redhawk253 wrote:yes alexander had a great o line.. but he still had to make the plays.. lynch is a good running back too.. but he doesn't put up even close to the numbers alexander did.. i love both of them but they are completely different runners.

for you guys that are saying its not even close.. lynch all day.. i'd first ask how old you are and how much you actually watched alexander the great play.. then i'd say go watch some youtube highlights.. it aint the o line choosing what hole to run through or gliding by guys like they are standing still or juking in the open field.. dont be confused by alexanders ailments late in his career and the fallout from the beginning of our o line woes.. he is an alltime great with borderline HOF numbers.

to pick one or the other is silly because this run game was designed for lynch so lynch performs better in it.. i guarantee if you put lynch behind alexander's line the great still comes out ahead simply because of his vision and the way he could cut once and be gone.

I watched every run both running backs ever made with the Seahawks. Alexander was infuriating at times when he would just fall down or run out of bounds to avoid contact. Alexander left A LOT of yards on the field by doing so. I saw many weak arm tackles bring Alexander down between the 20's and rarely see them bring Lynch down. Alexander only stepped it up and got tough when a score was to be had. Alexander seemed to be a "me" guy. Alexander seemed more concerned with self preservation than he was winning. Lynch at times does too much. Sometimes, I wish I could combine the two and make the best running back in the history of the NFL.

Don't get me wrong, I loved what Alexander did. I just think he could have been a WHOLE LOT better. I don't think Alexander gave his all.

To me it comes down to how they play in the playoffs. SA disappeared in the SB in 05 and Lynch earthquaked us to a victory in 2010. So for that I take Marshawn by a little baby stiff-arm

bmorepunk wrote:Curt Warner in 1983 or 1986.

Vision as good as Alexander and ran harder than Shaun though obviously not as hard as Beast. But of course Curt was way more elusive than Marshawn. Between the 2 in the poll, Lynch because I want that huge amount of heart he has. SA didn't have half the heart Beast has.

What I'm reading is style vs. production.

While hypothetical are fun, Alexander produced.

Lynch's style though is easily something to long for. In their Prime Alexander's production is redonkilous.

sammyc521 wrote:What I'm reading is style vs. production.

While hypothetical are fun, Alexander produced.

Lynch's style though is easily something to long for. In their Prime Alexander's production is redonkilous.

Lynch doesn't produce? #2 this year, and only behind arguable the greatest RB in history who is playing out of his mind.

Lynch is also only 4,000 yards behind Alexander for career yards. At age 26 he should easily surpass that number.

Let me ask the Alexander supporters one question..........if your life depended on one of these backs getting one yard, who would you choose?

SA just slipped by people, super slick for being as big a back as he was. He had a very rare skill set and made it look easy. I think that strength is probably what makes him so under appreciated now.

He made it look so easy it often times looked like he was doing nothing special at all. It's a shame really.

Alexander folded and fell down if a 190 lb cornerback was near him when he couldve put his helmet in the little dudes chest and picked up another 5 yards. Hey I know a back who does that. Ricky Watters did that too. Remember when Alexander lost the rushing title by like 2 yards and then threw Holmgren under the bus? He over the course of the season probably gave up 100 yards by being a pussy and falling to his knees behind the line of scrimmage if he didnt see a clear running lane.

Sgt. Largent wrote:

sammyc521 wrote:What I'm reading is style vs. production.

While hypothetical are fun, Alexander produced.

Lynch's style though is easily something to long for. In their Prime Alexander's production is redonkilous.

Lynch doesn't produce? #2 this year, and only behind arguable the greatest RB in history who is playing out of his mind.

Lynch is also only 4,000 yards behind Alexander for career yards. At age 26 he should easily surpass that number.

Let me ask the Alexander supporters one question..........if your life depended on one of these backs getting one yard, who would you choose?

Curt was awesome. There is a lot of younger fans that have no idea how good Warner was. Also, he was a great receiver. I like Lynch a lot, thought Alexander was good too, but Warner was simply amazing. But I think our best back is yet to achieve the spotlight.

Sgt. Largent wrote:

sammyc521 wrote:What I'm reading is style vs. production.

While hypothetical are fun, Alexander produced.

Lynch's style though is easily something to long for. In their Prime Alexander's production is redonkilous.

Lynch doesn't produce? #2 this year, and only behind arguable the greatest RB in history who is playing out of his mind.

Lynch is also only 4,000 yards behind Alexander for career yards. At age 26 he should easily surpass that number.

Let me ask the Alexander supporters one question..........if your life depended on one of these backs getting one yard, who would you choose?

My fullback

morgulon1 wrote:Alexander folded and fell down if a 190 lb cornerback was near him when he couldve put his helmet in the little dudes chest and picked up another 5 yards. Hey I know a back who does that. Ricky Watters did that too. Remember when Alexander lost the rushing title by like 2 yards and then threw Holmgren under the bus? He over the course of the season probably gave up 100 yards by being a pussy and falling to his knees behind the line of scrimmage if he didnt see a clear running lane.

