Are the Seahawks ready for life after Marshawn?

[kearly]

As many of you know, I was a big fan of Christine Michael before the 2013 draft, and even predicted that Seattle would take him in the 2nd round that year. I am very excited for Christine Michael's future, I'm hardly a doubter.

Last season, as Lynch labored for another productive season despite inconsistent OL play, all I could think about was how dumb it was that Michael was a healthy inactive. There were even a few times I wondered if Seattle might be better without Lynch, because it would finally force the Seahawks to play Michael.

I realize now that I fell into the trap of overvaluing the positives when a player is absent. Grass is greener, etc. When a player is playing, we experience the reality of how good or bad a player he really is. But for players who are not playing yet, we still hold onto illusions of grandeur, worshiping at the altar of potential. I wasn't comparing Lynch to Michael, I was comparing reality based Lynch to rosy outlook Michael.

When Lynch started his holdout, it forced me to think about the very real possibility of Lynch not playing another game for Seattle, whether he retired, held out indefinitely, was cut or was traded. Then I remembered Pete's comments about how Lynch's physical style does more than get Seattle rushing yards, it sets the tone for the entire team and wears down defenses.

Now, instead of having to wonder about the rosy what ifs of adding Michael to our offense, it forced me to think about the reality based what ifs of what being forced to lean on Michael might actually look like, and what might the unintended consequences of that change might be.

I think we can all agree that Michael can be a very good back in fantasy football, but can Christine Michael be that guy who wears down the defense in a defensive struggle type game? For the first time I really had to think about this, beyond simply citing his 220 pound weight and moving on.

The conclusion I had: not really. Michael has the pure explosiveness of Adrian Peterson... Michael's shiftiness is not that far behind LeSean McCoy... and he has the same quality of being volatile with big games and big setbacks like DeMarco Murray. Michael is a big play machine with some risk. But he is not a true bruiser, in fact there is a bit of Shaun to his game as he has a tendency to slide to avoid hits in the backfield. I can't see him knocking Darnell Dockett's helmet off on the way to the endzone, or carrying 7 Giants defenders 7 yards in a blowout loss to the Giants four years ago. But I can see him ripping off 50+ yard TDs on well blocked plays or screen passes, just like a young Shaun once did.

Is Turbin that guy? Turbin is tough and fearless, but he goes down quickly after contact, even minimal contact. Turbin has his uses and has home run hitting ability. He has a future in the NFL as a 3rd down back, but probably won't be a 3 down player. I do not think Seattle would choose Turbin to be their 3 down back of the future, but even if they did, Turbin does not have the balance and lower body strength that would allow him to wear down defenses like Lynch does.

Is Ware that guy? Yes, in fact I think a poor man's Lynch is a good comp for him. But will Ware get the opportunity? Probably not. And if he did, his pure talent level wouldn't be quite as high as maybe Seattle would want in a 300 carry a year starter.

Long story short, I have come to have a new appreciation for Marshawn Lynch. His skillset is much more difficult to replace than I had originally thought, and even now, I am unsure that Seattle could replace Lynch without turning into a fundamentally different team in the process. And when you are fresh off a dominating SB winning season, you would prefer to keep the same formula.

I think this might be something to watch for next offseason. If the RB situation stays as it currently is, we might see Seattle invest in a bruising RB with top talent in the 2nd or 3rd round next year. Recently, it's become fashionable to grab two or even three RBs in rounds 1-3, and even with Seattle having a very good RB group, they might still want a guy who can be a true successor to Marshawn.

Then again, Pete has proven that he is quick to adapt, so maybe we'll just enter a new era with Michael and focus more on scoring than winning fist fights.

 

[Cirmman]

I am unsure that Seattle could replace Lynch without turning into a fundamentally different team in the process. And when you are fresh off a dominating SB winning season, you would prefer to keep the same formula.

Agree 100%

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Michael has the pure explosiveness of Adrian Peterson... Michael's shiftiness is not that far behind LeSean McCoy... and he has the same quality of being volatile with big games and big setbacks like DeMarco Murray.

