MontanaHawk05
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 1, 2009
- Messages
- 18,370
- Reaction score
- 1,177
Right now, the Seahawks are flirting with being the best team to miss this year's playoffs. Two games out of the division, with the NFC South all but guaranteed to supply one of the wild-card contenders. And with a tough win against Matt Cassel Sunday, it's easy to understand how some people aren't excited. We want a win that can be easily extrapolated to the playoffs.
Yet I find myself asking...when has it ever been any other way with Pete Carroll?
This isn't the first time Seattle has found itself winning in less-than-convincing ways. Our Octobers under Russell Wilson have usually involved tough, scrapey road wins requiring more than a little bit of luck. But we've done it. And as the season goes on and the players find their midseason form, things change. I recall the Saints game in 2013. Previous wins didn't inspire a lot of confidence that Seattle could handle Drew Brees. We were calling a loss. But the 'Hawks defied their previous habits, came out swinging, and absolutely buried New Orleans on the way to the Super Bowl.
Fast forward to 2015. The team is getting players back from injury. Paul Richardson and Jeremy Lane aren't world-beaters, but they bring more spark to their depth charts than anyone else. And we've just come off a win in which we've finally found some variety on offense and some (schematic) protection for Russell Wilson. The defense, for its part, is back to playing lights out.
Now, this is where my PTSD over the 2007 defense could kick in. Remember them? They looked great, right up until the moment they played a legitimate QB. Nobody noticed until after our disgraceful beating at Lambeau that every QB our defense had beaten was a backup or a failed experiment. EVERY, and I mean every real QB they'd played had totally outdueled them.
Having beaten only the Bears, Lions, 49ers, and Romo-less Cowboys this year, are we looking at the same situation for 2015?
I say no. And the reason is, even though we've lost to every real QB, we've been in every game.
We are four plays away from being undefeated. In every single game, we've hung tough until the fourth quarter, in fact burying the opposing team in the third in some cases. The Seahawks have still proven their ability to play difficult opponents right down to the wire, and our victories have come at the hands of the league's best. Except for the Rams, everyone we've lost to has the "team of destiny" vibe. Yeah, that includes Andy freakin' Dalton. He looks legit. Who woulda thought? (not theENGLISHseahawk
)
Yes, this moral victory doesn't translate to the win column. But if you want a prognosis of this team's chances in the playoffs, it works.
To the details.
1. The playcalling
Actually, I'm not going to discuss Bevell. The guy is a conduit for Pete Carroll's wishes. Carroll has claimed that the buck stops with him, so let's stop it there.
I will give Pete and Bevell full credit for coming up with a offensive gameplay that protected Russell Wilson and the offensive line on Sunday. The increased emphasis on combo routes, simple slants, crossers, and hot routes kept Wilson throwing on time and relieved the pressure on the OL.
What I will NOT give them credit for, is waiting until now to do it. Where has this stuff been the last seven games while Wilson was getting smacked around?
If this is the result, then Pete needs to start calling every game as if Okung is out.
After months spent trying to corral my thoughts on Pete's offensive philosophy, here's where I stand. I remember a color piece back in 2010 that gave a picture of Carroll's style on offense. He likes the run, he likes having a big-bodied receiver, and he treats his QB as a point guard. That was...it. I remember thinking that it seemed pretty simplistic. Comments this year from media analysts have borne out the idea that our passing offense is remedial. This could be a response to our talent level at WR. And as time went on and Carroll revealed his belief in both generating and stopping the big play, making toxic differential and turnovers the focus of his game...
Pete is greedy. He believes more in the psychological impact of a big play than he does in building a short passing game. After all, a single 50-yard bomb to Doug Baldwin is statistically worth a couple of stalled drives. Ergo, we wind up with an emphasis on long-developing routes that keep Wilson in the pocket and our OL protecting for a long time.
And thanks solely to Wilson's legs, our past history hasn't given him much reason to rethink his strategy. I think Wilson's magic (and our defense) has made Pete complacent. After all, you don't spend massive resources to fix a problem that isn't major. (Jimmy Graham was more a redzone solution than a general passing-game solution.)