This is only correct for that last year and he was playing injured. Even then he gutted out a 40 carry 200 performance.

posted somethin else but startin a new thread on it..

anyway you look at it we've been lucky to have 2 great and entertaining rbs in seattle in the past 10 years and i cant honestly compare either because they are as far apart on opposite ends of the spectrum as you could get for guys playing the same position.. its like comparing a guy like calvin johnson to jerry rice.

Alexander never ran hard and physical, would not run the hole designed many times to the frusteration of Holmgren and the line had to figure out where he was going. This is not my opinion it was stated several times by interviews at the time. Only time Alexander manned up was inside the 20. Alexander left a lot of yards on the feild every week, I'm not saying he had to bull through a fence of defenders either, many times he would duck and curl or give it up with just a linebacker and DB to bust through.

Lynch behind that line would have looked like Earl Campbell or John Riggins in their prime and in Houston and Washington. They like Lynch once moving and up to speed would look like a bowling ball plowing thru pins on their runs. Lynch would have had 3 to 5 yards most times to get momentum and it would have been devastating for teams, Add the blocking of Strong as well and our WR's that blocked down field as well.

Watters and Lynch are comparable I think. more closer compliment to each others styles.

Sgt. Largent wrote:

sammyc521 wrote:What I'm reading is style vs. production.

While hypothetical are fun, Alexander produced.

Lynch's style though is easily something to long for. In their Prime Alexander's production is redonkilous.

Lynch doesn't produce? #2 this year, and only behind arguable the greatest RB in history who is playing out of his mind.

Lynch is also only 4,000 yards behind Alexander for career yards. At age 26 he should easily surpass that number.

Let me ask the Alexander supporters one question..........if your life depended on one of these backs getting one yard, who would you choose?

"only 4000"
"easily surpass"

very few running backs are effective past 28. Steven Jackson and Frank Gore are the only 2 in the league I can think of right now - one would be a first ballot hall of famer if he played for any team other than the Rams, and the other plays behind an even better line than Alexander had.

themunn wrote:.......and the other plays behind an even better line than Alexander had.

Look man, I also think the Whiners o-line is quite good but they are no way better than the Hawks' o-line SA ran behind. Walter Jones is simply one of the greatest football players ever and Hutch is a sure fire first ballot HOFer.

i hate it when people say alexander didnt run hard.. its all a matter of perception.. lynch trucks guys.. just blows them up and shakes them off.. alexander was a lot more like a greased pig he just shed tacklers with a slight drop of a shoulder, arch of the back, well timed highstep.. or made a slight cut with his deceptive speed and glided by them..

to say alexander didn't run hard and always got tackled by single cbs n what not.. go back to the film.. this is simply not true and people are generally basing their opinion off alexander's last year or two with the seahawks where he was oft injured and running behind a line that completely fell apart.

once again.. comparing alexander and lynch is like comparing jerry rice and calvin johnson... two completely different style players

Interesting debate. The only argument I can't see is the argument that it's a landslide in either direction.

Shaun made his job look so easy that we often wondered how hard he was trying. As far as natural running skills, there have been few in NFL history as blessed as Shaun Alexander. When he had the ball in his hands, it seemed there was nothing he couldn't do. If he got a glimpse of the end zone, he was gone.

Even though Lynch makes more jaw-dropping plays, I don't think he has Alexander's vision. However, Lynch seems to be able to do things that no other RB can. We're very fortunate to have one, and very fortunate to have had the other.

Lynch... for anyone thinking alexander.. remember he only did well if untouched... and if you look at it that way you may as well ask your self. Lynch or Washington.
leon goes down by air drafts... so.... to me the logical choice with this team is lynch.

I would take LEON over SHAUN i think in 2005 becuase he is faster than shuan and goes down just as easy.
I think... someone more intelegent should comment

themunn wrote:

Sgt. Largent wrote:

sammyc521 wrote:What I'm reading is style vs. production.

While hypothetical are fun, Alexander produced.

Lynch's style though is easily something to long for. In their Prime Alexander's production is redonkilous.

Lynch doesn't produce? #2 this year, and only behind arguable the greatest RB in history who is playing out of his mind.

Lynch is also only 4,000 yards behind Alexander for career yards. At age 26 he should easily surpass that number.

Let me ask the Alexander supporters one question..........if your life depended on one of these backs getting one yard, who would you choose?

"only 4000"
"easily surpass"

very few running backs are effective past 28. Steven Jackson and Frank Gore are the only 2 in the league I can think of right now - one would be a first ballot hall of famer if he played for any team other than the Rams, and the other plays behind an even better line than Alexander had.

