It’s one thing to botch a call here or there but continuously it’s rediculous and happens far to often to this team.
    In the end the Seahawks could have maybe should won the game in spite of the calls but just didn’t have it at the end. Defense tired and Offense could not execute when needed. Part of the problem with that is 2 in a row 10 am long flight starts against good opponents.

    Colts schemed our defense well and made some plays when they needed to. They played on our aggressive ness and or coverages several times, the first TD where 1/2 the people here blame Sherman for but it was the Safety not getting there, Sherman was covering someone on the flat there were 3 receivers on that side Sherman and the LB covered 2 and the Safety should have had the 3rd Sherman peeled back when he saw the throw but it was too late. Yea it did not look like he hustled but the damage was done. Another big play was 2nd half think 4th quarter Sherman and others got sucked up to a shorter route by being aggressive and they completed a to the 1 or 2 yard line over the top of the crashing DB’s. Schooled by the several plays the Colts called. Good to learn from for later in the year.
    If the D-line gets more pressure maybe those long developing plays don’t happen.

    It’s early in the season 4-1 and leading the division.
    I’m Happy just dissappointed we arn’t 5-0.
    At the start of the season most here did not realistically expect us to be 5-0 with the schedule we drew.
    Enjoy the ride boys and girls it’s gonna be a fun one

  91. Dukeshire says:

    yankinta – Are you claiming you didn’t see Clemons hit Luck in the head when that play happened, live? That would actually explain a lot regarding why you miss so much during games, and need it explained to you later. Perhaps you simply missed that one play, which is also a possibility. But look, blaming the refs for that loss is really not understanding why Seattle actually did lose. Regardless, the only thing we agree on here is that there were some bad calls.

  92. Duke, God bless you and yours, and thank you for coming in here to help us get a better understanding of what just happened, your input is greatly appreciated. Could you, would you, please also look at he total the number of plays SEA was in different personnel (11, 12, 21, etc) – or direct us to a source for that info? I’d also like your understanding of how well different personnel would fare with different alignments of defensive fronts(?)

    Chris Holmes – same thing goes, but I would also like to say that read option is a little more than just a college gimmick, when run right. If you have a chance, watch the huskies hosting the Ducks this coming Saturday closely. Even if UW should wallop UO, there is much more to read option than just a coupla inside zone reads. SEA has barely scratched the surface of the read option scheme.

    From PFF, RW dropped back to pass 42 times:
    No pressure: 20 snaps, 132.0 NFL QB Rtg
    Pressure: 22 snaps, 15.2 NFL QB Rtg

    No blitz: 22 snaps, 74.3 NFL QB Rtg
    blitzed: 20 snaps, 84.8 NFL QB Rtg

    Andrew Luck dropped back to pass 33 times:
    No pressure: 23 snaps, 114.8 NFL QB Rtg
    pressure: 10 snaps, 69.9 NFL QB Rtg

    no blitz: 23 snaps, 70.8 NFL QB Rtg
    blitzed: 10 snaps, 155.8 NFL QB Rtg

    Pass Rush:
    IND’s D: sk 2, ht 6, hu 20. SEA’s D: sk 2, ht 4, hu 12.

    For IND: ROLB R.Mathis got 2 sacks, 5 hurries. LOLB E.Walden got 2 hits, 4 hurries; and RE F.Moala, LILB J.Freeman, and LE L.Guy each got a hit and 2 hurries. RE R.Mathews got one hit and one hurry. LE C.Redding got 2 hurries and both FS A.Bethea and RILB P.Angerer got a QB hurry.

    SEA’s OL vs Pass Rush (71 total snaps, 44 pass, 27 run):
    LT P.McQuistan allowed: sk 1, ht 1, 6 hu.
    LG J.Carpenter: sk 0, ht 1, hu 2.
    C L.Jeanpierre: sk 0, ht 0, hu 3.
    RG J.Sweezy: sk 0, ht 1, hu 3. Plus a penalty.
    RT M.Bowie: sk 0, ht 1, hu 2.

    For SEA: DLE Red, DLT T.McDaniel, DRT B.Mebane, & DLT J.Hill each got one QB hurry. M.Bennett got 2 hurries.
    DRE CC got a sack and 3 QB hurries, SLB BI got a sack and 2 hurries.
    DLE O.Schofield got a QB hit, DRT C.McDonald got a hit and a hurry, and DLE C.Averil got 2 hits.

    IND’s OL vs Pass Rush (66 total snaps, 37 pass, 29 run):
    LT A.Castonzo sk 1, ht 0, hu 3.
    LG H.Thornton sk 0, ht 1, hu 0.
    C S.Satele sk 0, ht 0, hu 2.
    RG M.McGlynn sk 0, ht 0, hu 3.
    RT G.Cherilous sk 0, ht 1, hu 2.