If you're making those comparisons, then it is only fair to ask the hypothetical, "Are the Seahawks ready for life after Peterson (or any of those other backs, assuming they were playing for the 'Hawks instead of Marshawn)?" Can we really assume the run game would drop significantly if Peterson or McCoy were in the backfield instead of Marshawn? I don't think it would. A great back is a great back. And sure, Marshawn bulls into the defense and wears them down, but really, how fresh do you think a defense is after chasing Peterson or McCoy around all day?

The bigger question within the question posed in the title is this: Is Christine Michael going to be a top-tier running back? If so, we're prepared for life after Marshawn, no matter what kind of back he is. If not, then we have some figuring out to do.

 

[zhawk]

well put.

 

[Tech Worlds]

You are kinda slow on the uptick Kearly. Your post is exactly what I have been telling you ever since you thought that Lynch was slowing down last year but you refused to listen to me.

 

[General Manager]

I was disappointed Pete choose to redshirt him in the regular season last year but it's understandable with Lynch and Turbin in front of him there are only so many carries to go around. I think he'll get some legit playing time this year and we'll have a much better understanding of how the offense will look with him in the backfield.

 

[Timmahawk]

Michael has the pure explosiveness of Adrian Peterson... Michael's shiftiness is not that far behind LeSean McCoy... and he has the same quality of being volatile with big games and big setbacks like DeMarco Murray.

If you're making those comparisons, then it is only fair to ask the hypothetical, "Are the Seahawks ready for life after Peterson (or any of those other backs, assuming they were playing for the 'Hawks instead of Marshawn)?" Can we really assume the run game would drop significantly if Peterson or McCoy were in the backfield instead of Marshawn? I don't think it would. A great back is a great back. And sure, Marshawn bulls into the defense and wears them down, but really, how fresh do you think a defense is after chasing Peterson or McCoy around all day?

The bigger question within the question posed in the title is this: Is Christine Michael going to be a top-tier running back? If so, we're prepared for life after Marshawn, no matter what kind of back he is. If not, then we have some figuring out to do.

I agree with sailor. An elite back is an elite back, and makes it hard on defenses, regardless of running style. If Michael is elite, we are fine, but if he isn't, I have faith in PC and JS that they will make the right decisions regarding RBBC or changes in the offensive philosophy.

You aren't going to replace beast with another beast....

 

[RolandDeschain]

Great to see you writing novels again, Kearly. Hopefully plenty more to come.

I think our offensive identity will start to change this year, assuming that Bevell was serious when he said we're going RBBC.

 

[TXHawk]

Pete Carroll values a strong running game and always will, but that doesn't necessarily mean he needs a battering ram like Lynch to make that happen. At USC his teams ran more often than they passed yet he made that happen with backs as diverse as Reggie Bush and Lendale White, two players who couldn't have been more different in their running styles. Carroll used each of them in ways that maximized their individual strengths.

Carroll isn't one to pound square pegs into round holes so when the time comes for Michael to replace Lynch he will adapt the offense to maximize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. Will it be different? Sure. Fundamentally different? Not really. The goal will remain the same: use the runnning game to allow the offense to be the aggressors in the physical battle in the trenches and wear the defense down.

 

[CPHawk]

First off it was rumored for about two weeks that Seattle was taking Michael, so don't break your arm patting yourself on the back Kearly, anyone who paid attention knew it was a major possibility. Second I liked what I saw from CM in the pre season, but I still want to see it in a real game before I'm convinced he's the guy to take over. The player I really wanted was Dddie Lacy, and we had a shot at and traded down, allowing Green Bay to snag him. It remains to be seen if that was the right move, but so far it looks like it wasn't.

 

[dopeboy206]

Ask yourself this. In today's NFL...how many RBs are like Lynch? Only one I can think of off top is Eddie Lacy.

 

[Anthony!]