That's very true. Four grand is a lot of mileage, especially for a guy who runs like Lynch, and especially for a guy with a finicky back like Lynch.

As to the original question, I'd take Alexander there too. The guy had an awful lot of 1-yard touchdowns, and an equal number of converted 3rd and 4th and ones. He was absolutely money in short yardage in his peak. We don't see Lynch get the opportunities as often, whether they believe he isn't going to get the yardage, or if he gets the carry, it's not guaranteed he gets it. Not knocking Lynch at all. Dude's a beast. An absolute monster. But Alexander was special in his prime. If it was goal-to-go from the one yard line, we were already celebrating points when the ball was snapped.

I'd love to see Lynch eclipse everything Alexander did - because I want continual improvement. I want Turbin to eclipse Lynch when it's his turn to start. But for now, they're still behind Alexander in that department.

redhawk253 wrote:i hate it when people say alexander didnt run hard.. its all a matter of perception.. lynch trucks guys.. just blows them up and shakes them off.. alexander was a lot more like a greased pig he just shed tacklers with a slight drop of a shoulder, arch of the back, well timed highstep.. or made a slight cut with his deceptive speed and glided by them..

to say alexander didn't run hard and always got tackled by single cbs n what not.. go back to the film.. this is simply not true and people are generally basing their opinion off alexander's last year or two with the seahawks where he was oft injured and running behind a line that completely fell apart.

once again.. comparing alexander and lynch is like comparing jerry rice and calvin johnson... two completely different style players

I would say after 2005 alexander was not trying or he simply never had it.
he would fall before he got touched... (thats how i remember the post superbowl years anyhow).

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:

themunn wrote:.......and the other plays behind an even better line than Alexander had.

Look man, I also think the Whiners o-line is quite good but they are no way better than the Hawks' o-line SA ran behind. Walter Jones is simply one of the greatest football players ever and Hutch is a sure fire first ballot HOFer.

Yes, the left hand side of our line was all-world

Chris Gray and Sean Locklear?

Gray was a warrior, never got national props but if you remember the credits his team gave him constantly you realize he was special as well. Our real hole that whole era was RT.

themunn wrote:

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:

themunn wrote:.......and the other plays behind an even better line than Alexander had.

Look man, I also think the Whiners o-line is quite good but they are no way better than the Hawks' o-line SA ran behind. Walter Jones is simply one of the greatest football players ever and Hutch is a sure fire first ballot HOFer.

Yes, the left hand side of our line was all-world

Chris Gray and Sean Locklear?

Gray was a quality starting o-lineman. You don't play like 15 years and not be. Pro Bowl? Nope, but a good NFL guard. Locklear had a couple of pretty good years for Seattle and has also survived quite a while in the NFL though I wouldn't put him at the same level as Gray (and Tobek).

hawks4thewin wrote:Lynch... for anyone thinking alexander.. remember he only did well if untouched... and if you look at it that way you may as well ask your self. Lynch or Washington.
leon goes down by air drafts... so.... to me the logical choice with this team is lynch.

I would take LEON over SHAUN i think in 2005 becuase he is faster than shuan and goes down just as easy.
I think... someone more intelegent should comment

this is by far one of the silliest posts i've ever read on here.. i love leon.. i went to college with him.. he's an exciting and really good player if used right... but to say you'd rather have leon than alexander hahahhahaha thats asenine at best.

apples and oranges guys.. who's better calvin johnson or jerry rice?

the one knock on alexander i have is he set himself up for a short career. i met him when i was in highschool. he came to latenight out of the blue at the ymca one friday night with tons of gifts n such his rookie year with the seahawks.

words right out of his mouth, "i get in trouble because i don't do my lifting routine.. im just naturally blessed god gave me the abilities and physical strength and size you see today. i don't lift. i don't need to."

if he had hit the weights like he was supposed to his whole career and conditioned better he probably wouldn't have gotten bit so hard by the injury bug at the end of his career.

also whoever said "alexander disappeared in the superbowl while lynch went beastmode in the playoffs vs the saints.."

silly statement.. 20 carries for 95 yards in the superbowl isn't exactly disappearing.. far from it really.. and he woulda been guaranteed a few td's if not for some of the ridiculous calls.. one for example.. the only play jeremy stevens made the whole game for the big pass to the 1 yard line that was called back for a ghost hold.. guarantee'd alexander woulda got the ball across the goal line.

SacHawk2.0 wrote:SA just slipped by people, super slick for bring as big a back as he was. He had a very rare skill set and made it look easy. I think that strength is probably what makes him so under appreciated now.

He made it look so easy it often times looked like he was doing nothing special at all. It's a shame really.

This explains it perfectly IMO. Go watch some highlights of Alexander. Yeah he has holes but finding the right hole in a split second isn't as easy as some think. He just glides perfectly to the hole and accelerates through it. Lynch does not have Alexander's near HOF vision or acceleration but he makes up for it with pure determination.