  93. yankinta says:

    lol, Dukeshire, show me one of my posts where I blamed the Refs for the loss…. you can’t!! saying the refs affected the game with their bad calls (incorrect calls) is VERY different than blaming them for the loss. smh…

  94. @yank – – to be clear, my perspective is that while we were on the wrong end of some calls, it wasn’t the refs that cost us this game. Not at all. As I said earlier, there is some blame to be placed on several parts of the team, but in the big picture, it’s our inability to protect on passing downs, and Luck’s playmaking that made with one an L instead of a W.

  95. Southendzone says:

    As far as the refs go, the Tate PI was the most shockingly bad call in the game. There was zero push off, he made 1 move that sort of slapped down the defender’s hand. Something you see all the time.

    That call is one that really makes me question what was going on at an overall level by the refs yesterday, that’s not an “oops I made the wrong judgement”, that’s “I’m looking for something on this play, and goddamn it I am going to call a penalty on the Hawks”.

    The head shot on Luck was one they just didn’t see and we got lucky there. That Tate PI (And maybe the non-call on Rice on 2nd to last play of the game) seem like a case of pure bias.

  96. aelliott11 says:

    Seriously, Yankinta, you’ve got to stop with the emoticons. I mean really. Every. Single. Post. I don’t think you’re quite the villain you’re often made out to be, but your point – even when valid – gets totally lost when you end every post with a :)

    End it. Please.

  97. yankinta says:

    lol aelliott11,, sorry dude. But I only post those if I am really smiling…. I really don’t have hidden meaning when I post those,, plus of the over 20 postings today I only had eight :). plus I’m not the only one that use them, you can double check…. :)

  98. yankinta says:

    pdway, I’m on the same page as you. except I’m not worried about Luck, I’m worried about defending Bunch Formations. We have had ZERO answers for Bunch formations….which worries me a lot. I think a lot more team will try that with us in the future games….that could be our Kryptonite, which scares me a lot…

  99. yankinta says:

    Southendzone, totally agree!! I remember feeling the same way in 2005,, about refs having pure bias…. maybe we’re wrong but I couldn’t help but feel that way during the game. But we still could have overcome those and still win that game…. it would have been sweet to stick it to that Ref Crew!!….

  100. ChrisHolmes says:

    klm008 – Thanks for the post man. Appreciate those numbers. Seems to back up what I was saying above about RW being effective as a passer when he dropped back.

    The pressure number bothers me though. I wonder, of those 22 snaps, how many he ran on and got positive yardage? Because that does not factor into the QB rating according to what I know about it (formula here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating#NFL_.26_CFL)

    But a 132 rating on 20 unpressured snaps tells me that RW knows how to throw the ball… And Bevell is wasting it on the read-option.

    And that’s what I wanted to say back in dialog to you klm008: I have no doubt you’re right about the Oregon/WA game and the read-option. We *are* barely scratching the surface compared to what college teams are doing with it and what can be done with it.

    That’s kind of also my point as well; because we’re not doing enough with it, it’s not respected enough, and defenses are stopping it.

    And I think that means you have two options at this point: Abandon the read-option, because you’re not using it to full effect, and focus on more traditional passing, running and play-action elements, or you MUST go all-in on the read-option.

    I think at the collegiate level it makes a lot of sense to go all-in with the read-option for a lot of reasons. College football games are decided more by the exceptional talent of the athletes on the field vs. the kids who are there for education. You don’t need a cerebral Peyton Manning type kid to run a read-option offense at the college level and be successful with it. And that’s a big reason why it has evolved in college football – because finding a Peyton Manning to run your college offense is rare. College coaches need to win now, with inferior talent, and that is how offenses like the read-option and Air Raid get invented.

    But this is the NFL. Everyone is fast. Everyone is good. Everyone is an elite athlete.

    And RW has proven he’s a passer. He’s smart. He studies hard. I think he’s the kind of passer who could someday dissect defense the way Manning or Brady or Brees does. And I think we’re wasting time with him by having him take reps on read-option plays; especially because we’re not 100% invested in every wrinkle that the read-option can provide.

    I’d rather abandon the read-option and invest more reps and time in the other sets. With a 132.0 passer rating its clear RW can throw the rock.

    And if there’s anything I’ve learned from watching other QB’s in the league all these years, it’s this: the really elite guys spend all their time working on the passing game and all the little, subtle details of it, because something as simple as your eyes moving a safety can be the difference between a win and a loss.

    Russell has great legs. He has a great mind and great heart. He’s a fierce competitor. But someday those legs aren’t going to be as spry as they are now. He needs to be working on his mental game so when that day comes, and he can’t pull off that read-option play, he doesn’t have to. That play doesn’t even need to be in the playbook, because RW has 200 other plays that are designed for him to drop back and slice and dice the defense to death..