Now, however, things are shifting. Teams are figuring Wilson out. They're becoming more discipled with their DE and spy play, keeping pace with our scramble drills more often, and blitzing blithely and carelessly on third down, daring Wilson to beat them with his arm. And with our running game needing time to get back on track, our offensive strategy has been much less effective. Wilson is finding himself with less room to accomplish the amazing (last Sunday being an encouraging exception). And with teams figuring out our simplistic offense (it's been said that their DBs are running our receivers' routes for us with alarming precision), our ability to execute is effected.
The result?
2. The 11-5 team
You all know the conundrum of being an 8-8 team in the NFL. Such a team has just enough promise, and not enough despair to warrant blowing it up and starting over with fresh talent. But it's not enough to win, either. So such a team ends up in a cycle of mediocrity, trying to get over the hump with trades and unremarkable drafting.
There is, however, another and better version of the 8-8 team. It's the 11-5 team. Unlike the 8-8 team, they have enough talent to be a perennial playoff contender. But they never quite win the big game, ever. They're missing just enough crucial pieces to keep them away from becoming a dynasty.
The most recent example of this playoff "no man's land" is Whatever Team Peyton Manning Is On. I'm concerned that Seattle may become another example, and the reason is our habit of riding the razor's edge with every game. That tends to work for a season because you have sixteen opportunities and just need to win enough. But in a single game, it becomes more dangerous. And as we saw in the Super Bowl, hanging in there can get you burned, especially if the source of one's football woes is a simplistic offense that can be guessed by a scheme-genius coach.
This is why I don't blame fans who are sick of winning in the 4th quarter. They want to see something more like the Patriots: dominant in every aspect of the game, right from the start, thank you very much. Of course, EVERY team wants that. But it's for good reason; the Patriots are the only dynasty out there. We've needed an incredible amount of luck and some of the good ol' home-stadium aura to reach the Super Bowl twice. I'd like to see more.
Which begs the question, why don't we have more.
Is it because a) we're simply not done building, 2) because Pete doesn't believe it's necessary, or 3) because NFL finances may never allow it?
3. Our WR corps.
1) is very likely. Frankly, I'm still just not impressed with our WR corps. Let's be honest: nobody out there is game-planning for any of these guys. Jimmy Graham, maybe. But surprisingly, he's proven less to be a route guy and a zone-sitter than he is just a big body who makes good catches. Tyler Lockett, Paul Richardson, and Doug Baldwin are crafty. They can hit soft spots, succeed in scramble drills, and come back to the QB at the right moments. But they're dependent on Russell Wilson buying them time. These are small guys and they know it; Doug Baldwin recently mentioned that he's almost had to sacrifice personal relationships in his attempts to overcome his small frame and improve his craft.
After him, there's really nobody else on the roster. Kearse is replacement-level. Lockette (God rest his season) was just starting to show some refinement but was not really a technique guy ever. Less so Chris Matthews, who's got questionable speed and work ethic. Same with Luke Willson. And Cooper Helfet who? All of these guys will make the most out of what Wilson gives them. But they can't create anything FOR Wilson. And with the emphasis of teams now bearing straight down on Wilson, that's what he needs: help. From somewhere.
Seattle has been trying to find bargain-bin deals at WR and TE for a long time now. They've done better than most teams. But at the end of the day, it hasn't worked. Pete and John finally threw up their hands and opened their checkbook for Harvin last year and Graham this year. Seattle was certainly on the end of both trades, though I'd still rather have Graham than not. But they're trying. Good thing, because opposing DC's aren't sweating bullets at night thinking about Paul Richardson. More is going to be needed.
3) Might also be the answer; the salary cap may just not afford us the room we need to come up with 22 positions of strengh. In that event, Pete has chosen to stack his deck with the defense. The result is a yearly slate of 16 games that we ARE IN POSITION TO WIN, because of how low the score can go. But it's still a razor's edge. It burned us in the Super Bowl, and it's burnt us four times this year at less ideal times than last year.
But I do hope that it's not 2). I've already pointed out why I think Pete is content with the way we're winning. He believes in his way. He's not entirely without reason to do so. He believes in a simple system executed to perfection. It's worked for the defense.