I've watched Lynch miss hitting the right hole quite often this year. He still gets some yards but he could get more. Also next time Turbin comes in a game, watch how much more acceleration he has than Lynch. Don't get me wrong, Lynch is awesome and a good running back but he doesn't have HOF abilities like Alexander did.

amill87 wrote:

SacHawk2.0 wrote:SA just slipped by people, super slick for bring as big a back as he was. He had a very rare skill set and made it look easy. I think that strength is probably what makes him so under appreciated now.

He made it look so easy it often times looked like he was doing nothing special at all. It's a shame really.

This explains it perfectly IMO. Go watch some highlights of Alexander. Yeah he has holes but finding the right hole in a split second isn't as easy as some think. He just glides perfectly to the hole and accelerates through it. Lynch does not have Alexander's near HOF vision or acceleration but he makes up for it with pure determination.

I've watched Lynch miss hitting the right hole quite often this year. He still gets some yards but he could get more. Also next time Turbin comes in a game, watch how much more acceleration he has than Lynch. Don't get me wrong, Lynch is awesome and a good running back but he doesn't have HOF abilities like Alexander did.

Thanks for the compliment. I think Lynch COULD have more initial burst but he runs so bow legged he's practically breaking tackles before they come. You don't really see his burst until he sees daylight.

The mind set /style of these two backs are about as far apart as it gets. SA was all about self preservation, choosing to live to carry the ball another day. It was oft times less than admirable, but it was a strategy that obviously served him, and the team, quite well.

Lynch? Marshawn cares little about risk of injury. He is a demon and punishes would-be tacklers, fighting for every yard, even after hitting the wall. In the short term, his style is more exciting and for the most part, preferred. In the long term? There may be no long term. I'm glad he continues to deliver after getting paid and I certainly hope he has invested well.

Defenses hated both men. I think what pizzed off alot of us with SA, was he was not a small back, yet ran like one. He could be arm tackled and was quick to hit the turf to avoid contact. If he were smaller, like most scat (type) backs, nobody would have thought twice about his methodology. I was never a big fan but I am grateful for his service to this team. I rank him slightly ahead of Lynch, but behind Warner and John L.

SonicHawk wrote:I'm happy we have had both and I'm even more glad that we don't have to try and make this decision.

I'm leaning towards Alexander because he lead us to the SB.

Lot a people have the "what have ya done for us lately" mentality, and say Lynch, without hesitation, BUT, Alexander had 25 TD's and 1,880 yards, + a huge factor in getting the team into the SB, and I'll add, that he was as responsible as Hasselbeck was for getting us there.
I love Lynchs tenacity and all, but I'm happy that we had Shaun here when we did, because I really don't know that we could have done as well with just putting in a so so RB.

We know exactly what another RB could do. Mo Morris had 71 carries for 288 yards (4.1 ave) and 1TD behind that 2005 line. He was about as average as average gets.

<=====this guy

HawkWow wrote:The mind set /style of these two backs are about as far apart as it gets. SA was all about self preservation, choosing to live to carry the ball another day. It was oft times less than admirable, but it was a strategy that obviously served him, and the team, quite well.

Lynch? Marshawn cares little about risk of injury. He is a demon and punishes would-be tacklers, fighting for every yard, even after hitting the wall. In the short term, his style is more exciting and for the most part, preferred. In the long term? There may be no long term. I'm glad he continues to deliver after getting paid and I certainly hope he has invested well.

Defenses hated both men. I think what pizzed off alot of us with SA, was he was not a small back, yet ran like one. He could be arm tackled and was quick to hit the turf to avoid contact. If he were smaller, like most scat (type) backs, nobody would have thought twice about his methodology. I was never a big fan but I am grateful for his service to this team. I rank him slightly ahead of Lynch, but behind Warner and John L.

I respect this well thought out post although I dont agree with all of it. Do you rank SA ahead of Lynch due to total yards or more break away long runs? That I will give to SA. I thought he was an excellent back for about a four or five year stretch IIRC yet his style drove me crazy and the "fall to the ground like a battered wife" mentallity he seemed to run with embarrased me. IT WAS the national perception of the Seattle Seahawks.

If you go to other fans boards (thank you BlueThunder) youll find that our identity is nasty defense and you guessed it... Beef Moe

Hey everyone, for those of you that rank SA ahead of #24, I get it. He was as close to a bona fide sports star for Seattle. And it had been a little while. Just trying to have a little discussion. I met SA once and felt kind of underwhelmed. Everyone on TV talked about how big of a back he was. I'm 6'1" 200 lbs and felt like he was half a foot shorter and not that big. He also was kind of a smart ass to a couple of people I was with. I told him to get f*#@d.
That could also taint my view of him a little bit. He always came of as this "awww shucks" choir boy... I think it's a crock of shit.