    That’s what I want to see.

  101. GeorgiaHawk says:

    yankinta is right, he never said anything about the refs costing us the game. He said the refs effected the game more against us then the Colts. And I agree with that.

    I think sometimes the refs are affected or influenced more from the home crowd.
    I remember that John Madden was a master at working the refs on the sidelines. He would constantly be on them. Lol. It was fun to watch.

    Yankinta is clearly wrong though about Luck not being a top 10 QB.

  102. MEhawkfan says:

    I’ve read through all of these… some good posts. Certainly, there were bad calls as well as bad non-calls in yesterday’s game. Admittedly, I’m a homer, but I do think the Hawks got the short end of the stick when it comes to the officiating. Still, there is nothing to be done about the way officials call a game. The end point here, the one I hope the team learns, is you have to play well enough to win regardless of what the referees do or don’t do. Obviously, Seattle did not do that against the Colts. Consistently settling for threes instead of TD’s is a formula for defeat.

    Right now, I don’t see the Hawks beating New Orleans or Denver for that matter… even at home. They need to get healthy for one. Good thing NO’s not coming to town until Dec.2nd. Hopefully, this loss will be a good wake-up call… for the coaches as well as the players.

  103. yankinta says:

    GeorgiaHawk,, lol thanks for the first part. As for your second part, I said that he’s not top 10 QB based on his 2012 (look up his completion % and adjusted ints),, not this year. This year he is playing like a top 10 QB,, but the season is young and the circumstances has been in his favor. So let’s wait and see.

    But I don’t know what to make of RW’s season so far (in terms of passing the ball, not making plays),, our Pass protection has been the bottom 3rd of the league and seem to be getting worse…. I guess we’ll have to wait and see when our real OL returns.

  104. Dukeshire says:

    klm008 – I do and I’ll do formation breakdown. Probably all I’ll have time for tonight though…

  105. montanamike2 says:

    You don’t get a lot of 3rd downs when you’ve only 1.5 seconds from being sacked, man we need help on the line.

  106. ChrisHolmes says:

    “But I don’t know what to make of RW’s season so far (in terms of passing the ball, not making plays),, our Pass protection has been the bottom 3rd of the league and seem to be getting worse…. I guess we’ll have to wait and see when our real OL returns.”

    I, for one, am encouraged by RW’s play.

    For starters, we know he’s playing behind a shoddy OL. We know if this were any other non-mobile QB, we’d be leading the league in sacks given up right now. RW’s legs have turned a lot of negative plays into positive ones.

    What I find encouraging is that RW continues to look to pass the ball down field, despite the horrible OL play. I remember the Rick Meier days… he got gun shy fast. Scared. Stopped looking down field… You worry about that with a guy who can run. But RW isn’t Meier. Not even close. He’s looking down field all the time, trying to throw it to someone. I like that about him.

    I’m encouraged by some of his throws. At his best, he’s laser-accurate. He throws a very pretty, very catchable deep ball. He’s smart and cat-quick. I think he studies hard and knows where to go with the ball.

    He’s prone to floating some balls. Honestly, when I watch him, I simply think it’s adrenaline. I think Russell is stronger than he knows, and he’s amped up and he’s overthrowing. And the reason I think it’s mostly adrenaline is because Russell never under-throws a guy. He’s not scattershot like a McNabb. He’s not left or right or down. His misses are up. Always. To me, that says adrenaline.

    RW is playing very well considering the circumstances. Bad OL play, an offensive coordinator who keeps calling too many read-option plays, we’re playing GOOD defenses early in the season, and we’re on the road and playing 10am games.

    And RW is giving it everything he has. You can see it. He’s leaving it all out there, every game.

    I’m encouraged. Our schedule has been tough. Our OL has not. He’s under duress and he’s fighting.

    He’s young and still growing into the role. He’ll study, he’ll correct things… This journey has only just begun.

    In Russell we trust.

  107. seahawk44 says:

    OL is the whole problem.
    Does anybody think we could trade Avril and Rice for a stud OT that can play either side?

  108. yankinta says:

    ChrisHolmes,,, what I meant was I don’t know what to make of RW’s season so far (in terms of passing the ball only, but I have no questions about him making play,, he’s the real deal when it comes to making plays with what he has. His play making the main reason we’re 4-1, imo.

  109. rramstad says:

    This isn’t fantasy football, and it’s not baseball or basketball where teams throw players around like trading cards… the possibility of “trade Avril and Rice for a stud OT” happening is ZERO.

    I’m actually always kind of amazed when I see suggestions made that are totally outside what is possible in the NFL.

