What really pisses me off

[LudwigsDrummer]

What pisses me off is all the Cable and Bevell bashing by the fans as if it will make some kind of difference to the team's higher brass.

 

[byau]

I've noticed a lot of Cam Newtoning as well.

.gif or it didn't happen

Don't have any .gif abilities, but been noticing something similar.

Just from what I recall, I'd venture that guys are really trying to become experts at tackling. Not a big surprise, it's what Pete preaches, especially the rugby tackle

What I've noticed, the side effect is that guys are going for the tackle, not the ball

And in fact except for Kam, it seems they are going for the tackle, and not the HIT

The defense is really good at stopping plays and keeping teams off the scoreboard for the most part, but over the last few years this D has turned into a great tackling team. Not as much of a great hitting team nor a great turnover team.

In the 2014-15 SB run the team briefly got back to hitting, I think in the Philly game. But definitely went away from it again 2015-2016. And I see it again this year too

Good observation. I agree with you. I'd rather have a good tackling team. It will pay dividends when they face guys like Gurley, etc who don't fall down at just hits. While it's not highlight material, it prevents opponents from making a bigger play. The Seahawks tackled better while the Jets didn't. The announcers spoke about it quite a bit yesterday and it was one of the reasons the Seahawks won yesterday's game.

Good point.

Then it becomes the question would you rather see them go for the ball and get the turnover or go for the tackle.

Maybe the answer is it depends on how the offense is doing. If the offense is rolling, the D can just keep at its tackling. But if the offense needs help and could use better field positioning, then the D has got to start getting some turnovers.

The next follow up question: would you rather see more tackling or more hitting? Hitting can stay with a guy and make him think twice the next time he gets the ball. Could also have the reverse effect if he survives the hit, it could build confidence. And the way the Seahawks look to be tackling more than hitting, makes me wonder if they can't hit as effectively anymore and you're right maybe need to commit to the tackling (e.g. Earl's hit on Ryan Tannehill was hard, but came at a sideways angle and Tannehill was still able to score his TD)

 

[peppersjap]

The play was such a fluke! The ball bounced perfectly into the offensive players arms and he was gone. I don't look at it as an issue at all. When the ball goes forward 10 yards it is easy to assume it was a pass, I might be a little more worried about it if we had lost.

 

[Seafan]

I'm glad those three "garbage time" TDs goes against the defense and hope it really pisses them off.

 

[SomersetHawk]

Good point.

Then it becomes the question would you rather see them go for the ball and get the turnover or go for the tackle.

Maybe the answer is it depends on how the offense is doing. If the offense is rolling, the D can just keep at its tackling. But if the offense needs help and could use better field positioning, then the D has got to start getting some turnovers.

The next follow up question: would you rather see more tackling or more hitting? Hitting can stay with a guy and make him think twice the next time he gets the ball. Could also have the reverse effect if he survives the hit, it could build confidence. And the way the Seahawks look to be tackling more than hitting, makes me wonder if they can't hit as effectively anymore and you're right maybe need to commit to the tackling (e.g. Earl's hit on Ryan Tannehill was hard, but came at a sideways angle and Tannehill was still able to score his TD)

I think it's about protecting our guys too and some teams in the NFL are following our lead (and they all should). I'd rather miss out on a few turnovers a season and have our guys be healthier for longer, as long as we're making the stops.

You definitely notice it with Earl nowadays. I saw him appear out of nowhere (as he often does) to make a tackle near the backfield on Sunday, except the difference was instead of throwing his body at the guy like he used to, he went for the legs. Whilst this didn't stop the runner, it slowed him down enough for help to arrive after he'd only gained another yard or so.

I bet a lot of people probably would have criticised Earl after that for not stopping him outright, but it was still a ridiculously good play that not many other safeties in the league make.

I'd rather Earl kept doing this for another four or five seasons than put his body on the line for another one or two.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

Other than that cheap TD yesterday on the Fitzpatrick fumble, I really haven't noticed what you're talking about.

But overall yes I could use a little more ball hawking and wild dog mentality on both sides of the ball. The D is obviously playing very well, but still IMO aren't up to the 2013 insane crazy wild dogs hunger of that defense, thus less turnovers.

