Could the 2014 Seahawks actually be better than 2013?

[kearly]

I think this 2014 team will be better than the 2013 team in terms of pure talent.

However, I think this 2014 faces a much more difficult task in terms of scheduling. The 2013 team had to deal with a bunch of 10am games, but they also had a late bye and multiple home primetime games. This year, we have the dreaded early bye, which means our players are going to be pretty worn out by the time that brutal NFC West stretch happens later in the year. I also don't like the fact that Seattle is playing the AFC West in the pre-season and the regular season. The element of the "unknown" seems to favor Seattle -- they frequently blow out teams who aren't used to their speed. Having to play the AFC West teams twice sort of turns this into a more divisional dynamic, and we all know those games are more difficult. Making matters worse, the first match-ups (where the "surprise" element can still be a factor) don't even count.

I actually like the schedule. Only three 10am games this season, and Seattle will be favored in all of them (Rams, Panthers, Chiefs). One reason that number is so low is because we get the Redskins game in primetime, which almost certainly would have been a 10am start otherwise.

I just wish we had more primetime games. That late time slot is a biological clock advantage for West Coast Teams. Seattle is 10-1 (including playoffs) in primetime games during the Wilson-era.

I also like that Seattle has home games for most of their toughest opponents, and they end on a home game which is always a nice springboard entering the playoffs. Not having to travel a week or two before your first playoff game is a nice advantage, IMO.

I think we caught a huge break getting Green Bay and Denver in Seattle. And try not to laugh, but the Dallas-Seattle matchup has almost always been won by the home team, and that game is in Seattle this year. Other than the getting the 49ers on short rest after a brutal road game, I think our schedule is damn near perfect.

You make an interesting point about the preseason, though of course Russell Wilson slaughtered Denver in two preseason games before slaughtering them in the Super Bowl. Despite the preseason ass kicking, Denver looked totally unprepared for Seattle's defense that game, though maybe that's just bad coaching (I've always seen John Fox as a pretty over-rated coach).

 

[Tical21]

It is incredibly rare that an outcome of a season equals the sum of its parts.

Some players will play better than advertised. Some players you never thought would struggle could struggle. Teams could find strategies that work well against us for a stretch until we get it buttoned up. You just never know. A couple balls bounce the wrong way, a couple bad calls, a couple injuries to the wrong positions. After any season, if you look back, there are ebbs and flows and just a bunch of absolute craziness.

Could the 2014 Seahawks actually be better than 2013? Sure, why not?

 

[Perfundle]

I think this has a very real chance of being possible, despite the fact that 2013 is a high bar to clear.

First of all, the defense reached another level after the 2013 bye week. This also happens to coincide to the day with Byron Maxwell starting at CB #2 and playing out of his mind. Post bye-week, the Seahawks played 8 games and averaged 11.5 points allowed per game. Five of of those eight games were against Denver, New Orleans, and SF, so it wasn't exactly stat-padding against a bunch of powder-puff offenses. Prior to that point Seattle's defense had averaged 15 points allowed per game over 11 matches.

What's really amazing about that 11.5 average is that a lot of the points they allowed during that 8 game stretch came in garbage time when Seattle was trading points for clock. The upgrade from Browner to Maxwell ended up being enormous, but it just seemed like the defense as a whole was playing on an entirely new level after that bye week. It might be possible this was small sample size, but if it's not and Seattle's defense just went up another notch, then we could be looking at a potentially historic defense in 2014.

In terms of departures, the only significant losses were Browner, Thurmond, and McDonald. Browner of course was upgraded over with Maxwell, and when factoring health, I could see Lane being able to fill in for Thurmond without much, if any, downgrade. McDonald is a good player but only a backup/rotational guy. If Williams has anything left in the tank I don't think we will notice much change.

Unit improvements always sound good in theory, but you only have to look at last year's offense versus 2012's offense. I mean, let's rewrite your first paragraph:

First of all, the offense reached another level upon reaching December of 2012. This also happens to coincide to the day with Wilson allowed to run the read -option to his liking. Since that day, the Seahawks played 7 games and averaged 35 points per game. Five of of those seven games were against Chicago, Arizona, SF, St. Louis and Atlanta, so it wasn't exactly stat-padding against a bunch of powder-puff defenses. Prior to that point Seattle's offense had averaged 19.9 points per game over 11 matches.