    Among other issues, teams cannot trade salary responsibilities, and there isn’t a single team in the league that could take the salary cap hit of Avril and Rice, even if they were shedding the salary cap responsibilities of an OT.

    More obviously, stud OT do not grow on trees, and there’s not a team in the league that would trade a stud OT for a WR and DE package… the WR and DE are situational rotational players and the OT is a cornerstone building block that’s out there every offensive snap.

  110. Raiders cut Matt Flynn

    Guess he’s available for a lot less than a 2nd round pick now.

  111. yankinta says:

    Yeah, can’t believe some of us were wanting Flynn to start, before and during last season instead of RW…. smh…

  112. @chrisholmes – – – your post nicely sums up exactly my thinking about Wilson too.

    Given the way the line has played the last couple games, I think that there are maybe 2-3 QBs in the league who could have been as or more effective as our guy. If that many.

    would love to get injury status updates on Unger and Okung . . .

  113. ChrisHolmes says:

    Wow…. the Flynn star fell pretty damn fast.

    I liked the guy too. Bummer for him.

  114. “Raiders cut Matt Flynn

    Guess he’s available for a lot less than a 2nd round pick now.”

    Kind of strange to me – seems like he could still be a serviceable back-up. Maybe he’s more of a pain in the locker room than we knew?

  115. montanamike2 says:

    Are we going to see a Mattflynnisabust troll?

  116. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Does anyone know what the conditional 2015 pick is for the Flynn trade?

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9787117/oakland-raiders-release-demoted-qb-matt-flynn

  117. I have to imagine the conditional pick was tied to playing time and starts rather than just making the roster.

    Senecca Wallace is probably worried at this point, but who wants Flynn starting if the starter gets hurt?

  118. Southendzone says:

    Joe Thomas of Cleveland comes to mind as a great OT (never missed a start) who would be up for trade because EVERYONE in CLE is up for trade.

    However there’s no way they want Rice and Avril (expensive and 1 year deal for Avril). Cleveland knows they are rebuilding so you’d have to deal draft picks or young players to get them.

    For in-season trade of expiring contracts (don’t know what is up with Thomas), you can make salary caps work by the current team re-doing the contract and pushing current year salary into a new signing bonus.

  119. TallyHawk says:

    Actually yakinta I don’t care who refs the games if the hawks are in the playoffs. IMO the refs are pretty bad in every game on a weekly basis. Sure some weeks more calls go against you but that’s just how it goes. The size and speed of today’s players and game is too much for them, many of whom are twice the age of the men they are trying to officiate. Not to mention its easy to spot all their errors with a hi def tv and slo mo replays from every angle.

  120. yankinta says:

    TallyHawk,, lol I guess you may be the only one because I have not seen anyone else feel the same way you do. There’s nothing wrong with that. Maybe you should read what Southendzone wrote… :)

  121. ChrisHolmes says:

    Next 6 games:

    Tennessee
    Arizona
    St. Louis
    Tampa Bay
    Atlanta
    Minnesota

    Considering what we just went through in the first 5 weeks, I think we’re looking good.

  122. doubledink says:

    Yank, don’t go acting like you predicted the Wilson over Flynn decision.

  123. GeorgiaHawk says:

    TallyHawk makes some good points, especially about the age of the refs.

    I wish they were younger and it was there only job. Do they even have an age limit for refs in the NFL? How about eyesight requirements? And condition requirements?

  124. Is it me or have the comments on this blog started deteriorating?
    I used to come here for intelligent Seahawks related conversation, now it seems it is a constant one-upmanship on who knows more about what.
    Probably have to hang over at Condotta’s blog….

  125. GeorgiaHawk says:

    yep ChrisHolmes, only one top QB in that group, and it will be interesting to see how Freeman does in Minnesota.

  126. yankinta says:

    Umm, I didn’t predict that but I was calling for Flynn to be traded right after the Rookie Camp and right after the Kansas City Preseason game last season.

    rodman, I agree with you. People are obsessed with calling me out. smh….

  127. yankinta says:

    GeorgiaHawk and ChrisHolmes,, I see 3 losses on the Saints’ schedule. This would mean we’d have to go 13-3 (including beating them on Dec 2nd) to have the home field advantage in the playoff. What do you guys think?? :)

  128. doubledink says:

    Yank, you didn’t have anything to say on this blog until Wilson was named starter for the 3rd preseason game against KC.

  129. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Of all the possible things that contributed to the Seahawks losing yesterday Luck tops that list for me.