But it's getting better as the season goes along, hopefully that'll continue.

In this forum, if something happens once in a game, it's somehow extrapolated to mean a constant and sure-to-be rampant thing.

 

[mrt144]

Other than that cheap TD yesterday on the Fitzpatrick fumble, I really haven't noticed what you're talking about.

But overall yes I could use a little more ball hawking and wild dog mentality on both sides of the ball. The D is obviously playing very well, but still IMO aren't up to the 2013 insane crazy wild dogs hunger of that defense, thus less turnovers.

But it's getting better as the season goes along, hopefully that'll continue.

In this forum, if something happens once in a game, it's somehow extrapolated to mean a constant and sure-to-be rampant thing.

If it happens twice it's annoying. If it happens 3 times, you can be confident that it was an O lineman whiffing.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

Eh, like Wagner said, it's a teachable moment. Nothing to be worried about going forward.

FWIW, 21 players on the field stood around, with 1 player getting the gift of a lifetime and running with it.

 

[sutz]

Eh, like Wagner said, it's a teachable moment. Nothing to be worried about going forward.

FWIW, 21 players on the field stood around, with 1 player getting the gift of a lifetime and running with it.

This ^ ^ ^

 

[byau]

Eh, like Wagner said, it's a teachable moment. Nothing to be worried about going forward.

FWIW, 21 players on the field stood around, with 1 player getting the gift of a lifetime and running with it.

This ^ ^ ^

Not to mention, listening to one of the 710 shows and I think it was Dave Wyman that brought up that it was lose-lose because this thing happens all the time where one guy takes the ball all the way to the endzone. Almost every time it's a dead play and it's just one guy running with the ball and the rest of his team thinking "hey..come on back Johnny, bring the ball back. play's over stop running"

So his point was: can you imagine this happening and then you as a defender deciding to pop this guy one as he's running for the endzone? That'd more likely than not be an unsportsmanlike not to mention you'd get tons of boos, tons of negative media for popping an "unprotected" player on a dead ball. That's an angle I never thought about.

 

[253hawk]

Agreed. It seems like we don't try to rip any balls out anymore. Although to be fair, when we do it's invariably called an incomplete pass 5 yards later. I can understand the frustration but they have to keep trying. I see more home run hits than trying to force fumbles.

Watching the replay on this one, the ball bounces right to the Jets WR. I don't think anyone would've gotten it had they really ran for it, but bodies on the ground might've tripped the guy up. In another thread, I put this one on Wright as he ran right by a guy with the ball after no whistle was blown.

Not sure I agree with that. Whenever someone was stood up, guys were ripping at the ball. I think Marshall was going out of bounds once and Kam was flying in trying to hammer it out. Hell, we even managed to strip one out and recover but the refs don't know what the hell a catch is, so it was all for nothing anyway.

And KJ was chasing it the whole time while it was bouncing away from him right until Peake caught it on the bounce coming the opposite way. Unless he was intending to hit Peake before he even had the ball, there's nothing else he could have done. He's the only one that never slowed down.

https://gfycat.com/UntimelyBoldGreatargus


I think everyone just saw the ball coming forward and figured it had to be a forward pass because of the distance and velocity. Not that they shouldn't play to the whistle, but the refs are slow as hell sometimes to kill a play like that.

 

[WmHBonney]

I wasn't very pleased with that fumble either. When I played I was taught to play until the whistle blows. That is what I teach when I coached my pop warner team. I was very surprised about that.

Yep. Play 'til the whistle. EVERY sport. EVERY time.

 

[AgentDib]

Tackling has been great for the most part and they definitely try to strip the ball out. Our defensive priority at the end of games has always been to protect the win instead of protecting the scoreboard. A vocal minority of fans has never understood that and you can find threads from any year (2013 included) calling our defense soft at the end of games as a result. Letting the opponent drive for 80 yards over 6 minutes has cemented the victory for us more than a few times over the years.

 

[NJSeahawk]

[youtube]sWH7D55CpnE[/youtube]