But for an offense, whose job it is to help keep the defense guessing, I'm not sure it's going to work long-term. We never shake up formations or run unexpected plays from them. We're basically doing what Mike Holmgren did - doing our thing and daring the defense to stop it - but with considerably less talent, experience, and precision. It doesn't feel like a formula for success.
4. Russell Wilson
I place more responsibility for our slow start on both Russell Wilson and Pete Carroll than I do the offensive line. It's the job of the first two to protect the OL with decision-making and scheme. Wilson has struggled, and I'm okay with that. He's had a bigger load to deal with than ever before. Not only is his center new to the scheme, but there's the sense that Pete's development program for him this year (there's clearly been one this entire time) has been to up his ability to shift protections and guard himself against blitzes.
Against Dallas, Wilson was poor until the fourth quarter. His accuracy on a lot of passes, especially shallow crosses, was off. It made me wonder - is this an area of Wilson's development that hasn't been focused on, precisely because Wilson has accuracy problems here? Pete is the kind of guy to believe in capitalizing your strengths and ignoring your weaknesses, unlike most people. It gives me an inkling as to why we haven't seen any of the short passing game; perhaps it's just not Wilson's forte.
Nevertheless, I might just be talking out of my ass. Wouldn't be the first time.
Wilson was just good enough on Sunday to win. A few stalled drives were down to bizarrely inaccurate throws on his part. But he kept his timing and avoided sacks, which a lot of fans seem to value more than incomplete passes. We'll see how that goes. I personally think that sacks are a byproduct of Wilson's magic. But we'll see.
In the meantime, it's possible that Wilson's training as a QB will short-change us this year. I'm all right with that. It had to happen. He had to grow.
5. Darell Bevell
Okay, I lied. I am going to talk about this guy. Again, credit Bevell for finding a way to keep Wilson and the OL clean with the scheme. Some have claimed that Dallas rarely blitzed; I remember differently, at least on third down. But Bevell built a decent gameplan Sunday.
HOWEVER, he's still a bonehead at real-time play calling. I cringe at third-down deep sideline bombs to 5'10" receivers. That's embarrassing. I thought Jeremy Bates left years ago. It's about as low-percentage a play as you can imagine in that down and distance. What is Bevell hoping, that the opposing CBs will be so astonished that we're actually running such a dumb play that he'll pull a Dion Bailey and let Baldwin make the play? And why do you seemingly abandon the run the first chance you get? Wear them down, Darell. Quit overthinking.
6. Our prospects.
We get a nice long time to practice or newfound passing game, get healthy, and recoup before our very-likely-season-deciding showdown with the Cards. It's huge that we're one of the league's healthiest (*slams on nearest wood surface with large club*) teams going into Week 9. Huge.
The good news is that the Arizona offense could yet turn out to be a paper tiger. As happy as I am for Carson Palmer's big season after the horrible luck he's experienced in his career, he's faced the 30th, 26th, 32nd, 7th, 31st, 22nd, 25th, and 16th ranked DVOA pass defenses so far. Seriously, el oh el. And he was beaten by the 7th (Rams) and the 22nd (Steelers). We're ranked 9th and probably better with Kam and Earl disabused of their rust. And while we haven't been a whole lot better, our offense is starting to show signs of clicking.
After that, the schedule looks less intimidating by the week. The 49ers are now going with Blaine Gabbert (so long, Kaep). Pittsburgh blew it at home against Cincy and just lost their primary rusher. The Vikings road game may be crucial in deciding the wild-card seeding, but that's it other than the road matchup with the Cards to end the season. Health assumed, it's not crazy to see Seattle running the table from here on out.
Homefield advantage is probably out of our reach, unless the Panthers drop five games and the Packers four. The #3 seed feels quite within our reach.
So...yeah. I'm feeling pretty good.
Yet I find myself asking...when has it ever been any other way with Pete Carroll?
This isn't the first time Seattle has found itself winning in less-than-convincing ways. Our Octobers under Russell Wilson have usually involved tough, scrapey road wins requiring more than a little bit of luck. But we've done it. And as the season goes on and the players find their midseason form, things change. I recall the Saints game in 2013. Previous wins didn't inspire a lot of confidence that Seattle could handle Drew Brees. We were calling a loss. But the 'Hawks defied their previous habits, came out swinging, and absolutely buried New Orleans on the way to the Super Bowl.