    Check out what Matt has to say about him-

    http://www.kansas.com/2013/10/06/3042250/happy-to-have-luck-on-his-side.html

  130. yankinta says:

    ok, for the sake of argument, let’s say you’re right. So?? I was still a lot earlier than 97% of people on this blog…. doesn’t mean anything. :)

  131. yankinta says:

    GeorgiaHawk, I think most people are brainwashed when it comes to Luck. I mean he did play well yesterday but only after the momentum shifted (Thanks Refs) and their OC started calling plays with Bunch Formations…. I guess maybe I’m easily not impressed…. He did make a couple of throws that were impressive,, but then we’ve seen those from RW, from Day One…where’s the hype for RW??

  132. doubledink says:

    97% of the people on this blog don’t claim to have said from the Monday after the draft that that they declared that we found our franchise QB and we should trade Flynn. You have and you didn’t.

  133. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Thanks Browner for lighting a fire under Hiltons behind yesterday-

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2013/10/06/ty-hilton-seahawks/2933915/

  134. ChrisHolmes says:

    Home Field Advantage…

    Well, here’s what I think (for what it’s worth, which is nothing):

    Looking at the remainder of our schedule, ours looks pretty soft. I think we just weathered the worst part of it, by far. We have games later against Atlanta and New Orleans. I think that’s our test right there. And I think that game against the Saints will be for home field advantage, by the time that game rolls around.

    New Orleans has a really tough 4-game stretch later in the year:

    Home games against the Cowboys and 49ers, then on the road against Atlanta and Seattle, in that order. That’s a really tough 4-game sled there.

    The rest of the Saints schedule looks pretty soft to me as well, including next week against the toothless Patriots. But… Bellichick doesn’t tend to lose back-to-back games, so maybe we can cross our fingers and hope for an upset there. (That said, the Patriots just look completely weaponless right now, and that is not good when you’re playing the Saints).

    I dunno… Saints look good right now. And they have a killer TE and TE’s give us trouble. We know the Saints won’t run on us… But they will throw the ball all day long and move the chains. I hope our OL is healthy by then, because honestly, I think our OL decides that game. If our OL is healthy and we can run the ball and call play-action and control the clock and keep our defense off the field, then I think yes, at home we can win that game and win HFA.

    But if our OL is still in shambles… I don’t know that we can win a shootout against the Saints, even at home. Their defense is improved under Ryan and they score points in bunches.

    Bottom line: I think someone in the NFC is going 14-2. I think 14-2 gets you home field advantage. I don’t think 13-3 does. Either Seattle is going to have to go 14-2 and beat the Saints heads-up for the HFA, or the Saints are going to have to drop a couple games in that 4-game sled of theirs to fall to 13-3. And I just don’t know if I see it happening.

    They play Carolina twice in the last four weeks though, and we know the Panthers have a tough front-7. But they have a bad coaching staff and they just can’t win games. So Carolina doesn’t scare me, and they scare me even less as the season goes on and Rivera continues to ruin that team (you can just watch the Panthers’ confidence wane from week to week; they hit us as the right time of the season – right at the start – when all their optimism for the year was still in tact).

    If I were a betting man, I’d probably bet on Seattle for HFA only because I don’t like that 4-game stretch that the Saints have to play. No matter how good you are, playing four teams like that in four weeks is tough on you, mentally and physically. I’d expect the Saints to drop at least one game there, maybe two. And one of those games is in Seattle, and that head-to-head matchup will be the key.

    But here’s the last thing I want to say about predicting records: It’s mission impossible. Every year I look at a team’s schedule and think, “Okay, they probably beat these teams, and they probably lose to these teams.” And I’m never right. Teams always lose a game to someone they probably shouldn’t, and they always win games against teams they probably shouldn’t. It’s just the nature of the beast. Maybe New Orleans goes 4-0 in that stretch, beats Seattle, but loses to Carolina and the Bucs… I mean, you just can’t predict this stuff.

    I do think, however… that the way the schedule shakes out, and because I do feel strongly that it’s going to take 14-2 to get home field, that we’re going to see some important games in weeks 16 and 17. I don’t think New Orleans or Seattle gets to rest starters week 17. I think those games end up counting…

    That’s just my impression from where we sit, after week 5. I reserve the right to be totally wrong.

  135. doubledink says:

    pabuwal, “Raiders cut Matt Flynn

    Guess he’s available for a lot less than a 2nd round pick now.”

    the initial prediction was a first round pick.

  136. ok, for the sake of argument, let’s say you’re right. So?? I was still a lot earlier than 97% of people on this blog…. doesn’t mean anything.

    1. it is true
    2. it was about 50 – 50 and most didn’t dislike Wilson as many have stated
    3. if it doesn’t matter stop bringing it up

    4. I love how the story has changed until after the KC game – which is true
    – originally it was “right after the draft”
    – then it was after Rookie camp

  137. yankinta says:

    doubledink, do you understand “what I mean by for the sake of argument, let’s say you’re right…”?? My point still stands. Sorry dude. :)

  138. doubledink says:

    Chrisholmes,
    Seattle is in the best position to leverage their schedule into HFA. I too think it will take 14 wins.