The more I think about it, as good as ML has been, I would likely rate him just a tad higher than Chris Warren. Though ML should distance himself from CW by this time next year. Warren had some off field trouble that may have diminished his legacy, but being a 3 time pro-bowler (with a 1600 yd season) who also excelled returning kicks, should be worthy of mention. IMO, they rank like this:

John L.
Warner
SA
Lynch
Warren
* even as a FB, no "top Hawk" RB list is complete without mention of Mack Strong.

morgulon1 wrote:

HawkWow wrote:The mind set /style of these two backs are about as far apart as it gets. SA was all about self preservation, choosing to live to carry the ball another day. It was oft times less than admirable, but it was a strategy that obviously served him, and the team, quite well.

Lynch? Marshawn cares little about risk of injury. He is a demon and punishes would-be tacklers, fighting for every yard, even after hitting the wall. In the short term, his style is more exciting and for the most part, preferred. In the long term? There may be no long term. I'm glad he continues to deliver after getting paid and I certainly hope he has invested well.

Defenses hated both men. I think what pizzed off alot of us with SA, was he was not a small back, yet ran like one. He could be arm tackled and was quick to hit the turf to avoid contact. If he were smaller, like most scat (type) backs, nobody would have thought twice about his methodology. I was never a big fan but I am grateful for his service to this team. I rank him slightly ahead of Lynch, but behind Warner and John L.

I respect this well thought out post although I dont agree with all of it. Do you rank SA ahead of Lynch due to total yards or more break away long runs? That I will give to SA. I thought he was an excellent back for about a four or five year stretch IIRC yet his style drove me crazy and the "fall to the ground like a battered wife" mentallity he seemed to run with embarrased me. IT WAS the national perception of the Seattle Seahawks.

If you go to other fans boards (thank you BlueThunder) youll find that our identity is nasty defense and you guessed it... Beef Moe

Hey everyone, for those of you that rank SA ahead of #24, I get it. He was as close to a bona fide sports star for Seattle. And it had been a little while. Just trying to have a little discussion. I met SA once and felt kind of underwhelmed. Everyone on TV talked about how big of a back he was. I'm 6'1" 200 lbs and felt like he was half a foot shorter and not that big. He also was kind of a smart ass to a couple of people I was with. I told him to get f*#@d.
That could also taint my view of him a little bit. He always came of as this "awww shucks" choir boy... I think it's a crock of shit.

I don't disagree with any of your post. I also met SA and felt the same way. He was arrogant and quite cavalier. But as a back, his accomplishments cannot be taken lightly. It is difficult for me to rank him higher than ML, I just think ML needs a couple more years with us to over take SA. I expressed some feelings, similar to yours, in another thread and was rediculed, lambasted and called a liar (I wasn't lying). I was so upset by my unpopularity that I considered taking my own life. Hahahahahaha!

Sometimes, some refuse to see negativity in (their) childhood idols. That was what I took away from that attack. Silly boys that grew up wearing #37 pajamas = Pajama people. SA did give us that "soft" label but the dude could smell an endzone and was very instrumental in getting us to the promised land. I am grateful to him and would probably like him more if not for his cult-like following.

I dont even understand how ANY could even say Shaun Alexander. I mean yeah the guy was good, but EVERYONE and their grand mother knows that he had one of the most dominant offense lines TO EVER PLAY THE GAME that year and along with other years. He wasn't a work horse, he barely buised you, he wasn't a speed demon. Some even consider him to be soft. Listen, im not saying he is all these things, the dude broke records and brought us to the Superbowl. But you know what? He wasn't the other one. Matt Hasselbeck was in the prime of his career and was lights out. Marshawn is a bruiser who runs hard and wears down defenses. Time and time again this guy just moves the pill. Where Shaun Alexanders offensive line made Shaun Alexander play better, Marshawn Lynch is making our mediocre offense line play better. Russell Okung is no Walter Jones, James Carpenter is no Chad Futch, Unger is really good but its no Tobek and of course Robinson is no Mack Strong. NUFF SAID!! there really is no more room for argument now so we can lock this topic lol j/k

HawkWow wrote:

morgulon1 wrote:

HawkWow wrote:The mind set /style of these two backs are about as far apart as it gets. SA was all about self preservation, choosing to live to carry the ball another day. It was oft times less than admirable, but it was a strategy that obviously served him, and the team, quite well.

Lynch? Marshawn cares little about risk of injury. He is a demon and punishes would-be tacklers, fighting for every yard, even after hitting the wall. In the short term, his style is more exciting and for the most part, preferred. In the long term? There may be no long term. I'm glad he continues to deliver after getting paid and I certainly hope he has invested well.