Another thing to take into account is the term running game, that does not mean it has to come from 1 RB, It can come from many RBs, wr, and even QB, Not to mention with todays rules on passing a check down to a back is like a run. The idea is not just to wear the defense down but make them creep up to the line so you can go over the top. A short passing game can do that too. So we have plenty of options, and we have already seen we can win relying heavily on the run and on the pass, so we are good.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

Pete Carroll values a strong running game and always will, but that doesn't necessarily mean he needs a battering ram like Lynch to make that happen. At USC his teams ran more often than they passed yet he made that happen with backs as diverse as Reggie Bush and Lendale White, two players who couldn't have been more different in their running styles. Carroll used each of them in ways that maximized their individual strengths.

Carroll isn't one to pound square pegs into round holes so when the time comes for Michael to replace Lynch he will adapt the offense to maximize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. Will it be different? Sure. Fundamentally different? Not really. The goal will remain the same: use the runnning game to allow the offense to be the aggressors in the physical battle in the trenches and wear the defense down.

I was going to post, but then thought I'd just quote Tx and save on typing time.

 

[UK_Seahawk]

Another thing to take into account is the term running game, that does not mean it has to come from 1 RB, I t can come from many RBs, wr, and even QB, Not to mention with todays rules on passing a check down to a back is like a run. The idea is not just to wear th4e defense down but make them creep up to the line so you can go over the top. A short passing game can do that too. So we have plenty of options, and we have already seen we can win relying heavily on the run and on the pass, so we are good.

I was thinking along similar lines myself. The x factor for me moving forward is Harvin, his plays in the backfield can really impact on s DC's thinking and can move us away from the one dimensional (I use that loosely) Beast pounding offense.

 

[Tical21]

I fear many might be missing the point of Kearly's post. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe he is asking if we can replace the production of Marshawn. As a Michael believer, he has to believe that we could get somewhere close on paper.

What we will have a more difficult time replacing is the mentality. The Seahawks as they are built now are back-alley brawlers. They want to take all of their opponents high-flying pretty weapons, and your their LB's and undersized safeties, and throw those guys into the middle of a brawl to the death. The Seahawks don't want to play an aesthetically pleasing football match. They want to physically bully you into a pulp and leave your carcass for the paramedics. And we've got the meanest, baddest dude on the block, and he's pissed.

I know 95% here won't agree, but Marshawn is the most important player on our team. All of this LOB and tough guy mentality doesn't work the same without a guy literally nicknamed "The Beast". We want to intimidate. We want to line up on the field and make you pee your pants. The four guys that really built this persona for us were Marshawn, Red, Browner, and Kam. Two of those guys are gone now. The most important two are still here, but they have to carry that torch if we want to be feared the same way we have been for the past two years.

Without Marshawn, a lot changes. We're no longer the baddest dude around. Defenses don't fear getting their helmet ripped off. We'll rely on the pretty play of Michael and the arm of the golden child. I'm quite sure it will be effective, but it isn't the same thing. There is more to this than 4.2 YPC and Skittles.

 

[kearly]

Tical gets it.

I suspect that Pete will have to adapt, but will Seattle still be as good a team after adapting? This situation reminds me so much of the Patriots, who won 3 SBs in 4 years because they beat teams up and had a smart, clutch QB.

But eventually, intimidating forces like Milloy and Dillon moved on, and Belichick was forced to adapt. He would eventually turn the Patriots into a team with an amazing passing offense that won with finesse. Then, those players got old and he is starting to revert back to the defense/toughness side of the equation.

As great as some of those offense heavy Pats teams were, they never quite won a SB during that period. The nine best offenses to ever reach the Super Bowl are 0-9 in those games. In the end, you would rather go to a SB with a group street brawlers than a high octane offense team that pads their numbers by blowing up pretenders.

I could see Michael being a lot like Shaun Alexander in that he puts up monster numbers but does not impact the game the way Marshawn does with his intangibles. We know that we are a championship team with Marshawn's toughness, are we still a championship type team if we evolve into something more finesse on offense? Maybe, but given that Seattle is in a championship window I would rather stick with the known commodity than rush to enter the unknown.