  139. ChrisHolmes says:

    doubledink – you win the conciseness award :) You said what I was trying to say. Nice work wordsmith… “leverage their schedule”. I like that :)

  140. AKhawkFan says:

    Georgia, I was about to link that also. Browner was a straight up liability yesturday. Hopefully we are fired up and make a statement against Tennessee Sunday. I’m okay with 4-1 but the 9ers are breathing down out necks and the Saints are tough as hell. No doubt we are a playoff team, I’m just worried about HFA.

  141. AKhawkFan says:

    Saints and 9ers are the two most inportant games on our schedule. It will be interesting to see who we are rooting for when they play each other.

  142. AKhawkFan says:

    Impryant*, typing from IPhone:/

  143. doubledink says:

    Yank, what point was that? That you claimed that the day after the draft you anointed Wilson? That was the claim that you say you made before everyone else. You didn’t even appear here until Wilson was named starter by the coaching staff. There were lots of folks on here touting Wilson’s abilities and discussing his future for 4 whole months before you even uttered a word. You were behind the curve, not ahead of it.

    Or was it that Flynn is worth a 1st round pick? That was your wish in your first post.

    You do best when you quit trying to show everyone how smart you are and just discuss current football events. Drop the passive-aggressive, narcissistic attitude.

  144. GeorgiaHawk says:

    ChrisHolmes on a roll today. Lots of interesting stuff you’re posting.

  145. ChrisHolmes says:

    Don’t worry, I’ll disappear back into obscurity very soon GeorgiaHawk :)

    Just one of those days… Feel like contributing something.

  146. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Look at the 49ers schedule the rest of the way. It looks like the easiest one.
    I have a feeling it will all come down to that game in San Francisco.
    I hope not though.

  147. yankinta says:

    GeorgiaHawk, lol, yeah you’re right. I don’t want which team to cheer for when 49ers play against the Saints anymore…. lol

  148. yankinta says:

    doubledink, now you’re just being ignorant so not really worth my time replying back to you anymore. sorry dude….

  149. yankinta says:

    ChrisHolmes, I guess I disagree with you. Saints should be able to beat Cowboys with that D at home easily. The hard games that I see for them are aginst us and 49ers. ATL is still unknown. Their O-Line has too many injuries and lost a few good players in the FA too. No matter what, we gotta beat the Saints on Dec 2nd to have a chance at HFA, imo.

  150. schmibe says:

    Seattle’s tactical M.O. is a gimmick whose days are numbered. You can dazzle the league with oversized DBs, a small, shifty QB and the Read Option for a season or two, but sooner or later tried-and-true coaching philosophies employed by bona-fide talent will expose you. I think it’s clear Indy’s game plan has cleared the smoke and smashed the mirrors: spy the weak side Read O with a safety or LB and shell the QB keeper/RB with your most effective DE. As for the offense, wring it out with an up-tempo, throttle-down attach and throw strikes/dink-and-dunks over the middle on 3rd down and you’ll convert at least 60% of the time. Booh-yah–there’s your 7-9 season. If I were Paul Allen, I’d have the entire coaching staff on alert and hover pink slips over heads the next time they blow a winnable game. We’ve been sold a bill of goods thus far; Seattle should get real, stop smelling the vapors and insert the Old Faithful pro-football blueprint: a massive, athletic O-line surrounding an accurate 6’5″ QB with a rocket arm who can read defenses. A great D helps, but is no longer indispensable. 3 more wins this season, guys. Take it to the bank.

  151. I don’t get why it’s one or the other? The Hawks would’ve won this game had they played modestly better and they would’ve won if the refs weren’t effing terrible. Regardless, can’t change the refs. They can only learn and play better moving forward.

    I’m starting to be more disappointed in Rice. He better pick it up or he’s going to have to restructure or be cut.

    Someone also said that Avril would be cut for cap room. I bet you it’s CC and not Avril should Avril remain relatively healthy. I can’t imagine them paying CC 9.6 mil next year. And it’s not because I don’t think he’s a good player.

  152. “A great D helps, but is no longer indispensable. 3 more wins this season, guys. Take it to the bank.”

    Thanks for the comedy relief. Will you have the stones to come back when you’re wrong?

  153. “If I were Paul Allen, I’d have the entire coaching staff on alert and hover pink slips over heads the next time they blow a winnable game.”

    You are so right . . .leading the division at 4-1, and losing the first game of the season, on the road to a playoff team, is clearly and obviously cause for a coaching change. Why can’t everyone see that?

