A few random thoughts on the Seahawks

#1:

Is it just me or has Lynch looked off his game the last few weeks? Both the Saints and 49ers consistently brought Lynch down with arm tackles, and in the case of the 49ers game there were almost too many times to count when Lynch gained two yards rushing with his OL pushing dudes 3-4 yards downfield. He missed a ton of easy reads, and was often tackled by defenders who were being blocked and still got Lynch down. This didn't escape our coaches attention either- on the broadcast you could see Tom Cable and (I think) Pete Carroll pulling Lynch aside to talk to him during the game.

Maybe it's just a fluke 2 game sample against two quality D-lines. But then again, Seattle has run blocked very well this season, and entered the game with the NFL's #1 rushing QB (by rushing yardage) in a partial read option offense. Yet despite all those huge advantages, Lynch is averaging a very ordinary 4.3 yards per carry this season, and I wonder if it might be because he's not quite as special at racking up yards after contact as he was in previous seasons.

#2:

What's up with the body language of Richard Sherman this year? In previous years he was always so geeked to play, and this year he seems horribly bummed out. Geeked up Sherman is a better player than melancholy Richard Sherman, or at least it seems that way.

#3:

Yesterday's game felt like a loss all the way, and I say that because Seattle had "defeatist" body language from the first snap to the last. Even Russell Wilson seemed especially mellow, almost like he didn't sleep the night before. Wilson played a great game, in fact most of the team played very well, but it just kind of felt like that "spark" was never there yesterday and without that spark, teams will hang around Seattle, and sometimes that means those teams will win a game.

#4:

The officiating yesterday was mostly fair, it's just that the timing of the calls and non-calls hurt Seattle so much more than they hurt SF. The officiating in the Indy game was a zillion times worse and one-sided.

#5:

You know what? I'm of the opinion we actually NEED Harvin. Has Robert Turbin even broken the 20 on a KR yet? Maybe once. SF seemed to figure this out and took advantage. Late in the game, they intentionally had a kickoff land around the three yard line, an excellent kick to return, and Turbin still couldn't get it out to the 20. Harvin isn't going to score every time, but our average starting position is going to be 15 yards better with him back there, even if they don't kick right to him.

Add in his value as a receiver and it's no stretch to think that Harvin could have been the difference yesterday. Though in fairness, 20 different things could have been the difference yesterday.

#6:

I think the one play Wilson wants back the most yesterday was that third down incompletion to Tate that just barely hit the ground. Tate was wide open and it was an easy throw for an easy first in a critical drive.

#7:

Seattle usually responds big after a loss. In the Wilson era, Seattle is 6-1 in the next game immediately after a loss (if you exclude week 1 this year, it's 5-1). The one loss was at Detroit, a 10am start where Seattle played very well but Matt Stafford went out of his skull and put his team on his back for one of the most clutch performances I have ever witnessed. So unless Manning is hypnotized into thinking it's February, I expect Seattle to be 12-2 next week and 14-2 in three weeks.

When you put the officiating in the perspective of the colts game, you are right... Yesterday really doesn't seem bad at all. I want to be mad about the offensive PI on Tate, but I can see why they called it. If anything was worth being irritated over it was the non calls on SF for holding a few times.

Colts game had like 3 game altering, and horrifically bad PI calls.



I'm done thinking about Harvin until he plays a complete game. Until then, the guy is a fantasy. It's like a girl we have a crush on and keep dreaming of taking her on a date (and more), but it never actually happens. His one partial game is like one time she gave us a peck on the cheek.

As of this moment we gave up a 1st rounder for 1 catch for 6 yards (or whatever it was). Beautiful catch it may have been.

Good review. If we can't have Harvin on kickoffs my vote is try Lockette or lane. We need speed. He is turtle slow.

I have not noticed the attitude change is Sherman myself. I have noted ET3 is much more vocal.

I have noticed that Tate seems down more than prior years and he still disappears in games at time.

#1 - I think he might have used up his yards after contact in the first half of the season. Guy has got to be a bit warn down by now. He's had to carry a pretty heavy load w/ the o-line that we could field for weeks 3-10.

#2 - Mentioned the same thing to my buddy while we were watching. Sherm, I'm not sure I noticed his demeanor (he didn't have any big plays in the positive category so he wasn't very animated).

#3 - Russell was the one that I noticed. He looked pretty... indifferent? Also interesting to me that he didn't have any keeps from the R/O (2 yards rushing) and the yards were there to be had. Not sure what the deal was.

#5 - I believe Turbin's first (and only) trip past the 20 was yesterday.

#6 - That one and not identifying Kearse open in the corner of the end zone more quickly on that incompletion that would have been a TD.

#7 - With the way SF is playing, they have to take on a do or die attitude about these remaining games. Cannot lose a division game from here on out, period. Yesterday could have been a dagger to the heart of SF and instead we gave them a shot in the arm.