Defenses hated both men. I think what pizzed off alot of us with SA, was he was not a small back, yet ran like one. He could be arm tackled and was quick to hit the turf to avoid contact. If he were smaller, like most scat (type) backs, nobody would have thought twice about his methodology. I was never a big fan but I am grateful for his service to this team. I rank him slightly ahead of Lynch, but behind Warner and John L.

I respect this well thought out post although I dont agree with all of it. Do you rank SA ahead of Lynch due to total yards or more break away long runs? That I will give to SA. I thought he was an excellent back for about a four or five year stretch IIRC yet his style drove me crazy and the "fall to the ground like a battered wife" mentallity he seemed to run with embarrased me. IT WAS the national perception of the Seattle Seahawks.

If you go to other fans boards (thank you BlueThunder) youll find that our identity is nasty defense and you guessed it... Beef Moe

Hey everyone, for those of you that rank SA ahead of #24, I get it. He was as close to a bona fide sports star for Seattle. And it had been a little while. Just trying to have a little discussion. I met SA once and felt kind of underwhelmed. Everyone on TV talked about how big of a back he was. I'm 6'1" 200 lbs and felt like he was half a foot shorter and not that big. He also was kind of a smart ass to a couple of people I was with. I told him to get f*#@d.
That could also taint my view of him a little bit. He always came of as this "awww shucks" choir boy... I think it's a crock of shit.

I don't disagree with any of your post. I also met SA and felt the same way. He was arrogant and quite cavalier. But as a back, his accomplishments cannot be taken lightly. It is difficult for me to rank him higher than ML, I just think ML needs a couple more years with us to over take SA. I expressed some feelings, similar to yours, in another thread and was rediculed, lambasted and called a liar (I wasn't lying). I was so upset by my unpopularity that I considered taking my own life. Hahahahahaha!

Sometimes, some refuse to see negativity in (their) childhood idols. That was what I took away from that attack. Silly boys that grew up wearing #37 pajamas = Pajama people. SA did give us that "soft" label but the dude could smell an endzone and was very instrumental in getting us to the promised land. I am grateful to him and would probably like him more if not for his cult-like following.

Hahahahaha . I agree, the only thing that SA has over Lynch at this point is longevity. For a pure running back, and this is my personal opinion... I think Curt Warner is the best to put on a Hawk uniform. He had it all and had it not for the shit-turf NFL stadiums used back then, there wouldn't of been any question.
Warren, nice back with a lot of talent (and problems) which I think unfairly knocks him down a notch.

John L Williams...enough said
Mack Strong...one of the best FB of all time, not just Seattle

Glad you didnt take your life.

Please refresh your memories of a healthy shaun alexander. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB2TfY03kG4

DAT SPEED

I respect this well thought out post although I dont agree with all of it. Do you rank SA ahead of Lynch due to total yards or more break away long runs? That I will give to SA. I thought he was an excellent back for about a four or five year stretch IIRC yet his style drove me crazy and the "fall to the ground like a battered wife" mentallity he seemed to run with embarrased me. IT WAS the national perception of the Seattle Seahawks.

If you go to other fans boards (thank you BlueThunder) youll find that our identity is nasty defense and you guessed it... Beef Moe

Hey everyone, for those of you that rank SA ahead of #24, I get it. He was as close to a bona fide sports star for Seattle. And it had been a little while. Just trying to have a little discussion. I met SA once and felt kind of underwhelmed. Everyone on TV talked about how big of a back he was. I'm 6'1" 200 lbs and felt like he was half a foot shorter and not that big. He also was kind of a smart ass to a couple of people I was with. I told him to get f*#@d.
That could also taint my view of him a little bit. He always came of as this "awww shucks" choir boy... I think it's a crock of shit.[/quote]

I don't disagree with any of your post. I also met SA and felt the same way. He was arrogant and quite cavalier. But as a back, his accomplishments cannot be taken lightly. It is difficult for me to rank him higher than ML, I just think ML needs a couple more years with us to over take SA. I expressed some feelings, similar to yours, in another thread and was rediculed, lambasted and called a liar (I wasn't lying). I was so upset by my unpopularity that I considered taking my own life. Hahahahahaha!

Sometimes, some refuse to see negativity in (their) childhood idols. That was what I took away from that attack. Silly boys that grew up wearing #37 pajamas = Pajama people. SA did give us that "soft" label but the dude could smell an endzone and was very instrumental in getting us to the promised land. I am grateful to him and would probably like him more if not for his cult-like following.[/quote]


Hahahahaha . I agree, the only thing that SA has over Lynch at this point is longevity. For a pure running back, and this is my personal opinion... I think Curt Warner is the best to put on a Hawk uniform. He had it all and had it not for the shit-turf NFL stadiums used back then, there wouldn't of been any question.
Warren, nice back with a lot of talent (and problems) which I think unfairly knocks him down a notch.