  154. I guess you just aren’t thinking on that next level like schmibe, pdway. SMH.

  155. schmibe says:

    Yay! I’ve finally registered for these conversations and have thrown myself into the meat-grinder!!
    BBmate: to call my assessment a bit one-dimensional is a fair criticism, I’m just concerned the issues contributing to this loss aren’t so easily reversed or re-tooled. And I would love nothing more than to come back in 10 weeks and see the Hawks at 12-3 or 13-2, but I see trouble up ahead. I say we win at home vs. Tampa Bay, AZ, and St. Louis and drop the rest.

  156. Time will tell. You could be right. Crazier things have happened. I certainly wouldn’t go to Vegas with your prediction.

  157. I made the jab b/c it’s really pretty early to be putting coaches on warning, don’t you think? We won our first 4 games, including 2 tough road wins, and then we lost by one score against a very solid team at Indy. Teams lose games, we weren’t going to go 16-0. And it’s not like we were blown out, we had the ball w/a chance to win the game, and this time it didn’t work out.

    Things are still looking very good for this squad.

  158. schmibe says:

    I look back with concern at Arizona’s vaunted 4-0 start from 2012. Everybody was talking about their bad-ass D. They were up at #5 in the ESPN Power Rankings and I’m sure Phoenix area fans were giddy. Then reality set in and they rattled off 9 straight losses.

    dang…these Cheetos are really good, bros.

  159. Arizona wasn’t 11-5 the year before, and the Hawks don’t have John Skeleton at QB.

  160. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I like Cheetos!

  161. schmibe says:

    John “Osteoporosis” Skelton.

    Yer right about Skelton and AZ. But what if RW isn’t the answer we think he is? No quarterback of his breed ever lead a team to a Super Bowl championship; Fran Tarkenton got close going 0-3 in the mid 70’s, but that was a different era. I love RW, don’t get me wrong. It’s just that it doesn’t really take much to froth up Seahawks fans. I remember how titillated people got about Dan McGuire, for f**k’s sake (“golly, defenders will just bounce off of him!!!” we marveled).

  162. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I posted an article by Rob Staton earlier that I thought was a good analysis of yesterdays game.

    Then I went back to the comments section there to see him say the O-line played well.
    This dude named JW posted that it was typical Seahawks line play. Good run blocking and poor pass blocking.
    Then after that posters were calling JW a troll, and Staton himself got on his case a few times like this below-

    Rob Staton says:

    October 6, 2013 at 3:47 pm

    I’m sure there are plenty of other blogs saying the backup-laden offensive line sucked today that you can visit.

    They’re wrong, too.

    What a Jerk Staton was! And wrong too.

    I feel like crashing that blog and telling that pompous a$$ a thing or two.
    Makes me feel glad to have had Eric and now Todd here that don’t try to chase you away if you have an opinion that is different from the mass.

  163. RW may or may not be as good as we thought he was after his first season. Early days yet. Hard to judge anything with that shit-sandwich of an offensive line.

    He’s still a franchise qb, and we’re damned lucky to have him. And I think he’s gonna be a top-5 qb, despite his somewhat rough 2013 thus far. (I just wish he’d stop missing wide open duded downfield, esp for TD’d and on fourth down).

    I also think, contrary to many of the comments on here, that this offense not only works well when running healthy doses of the Read Option, but that it flat doesnt work UNLESS we’re sprinkling in read option plays.

    RW has not shown that he can throw the longball with touch/accuracy, nor has he shown that he can see and deliver the ball from the pocket in a normal drop-back. Again, hard to judge with the turdinthepunchbowl O-line.

  164. GeorgiaHawk says:

    STTBM- Do you want to go crash the SeahawksDraftBlog and help JW out from Staton and his kiss uppers that are saying that the Seahawks O-Line played well against the Colts?

  165. Georgia–Jerks like Staton are a large part of the reason I boycotted FieldGulls and BleacherReport for so long.

    The fact that the O-line has three new guys and all but one playing out of position or backup has nothing to do with how well they played; ie, the suck. Yes, they cant be expected to be great, but their play sucked. Funny though, they arent much worse than what we had games 1-3. And they improved since HOU, though that didnt take much…

    All I want for Christmas is Percy Harvins recovery to transfer instead to Okung and Unger. Harvin can go to IR (or hell) for all I care, we dont need him and he wont save this offense. Okung and Unger would help a lot–or at least I would hope so.

    And If Im REALLY GOOD, I wish for Sweezy and fat Carp’s backups to outshine them so bad in practice, that Cable HAS to play them (ie, Unger at C, Lem at G, Carp traded for a pile of horsepoop…).

    Dont worry Georgia, Ive not been terribly good, so wont happen. We ride with SweezyCarpMCQuistan!