And that offense didn't even have any losses, and added Harvin to boot. But Rice regressed and then got injured, Harvin was injured the whole year, the offensive line got banged up, and wasn't as good as they were 2012 even when healthy. The 2012 offense was first in weighted DVOA by the end of 2012, but never approached that in 2013. I certainly don't see an even better defense, if only because of the much better offenses they will face. The offense has a good chance of improving, though.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

...........I actually like the schedule. Only three 10am games this season, and Seattle will be favored in all of them (Rams, Panthers, Chiefs). One reason that number is so low is because we get the Redskins game in primetime, which almost certainly would have been a 10am start otherwise.

I just wish we had more primetime games. That late time slot is a biological clock advantage for West Coast Teams. Seattle is 10-1 (including playoffs) in primetime games during the Wilson-era............

Could end up being only two 10:00 AM games if the Carolina game gets flexed. Remember, NBC has flexing rights earlier this year and that game falls within those rights.

Ditto on wishing for more prime time games, especially at home of course.

 

[kearly]

And that offense didn't even have any losses, and added Harvin to boot. But Rice regressed and then got injured, Harvin was injured the whole year, the offensive line got banged up, and wasn't as good as they were 2012 even when healthy. The 2012 offense was first in weighted DVOA by the end of 2012, but never approached that in 2013. I certainly don't see an even better defense, if only because of the much better offenses they will face. The offense has a good chance of improving, though.

Okay, a few things.

The 2013 offense didn't decline in the truest sense. It suffered critical injuries to Harvin, Rice, and most of the OL. The fact that they still managed one of the better DVOA offenses in the game anyway speaks volumes. Now, defensive coordinators seemed to figure out Seattle better after having an offseason to look at tape, but on the whole it didn't make much difference. Wilson actually put up slightly better numbers including 500+ rushing yards even after the NFL had the book on him.

Injuries happen. But that's a given. If Earl Thomas gets injured Seattle's defense will drop off some. It doesn't change the fact that Seattle's defense is more developed and talented at the start of 2014 than it was at the start of 2013.

Also, I don't see any offenses on the schedule that are going to give Seattle trouble. Newton? Seattle owns him. Kaepernick? Seattle owns him. Manning? Rodgers? Owned. Rivers is an elite level dink and dunk QB so he might threaten 20 points, but I still expect the Chargers to get their asses kicked.

Seattle's only weakness on defense is a passing attack that can overload our cover-3 with several talented deep threat weapons and a big armed QB that can make the plays. The Colts are one such team, maybe the Lions too. Neither of them are on the regular season schedule. I would have said the Eagles, but I think Seattle could handle their WR corp just fine with the loss of Desean Jackson.

 

[Tokadub]

Could they be? absolutely

Will they be? Under certain conditions...

If Harvin, Sherman, Earl Thomas, Maxwell, and Russell Wilson stay healthy we have a legit chance to be better.

If ANY of those guys get injured (most likely Harvin followed by Sherman) then it's unlikely we will be better or repeat. We still would have a chance if one of those guys go down but we may no longer be the favorites which I think we clearly are right now.

Another big factor will be the offensive line. Seems like a lot of blind faith to me with everyone expecting improvements. I need to see it to believe it.

I'm just starting to re watch all the 2013 games and am about finished with week 1 Carolina, it's so obvious our offensive line sucked in that game and I expect that to be pretty much the expected result for every game. It's also interesting watching older games where we had Sidney Rice or Browner etc. the roster changed a ton for us last year from start middle to end.

Ultimately I think we need offensive line improvement which seems sorta unlikely to me, but if those 5 guys I listed above stay healthy I think we can repeat even with another trash Oline.

My prediction for the season was 14-2 with losses to Carolina and 49ers on the road. So I am predicting us to be better... Just a lot of things could go wrong.

 

[ctrcat]

And that offense didn't even have any losses, and added Harvin to boot. But Rice regressed and then got injured, Harvin was injured the whole year, the offensive line got banged up, and wasn't as good as they were 2012 even when healthy. The 2012 offense was first in weighted DVOA by the end of 2012, but never approached that in 2013. I certainly don't see an even better defense, if only because of the much better offenses they will face. The offense has a good chance of improving, though.

Newton? Seattle owns him.

Maybe, but I'm not sure it's quite that simple. In 2012 the LOB deserves credit, but to completely throw the ball in the dirt to a wide open target for the game winner makes me wonder how much Newton's head was still thinking about the most maddening loss in franchise history just one week prior in his hometown of Atlanta. In 2013 he played decent given a conservative game-plan against a great D and got no help from his best target (Olsen), or from Earl Thomas fumble on DeAngelo Williams.