John L Williams...enough said
Mack Strong...one of the best FB of all time, not just Seattle

Glad you didnt take your life.[/quote]
=====================================================

Thanks. His followers refused to believe someone, in this case Hutch, just might not like their hero. It all got rather creepy and I now log out at nite for fear of being cyber-murdered in my sleep. LOL.

I agree with your sentiment about Curt. I close my eyes and can still see that gawd-awful play. Tragic. When an outsider brings his name up in RB conversations, you know you're talking to someone that knows football. Buy that man a beer.

TheRealDTM wrote:Please refresh your memories of a healthy shaun alexander. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB2TfY03kG4

DAT SPEED

VERY gifted athlete. Thanks for that. But it really just proved a point. When he had an opening, he was money. When he didn't, he wasn't. I saw like one broken tackle (against Florida) on the entire highlight reel. BUT...to his defense. SA never pretended to be a bruisng back. He never apologized for his style and always made it clear "this is who I am, this is how I run, take it or leave it". It's hard to condemn him (too much) based on that.

Great Thread !!

Stats are great to compare and speculations are a wonderful thing.
* * My choice is based on the Man alone, and all he stands for.
Comments can be made that this quality would not bring us a Championship itself,
....and no disrespect to the Beast and his personal qualities

Shaun Alexander was and is a true class individual. (on or off a football field)
THIS is my basis for favorites among the two.

#37 still represents the Seahawks and the 12th man with pride.
~ never forget ~

SacHawk2.0 wrote:We know exactly what another RB could do. Mo Morris had 71 carries for 288 yards (4.1 ave) and 1TD behind that 2005 line. He was about as average as average gets.

i dont know if you're arguing for or against SA being all line. mo morris has a 4.2 ypc career avg over a 10 year career and had about a 4.0 ypc avg with 8 tds in his 3 years with detroit had about 20 more carries a season.. most backups usually have higher ypc avgs simply due to the fact they get a lot of draw plays in 3rd and long situations which spikes their ypc numbers a lot considering the low amount of carries they get in a season and they generally get 5-10 garbage yards on a draw.

basically comparing a backup running back/ 3rd down backs stats to a starting rb doesnt work because its situational. this was the same thing that caused a lot of arguments on here when people were begging for forsett to start because of his high ypc avg.

Lynch has about 1/10th of the line Alexander had, and alexander was a joke right after the sb season. Lynch with the 05 line would be just unfair

This is actually pretty easy for me

I'm taking a young, healthy Alexander. I think too many people remember the 2006/2007 Alexander and are holding it against him.

Alexander's vision is what made him great and one of the most productive RB in NFL history over a 5-6 year span. He was a TD machine.

HawkWow wrote:

TheRealDTM wrote:Please refresh your memories of a healthy shaun alexander. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB2TfY03kG4

DAT SPEED

VERY gifted athlete. Thanks for that. But it really just proved a point. When he had an opening, he was money. When he didn't, he wasn't. I saw like one broken tackle (against Florida) on the entire highlight reel. BUT...to his defense. SA never pretended to be a bruisng back. He never apologized for his style and always made it clear "this is who I am, this is how I run, take it or leave it". It's hard to condemn him (too much) based on that.

The thing is, Lynch takes on tacklers head on, that was never Alexander's style, he'd try to run around them and most of the time it was successful. It's not as if he was running into crowds and sliding, he simply found space to avoid having to do what Lynch did.
ALexander was faster at getting to the second level, hence when Lynch gets past the LoS he has less space to work with. If you gave Lynch and Alexander the same running lane, Lynch would probably fight through two or three defenders to make the yardage, but when Alexander got past the LoS there was only one LB close enough to make the tackle and he'd fly past them more often than not.

Look at this video of Jones greatest ever block again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nd-BSrVsRDs
As great as the block was, Lynch probably wouldn't get the 1st down there - he'd have been touched at the 16 yard line - slowed enough that the next guy coming in could also get his hands on them - Lynch would probably fight for another 2-3 yards and make it to the 10. Alexander didn't have to break tackles because nobody got close enough to him to make them. Even when he reached the 10 yard line he squeezes through what is a tight gap but makes it look easy before diving forward with the ball when he knows he can't make the TD because if he stays upright, he's probably stopped at the 5 yard line as he wasn't the type to drag players along with him.

Your argument is well noted and it is impossible to disagree, IMO, with those that prefer SA to ML and vice versa. Two very different backs with different skills. It's like comparing Dorsett to Campbell.

To those that consider what ML would do behind that 05 line. It would be a thing of beauty and what most hardcore football fans look for in a running game. Plain and simple, ML finishes runs with ferocity and disregard for life or limb. SA preferred to run out of bounds or hit the turf...but carried the rock a ton and for the most part, kept healthy because of his chosen strategy. For those of us who didn't always like SA's style, we should point at our FO, moreso than SA. With the exception of time he spent battling Watters, SA ran pretty much the same way his entire time with the Hawks.