To #3.... I was concerned in the mid quarter that Wilson got hurt, or something just wasn't right. He has a good mask, but some time in that quarter every time they showed him between plays he looked like he was trying to conceal some kind of discomfort. And maybe it's just me, but when I saw his post game press conference, he still looked like that.

In my opinion, a loss was good (not good against SF, but it happens), because it helps the team identify what they're doing wrong and how they can fix it. Also, I think (as I said in a previous thread) that the pressure continued to build through the winning streak and that likely led to some pressure in need of release.

Dick Sherman is my favorite Seahawk by far, but I was a little dissapointed in him yesterday. I didn't like the "glorified practice" pump ip speech. I believe you have to have a healthy respect for a tough opponent in order to really rise to the occasion. If you think your opponent is no more challenging than a practice squad opponent, you're not going to give max effort. I thought this attitude showed up a little bit during this game.

Is it possible Sherman has been sick? I remember thinking maybe he had the flu a few weeks ago.

kearly":1l69vne7 said:

#3:

Yesterday's game felt like a loss all the way, and I say that because Seattle had "defeatist" body language from the first snap to the last. Even Russell Wilson seemed especially mellow, almost like he didn't sleep the night before. Wilson played a great game, in fact most of the team played very well, but it just kind of felt like that "spark" was never there yesterday and without that spark, teams will hang around Seattle, and sometimes that means those teams will win a game.

Click to expand...

This was noted in the gameday forum early on as well, though it was mostly regarded as negative-Nancyism and the general panic that sets in sometimes when the Hawks don't dominate every single play. They weren't as jacked up as the Niners, I think it's fair to say. But also, it's a mental challenge to keep body language up when it seems like every single drive was either killed or extended by a penalty, legit call or not.

CaptainSkybeard":2lr08dh0 said:

It's like a girl we have a crush on and keep dreaming of taking her on a date (and more), but it never actually happens. His one partial game is like one time she gave us a peck on the cheek.

Click to expand...

Please stop accessing my actual teenage life to research your posts. Thank you.

Provacative thoughts for sure (per ususal).

1) I'm seeing the same with ML. But because of his ridiculous efforts of games past, I look the other way. The 4.3 YPC is still respectable, but as you suggest, there's something about the body language that raises concern. In boxing, a fighter that's taken too much abuse, starts reacting differently to punches IE: he might get stunned by a jab that in the past, wouldn't be more than stinging. It's likely we are seeing the expected fade of ML. If that's the case, more the reason to keep CM fresh.

2) I can't dial Sherman in right now. He took a lot of heat for his brash, uber-confident ways and that seems to have dropped off a bit, now that we have accecpted, if not embraced, that Richard Sherman. In any event, if not the best, he's right in the mix. So I guess it is what it is.

3) I was concerned we might arrive in SF with a hangover. I think that happened. Facing 2 top 5 teams in 6 days would be difficult under any circumstances. The fact we blew out the first, I believe made the second (on the road) much more difficult than had we beat N.O. by a narrow margin. The Stick mis not the Clink, but a tougher venue, under these circumstances than about any other place we could have traveled. I like our chances going forward.

4) Agreed. Again to use a boxing analogy, you have to take the title from the champ. SF is the NFC champ and we didn't play well enough to win. They got the close calls, IMO, and that should be expected on their turf. We fought like contenders, not champions.

5) From a return stand point, we need Harvin or anyone that can actually return a kick off. Turbin is a solid running back. And he's returning kicks like a solid running abck. No flash, no burst, just head down, running straight with his primary focus : hold onto the ball! It's not pretty and I mentioned in another thread, opposing kickers should never kick deep if he's back to receive. Drop it on the goal line, stop him short and hope for a turnover or penalty. Huge liability, IMO.

6) I saw that underthrow in my sleep last night. Very pivotal play in a close game. Too many such plays to list here, but that one's not far below the Gore run or the Kaep 3rd and 7 conversion. Killers, all.

7) I fully expect us to make a statement @ NYG. 30-13 is my current prediction. There will be no hangover next week.

kearly":1apnlqns said:

#1:

Is it just me or has Lynch looked off his game the last few weeks? Both the Saints and 49ers consistently brought Lynch down with arm tackles, and in the case of the 49ers game there were almost too many times to count when Lynch gained two yards rushing with his OL pushing dudes 3-4 yards downfield. He missed a ton of easy reads, and was often tackled by defenders who were being blocked and still got Lynch down. This didn't escape our coaches attention either- on the broadcast you could see Tom Cable and (I think) Pete Carroll pulling Lynch aside to talk to him during the game.

Maybe it's just a fluke 2 game sample against two quality D-lines. But then again, Seattle has run blocked very well this season, and entered the game with the NFL's #1 rushing QB (by rushing yardage) in a partial read option offense. Yet despite all those huge advantages, Lynch is averaging a very ordinary 4.3 yards per carry this season, and I wonder if it might be because he's not quite as special at racking up yards after contact as he was in previous seasons.