  166. sure, Georgia–are you with me?! Lets let ‘em have it! I hate it when BLog writers get all pissy with anyone who dares hold a dissenting opinion!

  167. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Absolutely! I’m headed over there now.

  168. Georgia–Yeah, read Statons responses. They’d be laughable if they werent so petty and rude. Seriously, the guy states that the O-line played well, with no facts or even instances to back up said opinion: then, when someone has the temerity to take issue with his blatant untruth, he and the other commenters hound the dissenter…and none of them ever offer any real proof that the line didnt suck.

    In fact, Staton says “Jesus JW let it drop.I’ve stated my case. You’re wasting time focusing on the line today. So many other things to discuss ahead of that.” this after saying “O-line played well today.” and “I’m sure there are plenty of other blogs saying the backup-laden offensive line sucked today that you can visit.They’re wrong, too.”

    If thats “stating my case” then Im President Obama!

    The line improved, but RW and Lynch made them look better than they really were. The whole gameplan was designed to get the ball out knowing full well the line couldnt pass pro for crap. The line is affecting everything Seattle does.

  169. Posted one quick comment, says its awaiting moderation. Im betting that Staton deletes that comment as soon as he reads it! Just in case, Im posting it here for those that care:

    “Curious as to why Offensive line play is not one of the laundry list of issues to discuss why Seattle lost. Because the guy who wrote the story doesnt want to hear it? Seriously, Rob Staton insists the line played well, yet offers no proof or even a single instance where that was the case.

    In point of fact, 54 of Lynch’s first 94 yards came after contact. That doesnt equate to an offensive line that was performing at a high level, even in the run game.

    The entire gameplan and playcalling was obviously built around the fact that the Coaches knew the offensive line couldnt give them 3 seconds to throw the ball from the pocket on a regular basis, nor could they count on them to get them 2 or 3 yards on a RB run on third down. Proof? They havent tried to run with a RB on third and more than one yard in weeks, and not once vs Indy. I think thats a prime example of the offensive line a) not playing well and b) negatively affecting the outcome of the game.

    Not to mention the sheer number of called rollouts, qb keepers, and read-option plays compared to games past. I think its clear Seattle is taking out all the stops in an effort to help their tattered and underwhelming O-line.

    To say the O-line wasnt a huge part of that loss is ridiculous.”

    Whats the over-under on how soon I get called a troll for that comment, or how long it takes him to delete it?!

  170. GeorgiaHawk says:

    My comment is waiting for moderation. Whatever that means, but here is what I just posted over there-

    “Rob Staton,

    I thought your article was spot on with regards to the game yesterday so I posted it over at TNT. However your assessment in the comments section about the O-line playing well made me scratch my head.

    But what really ticked me off was your treatment of JW , who was spot on with his assessment of the O-lines play.
    Why do you want to be a jerk to someone that clearly sees our O-line more logical then you?

    And what’s up with some posters here calling him a troll?”

  171. GeorgiaHawk says:

    LOL STTBM. Let’s see how this plays out.

  172. Georgia–My comment appears to have been deleted, or not ok-ed yet. I didnt see yours there either!

    Good on you for your comment, Im betting neither of ours sees the light of day!

    Staton appears to be on an ego trip round the world. Seriously, who the hell writes an article, then tells everyone what part of it they can discuss, and when to stop discussing it, and always has to have the last word–even if it means deleting comments?! At best, that is insecure and juvenile behavior, especially since JW’s comments were totally within bounds–and far more respectful than other commenters and Statons own responses.

    Yep, smells like the bad old days at Field Gulls!

  173. GeorgiaHawk says:

    It sure looks that way STTBM. I didn’t experience the bad old days at Field Gulls, but after this I can imagine how it was.

  174. Yeah man, seriously: the main writer–whom I confused later with John McGrath, to the hilarity of many–would argue some completely and obviously wrong opinion as to why a certain play failed–with Gifs no less–and then delete any opinion that differed from his own, no matter how innocuous and fact-based. It was outrageous!

    Staton seems to be of the same ilk. How dare a lowly commenter state a contrary opinion! And woe to those who wish to discuss a part of the stroy he doesnt want you to focus on!

    Im just glad this guy isnt a cop or any position of authority…

  175. Getting Harvin back with the line in shambles is like getting steel-core ammo by the bushel, but having no trigger for your gun…

  176. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I just posted another one over there. Lets see if this one gets through.

    “JW is right when he says-”It was their typical performance. Good run blocking, poor pass blocking.”

  177. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I got through this time. Lets see where this goes.

  178. Georgia–Your comment isnt up now. I looked. Staton-Gestapo strike again?!

  179. GeorgiaHawk says:

    What a coward is all I can say. Lol.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0