 

[bigcc]

the team is extremely young, players SHOULD be getting better over the offseason.... not to mention we've essentially added two draft classes to replace the guys we lost


that being said I personally think it'll come down to injuries not only for us, but for the other teams in the division as well.....

 

[Bob_the_Destroyer]

The draft was amazing, maybe the second best in Seahawk history (behind 2012). Getting Kevin Williams was fantastic. The off-season was incredible. Russell Wilson and the rest of the team improved exponentially. The talent and depth at every position is unbelievable. The early bye-week is a mole-hill that only the babies will cry about. The schedule is tough, but it's always tough. Everyone is gunning for us, but like Bobby Wagner says, "We've got bullets, too."

Get ready for the most incredible ride of your sports life.

This team is going to be much more dominant than last year, head and shoulders better. The Seahawks are going to be so good, so dominant. and so improved that they won't even seem like the same team.

If you can't see that, open your f*cking eyes and try to understand what's right in front of your f*cking nose.

If you still refuse to believe it, you don't deserve to be a Seahawk. We are going to conquer the world without you.

.

 

[RiverDog]

In terms of departures, the only significant losses were Browner, Thurmond, and McDonald. Browner of course was upgraded over with Maxwell, and when factoring health, I could see Lane being able to fill in for Thurmond without much, if any, downgrade. McDonald is a good player but only a backup/rotational guy. If Williams has anything left in the tank I don't think we will notice much change.

Although I realize you mentioned him further down in your post, you need to include Golden Tate as one of the "significant losses". In addition to being our leading receiver, Tate did a fantastic job returning punts, seldom fumbled (except for that onsides kick in the NO game) and saved our bacon on several occasions, such as the Tampa Bay game.

But I agree with your premise. If the stars line up just right, this team could easily be better than last year's.

 

[Threedee]

Losing Clemens was the biggest blow. Red's knee issues will likely prevent him from playing much longer at his current level. Browner and Thurmond have been replaced, and are on hot water with the league. Giacomini was a huge penalty problem, so it will be nice to see an upgrade there.

 

[Hasselbeck]

kearly - I think 2014 can be one of those years where the team is better but the win-loss record doesn't necessarily reflect that. For example, I can see them finish 12-4 but be a much more dangerous team than they were in 2013.

The offense really excites me more than anything else. We caught a glimpse at how different the offense looked with a healthy Percy Harvin in the lineup. Now add in Paul Richardson opening up the top with Doug Baldwin and Jermaine Kearse slicing you up underneath. Think of how much strain on a defense that alone can bring. That's not even talking about Michael, Willson, Miller, Norwood, Rice, etc.

So in sum.. Yes.. I think there is a very REAL possibility this team is better in 2014 if they can manage to avoid the big injury at a key position (namely Russ, Thomas, Sherm, Okung).

 

[theincrediblesok]

I believe it could be, with a healthy Harvin and the o-line being at least decent. Wilson was able to play with an injured o-line, imagine what he can do with a healthy one. The defense I believe can be even better than last year, the new guys will step up. Everyone is wishing our team to be complacent just because we just won the Super Bowl, but Pete's philosophy is going to be the thing that keeps this team hungry. The veterans want to be great and the red shirted players would want to have their own experiences playing in the Superbowl.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

I think the team will be better, much better, but like others have said, I wouldn't be surprised if they finished 11-5 and maybe even not win the division. I think the team doesn't need HFA to go all the way, but it would be nice. I think with them playing so many really weak defenses in the first half of the season they'll start off 7-1 or 6-2, but that second half will be brutal and they'll claw their way through it. Still, they'll be better than last years team and probably make it to the Super Bowl.

 

[Tech Worlds]

I want to win it without home field advantage. Just to show em we can.

 

[brettb3]

If you think they'll be a better team in 2014 but go 11-5, then you're really overrating the schedule. Or underrating just how good we were last year.

 

[RiverDog]

Losing Clemens was the biggest blow. Red's knee issues will likely prevent him from playing much longer at his current level. Browner and Thurmond have been replaced, and are on hot water with the league. Giacomini was a huge penalty problem, so it will be nice to see an upgrade there.

I don't agree. Clemons production, even when healthy in the 2012 season, had tailed off quite a bit, and he's 32 years old. IMO he would have seen limited playing time had he stayed. Not bringing him back opens up a roster spot for some of the younger players. IMO Tate's going to be the one we miss the most, unless one of the rookies steps up to the plate and/or if Harvin plays a full season. If nothing else, we'll miss his punt returning ability.