We know what Lynch does for us, and this realization made me appreciate him much more than before even though I am intoxicated with Michael's talent and potential.

 

[kearly]

First off it was rumored for about two weeks that Seattle was taking Michael, so don't break your arm patting yourself on the back Kearly, anyone who paid attention knew it was a major possibility. Second I liked what I saw from CM in the pre season, but I still want to see it in a real game before I'm convinced he's the guy to take over. The player I really wanted was Dddie Lacy, and we had a shot at and traded down, allowing Green Bay to snag him. It remains to be seen if that was the right move, but so far it looks like it wasn't.

I don't care about patting myself on the back, I was simply making a pre-statement so that people would understand I'm not anti-Michael despite having some minor doubts about the big picture with him.

That said, I gotta correct you on what you said. I actually made that mock draft prediction before the draft rumors started, and even if I didn't it's kind dumb to bring that up because pre-draft rumors are notoriously inaccurate / false anyway, it's lying season. I generally do not put much stock in draft rumors from national sports sites a couple weeks before the draft, if anything I lean the opposite way as teams use the media to spread false information.

You should go back and read my mock draft post from 2013 where I made that Michael prediction and everyone disagreed with me, some of them quite passionately. It was a fun thread having to defend my position from so many people who thought I was nuts.

Of course, any time you guess a 2nd round pick it's more luck than skill anyway. Not really anything to brag about. I'm just really happy that my favorite team drafted a player that I thought was awesome.

I liked Lacy too but I had a hunch that Seattle wanted Michael because they had spent so much time talking up "explosiveness" that offseason, and you don't get any more explosive than Michael. I think Lacy might have lost appeal to Seattle when he ran a poor forty. Lacy was a great pick by GB, but he's basically an Alfred Morris type of back who is probably already at his maximum upside and I'm not sure that's the kind of back that Seattle was looking for. Seattle prefers to swing for home runs ultra high upside.

 

[MB12]

To people who wonder why Michael wasn't given more carries last season:

Pete didn't want to unnecessarily use him behind a weak OL. There was no point in letting Michael get battered around, and he was not good in pass protection.

 

[DavidSeven]

Pete has talked about the running game "closing the circle of toughness" on his team. Is Michael the type of RB who can close that circle of toughness? IMO, no he is not. And I really don't believe Carroll would change his philosophy to accommodate Michael's running style. That's not to say he can't be an extremely valuable member of this team. There was a time when Reggie Bush was the most important player on a Pete Carroll team. But the Bush thing worked because Pete also had LenDale White to punch the defense in the mouth. Citing the USC example does nothing to disprove the notion that Pete needs a punch-you-in-the-mouth runner -- it actually supports it.

I think Pete needs a bruiser and will always seek a bruiser. It's likely why they burned a pick on Ware to compliment Michael. It's the reason why they gave a fat LenDale White a second look and obsessed over getting Lynch. Marshawn Lynch is a dream RB in Pete Carroll's system -- elite production with a bruiser mentality. It may be unlikely that we ever find an RB like that again. Best case scenario may be to manufacture something similar with two backs -- the classic Bush/White 1-2 punch. I agree with kearly -- look for Seattle to burn high draft cap on a physical runner next year.

As of now, no, I don't think the Seahawks are ready at all for life after Lynch.

 

[chris98251]

Turbin doesn't look like a punishing back, he appears more like a quick popper up the middle type, Micheal is as Kearly said more like Shaun with more burst and better hands I think, he catches the ball with little effort, Shaun could catch but he looked like he fought himself to catch the ball in my opinion. Ware I think is the punisher, bruising runner and can also receive. I don't know if we can get away with another redshirt type situation for Ware, could be the backup Fullback on paper I guess, and if he is on the squad would need to do a lot of things special team wise. Next season it would be Ware, Michael I would think, not sure where Turbin would fit in. This season is a long audition in my mind for at least two of them.