Click to expand...

I think Lynch missed some open running lanes... Watch the play at 7:55 left in the 4th quarter (NFL game rewind). Its one of the "vanilla play calls" everyone is on Bevell's case about. If Lynch simply follows Mike Rob though the hole on the left side...he gets a huge gain at least down to the 5 yard line for a first down... and maybe even scores. Instead, he inexplicably goes straight up field into the teeth of the defense (not following his lead blocker) for only a 2 yard gain. Granted, its just one play out of several on that drive the offense as a whole could have been executed better.... But I do wonder if Lynch hasn't been quite as sharp at hitting the hole lately.

Maybe he needs to practice wed? :229031_shrug:

Agreed on the body language.

I wonder how much effect Tarvaris being sick all week had on the gameplan, which felt conservative. I know I expected no real read option when I thought about Tarvaris having been questionable. Also, San Fran let us know early on they had a spy on Wilson.

I see no reason we will not be 14-2 with a week to go.

Thanks for the thoughts.

Probably my biggest takeaway from the game is that I wish our D would think more strategically. Chasing down Gore until he got to the 18 or whatever and flopped inbounds just irritated me. We have a 1 point lead and he's down in easy FG territory where they can burn up our timeouts and win the game.

Let Gore walk in to the endzone and give RW the ball with 2+ mins left and 2 timeouts. At least we'd have more then a hail mary's chance.

One thing I will say about Turbin, he is fantastic at securing a football. I don't remember him fumbling much at Utah State, and in the pros he has yet to fumble even once and that's with about 180 total touches over the last two seasons. Maybe his ridiculous biceps provide an extra point of contact? I dunno, but whatever he does to secure a ball, it's working big time.

1. Not sure about Lynch, but I noticed this last week, that if he had cut back on a play, he would've had 10-12 yards. I'm not sure about the arm tackle thing...NO seemed to be hitting pretty hard and I remember that. SF is always physical, but Lynch is still effective against them. We've faced a ton of good defenses this year...much of the year without MikeRob and half or more of our starting OL. Maybe Lynch just took too much of a beating. I'd love to see Turbin or Michael get more reps. Turbo had a couple good runs against SF and seemed pretty pumped up.

2. Sherm seems mellower, I don't know if I'd call it depressed. If you look at the SoundFX stuff, he's still talking major smack, but he's not so animated about it. He's almost like Larry Bird now. Bird was one of the biggest trash talkers in the NBA, but you'd never know it because he kept it really low key. One former player I read about had an example of what he would say...Bird would walk up and say "wow, I've got 22 on you at halftime...surprised Coach would put you back on me" and walk away. Sherm is still talking, and is still physical, but he's not head bobbing, getting right in guy's faces, etc.

I don't know if he's trying to be smart about it or what. I pray that he's not trying to preserve himself (ala Deion Sanders) for his big pay day.

3. I disagree about the body language. We were still physical (like you mentioned, the OL run blocked very well and blew open lots of lanes) but SF was much more hyped up. I wouldn't go so far as a hangover. There was a radio interview with Bill Cowher this morning, and he said he was incredibly impressed with Seattle. They had every reason to have a hangover, but came out fired up and played hard. He also thinks the D is legit the best in the league. SF was just more geeked up than us.

As for Harvin, maybe. I know his biggest impact will be ST. Turbin either doesn't have that burst (he's fast enough, but doesn't have that great acceleration) or it just seems he hesitates a second before deciding to come out of the end zone. He's not that experienced at it so I can understand it, but it's still there.

Harvin on offense is one of those things that will put us over the top. We'd beat a team by 10, with Harvin it would be 17. Close games will be touchdown games. Stuff like that. He's a luxury that's going to really make the offense elite.

Seattle played hard. You can play hard with heavy hearts. I just didn't sense a "spark" from them. There was no positive energy, no confidence, no swagger, no sense of "we got this." It's purely abstract interpretation, but to me their body language felt as if they were expecting to lose or didn't care if they lost.

Turbin and Michael need to take some of the pressure away from Marshawn. He's taken more of a pounding at this stage in his career than most other backs. They drafted Turbin last year to take some of the strain, and I suspect added Michael for the same reason.

Yesterday was the first real time Turbin looked threatening as a runner -- and Michael wasn't even activated. Both need to step it up. The absence of Michael continues to be a mystery. He must have some pretty awful work habits during the week. What other reason is there for keeping Coleman active over Michael?

Scottemojo":32twre6t said:

...I wonder how much effect Tarvaris being sick all week had on the gameplan, which felt conservative. I know I expected no real read option when I thought about Tarvaris having been questionable....

Click to expand...

That's an interesting observation. I wonder if they literally had no backup QB for the day? If they were trying to finesse their way through a situation like that, it would explain a bit about some of RW's choices.

When teams assign a "spy" to stay in and check Wilson should we not have some go to plays to take advantage of that besides running strait at him?