BTW, I voted for SA in this thread....even though I prefer ML's style (by a significant margin).

Shaun could not take the job away from Watters at first because of his soft style and lack of blocking and pass catching. Why we had to get more backs to platoon with Shaun because he refused to learn how, you have a back with size and the ability but lack of effort to do any of the little things to complete his game.

One of my big complaints about him, we basically telegraphed that we were passing or doing the draw play on third down becasue of Alexander.

Scottemojo wrote:I am very curious to know if this ranking accounts for all the yards Lynch gets after contact. If it doesn't, then it really doesn't make a statement about the line.

You say yards after contact, I say vision. That said, I do think two things on this topic:

#1: Lynch probably helps his FO line stats more than Alexander did because of his superior consistency.

#2: The difference between the 2012 and 2005 lines is FAR smaller than the perception gap makes it out to be.

HawkWow wrote:Your argument is well noted and it is impossible to disagree, IMO, with those that prefer SA to ML and vice versa. Two very different backs with different skills. It's like comparing Dorsett to Campbell.

To those that consider what ML would do behind that 05 line. It would be a thing of beauty and what most hardcore football fans look for in a running game. Plain and simple, ML finishes runs with ferocity and disregard for life or limb. SA preferred to run out of bounds or hit the turf...but carried the rock a ton and for the most part, kept healthy because of his chosen strategy. For those of us who didn't always like SA's style, we should point at our FO, moreso than SA. With the exception of time he spent battling Watters, SA ran pretty much the same way his entire time with the Hawks.

BTW, I voted for SA in this thread....even though I prefer ML's style (by a significant margin).

I concur, two different backs.Except I voted for Beef Moe. Hahahaha

chris98251 wrote:Shaun could not take the job away from Watters at first because of his soft style and lack of blocking and pass catching. Why we had to get more backs to platoon with Shaun because he refused to learn how, you have a back with size and the ability but lack of effort to do any of the little things to complete his game.

One of my big complaints about him, we basically telegraphed that we were passing or doing the draw play on third down becasue of Alexander.

You'll hear no argument from me on this. But I sure liked the fire his drafting lit under the ass of Watters, lol. Watters was a bit of a primadonna himself at times. When SA came along, Watters again ran like a man possessed. I want to see this between Lynch and Turbin as well. I think Turbin is a bit intiminated by the greatness of Lynch. As soon as he gets over this, we should see some fireworks and our running game should benefit immensely.

morgulon1 wrote:

HawkWow wrote:Your argument is well noted and it is impossible to disagree, IMO, with those that prefer SA to ML and vice versa. Two very different backs with different skills. It's like comparing Dorsett to Campbell.

To those that consider what ML would do behind that 05 line. It would be a thing of beauty and what most hardcore football fans look for in a running game. Plain and simple, ML finishes runs with ferocity and disregard for life or limb. SA preferred to run out of bounds or hit the turf...but carried the rock a ton and for the most part, kept healthy because of his chosen strategy. For those of us who didn't always like SA's style, we should point at our FO, moreso than SA. With the exception of time he spent battling Watters, SA ran pretty much the same way his entire time with the Hawks.

BTW, I voted for SA in this thread....even though I prefer ML's style (by a significant margin).

I concur, two different backs.Except I voted for Beef Moe. Hahahaha

I just hope our boy can stay healthy. Nothing suggests he spends much time worrying about it, lol. Lynch AND Alexander in the same backfield would have been amazing. Those two behind that 05 line would have taken the refs right the **** out of the game! In fact, they would have taken Hass right the **** out of the game, too.

No disrespect intended to anyone, but I have to disagree with the growing myth that Chris Gray was some great lineman. He was pretty much the definition of average for ages, until he became a massive liability late in his career (2006 and on) when Tim Ruskell was too incompetent to acquire a guard that could beat out a mid 30s guy who was average in his prime. I don't blame Gray for those late years, he actually started off some of those seasons as a backup and would up starting after injuries. But I also remember very well how much Seahawks fans bitched about his performances week in and week out, and that was when things were going well during their peak run.

He was better back then than his negative reputation just like he's not as good in retrospect as his sudden post-career sainthood. He was basically the Paul McQuistan of his time (although McQuistan is much stronger and much better as a run blocker, IMO). They are similar in that they were two guys that the FO constantly had targeted for replacement, but he kept playing just barely good enough to keep his job for a surprisingly long time. That's no bash on Gray, playing in the NFL for a decade plus is impressive. But that doesn't mean that he was secretly terrific. He was the definition of average, and at times less than average.

Actually, I think John Moffitt might be a better comparison in terms of style. Both were technician types who contributed with skillful blocking but could at times be manhandled.