Fast forward to 2015. The team is getting players back from injury. Paul Richardson and Jeremy Lane aren't world-beaters, but they bring more spark to their depth charts than anyone else. And we've just come off a win in which we've finally found some variety on offense and some (schematic) protection for Russell Wilson. The defense, for its part, is back to playing lights out.
Now, this is where my PTSD over the 2007 defense could kick in. Remember them? They looked great, right up until the moment they played a legitimate QB. Nobody noticed until after our disgraceful beating at Lambeau that every QB our defense had beaten was a backup or a failed experiment. EVERY, and I mean every real QB they'd played had totally outdueled them.
Having beaten only the Bears, Lions, 49ers, and Romo-less Cowboys this year, are we looking at the same situation for 2015?
I say no. And the reason is, even though we've lost to every real QB, we've been in every game.
We are four plays away from being undefeated. In every single game, we've hung tough until the fourth quarter, in fact burying the opposing team in the third in some cases. The Seahawks have still proven their ability to play difficult opponents right down to the wire, and our victories have come at the hands of the league's best. Except for the Rams, everyone we've lost to has the "team of destiny" vibe. Yeah, that includes Andy freakin' Dalton. He looks legit. Who woulda thought? (not theENGLISHseahawk
)Yes, this moral victory doesn't translate to the win column. But if you want a prognosis of this team's chances in the playoffs, it works.
To the details.
1. The playcalling
Actually, I'm not going to discuss Bevell. The guy is a conduit for Pete Carroll's wishes. Carroll has claimed that the buck stops with him, so let's stop it there.
I will give Pete and Bevell full credit for coming up with a offensive gameplay that protected Russell Wilson and the offensive line on Sunday. The increased emphasis on combo routes, simple slants, crossers, and hot routes kept Wilson throwing on time and relieved the pressure on the OL.
What I will NOT give them credit for, is waiting until now to do it. Where has this stuff been the last seven games while Wilson was getting smacked around?
If this is the result, then Pete needs to start calling every game as if Okung is out.
After months spent trying to corral my thoughts on Pete's offensive philosophy, here's where I stand. I remember a color piece back in 2010 that gave a picture of Carroll's style on offense. He likes the run, he likes having a big-bodied receiver, and he treats his QB as a point guard. That was...it. I remember thinking that it seemed pretty simplistic. Comments this year from media analysts have borne out the idea that our passing offense is remedial. This could be a response to our talent level at WR. And as time went on and Carroll revealed his belief in both generating and stopping the big play, making toxic differential and turnovers the focus of his game...
Pete is greedy. He believes more in the psychological impact of a big play than he does in building a short passing game. After all, a single 50-yard bomb to Doug Baldwin is statistically worth a couple of stalled drives. Ergo, we wind up with an emphasis on long-developing routes that keep Wilson in the pocket and our OL protecting for a long time.
And thanks solely to Wilson's legs, our past history hasn't given him much reason to rethink his strategy. I think Wilson's magic (and our defense) has made Pete complacent. After all, you don't spend massive resources to fix a problem that isn't major. (Jimmy Graham was more a redzone solution than a general passing-game solution.)
Now, however, things are shifting. Teams are figuring Wilson out. They're becoming more discipled with their DE and spy play, keeping pace with our scramble drills more often, and blitzing blithely and carelessly on third down, daring Wilson to beat them with his arm. And with our running game needing time to get back on track, our offensive strategy has been much less effective. Wilson is finding himself with less room to accomplish the amazing (last Sunday being an encouraging exception). And with teams figuring out our simplistic offense (it's been said that their DBs are running our receivers' routes for us with alarming precision), our ability to execute is effected.
The result?
2. The 11-5 team
You all know the conundrum of being an 8-8 team in the NFL. Such a team has just enough promise, and not enough despair to warrant blowing it up and starting over with fresh talent. But it's not enough to win, either. So such a team ends up in a cycle of mediocrity, trying to get over the hump with trades and unremarkable drafting.
There is, however, another and better version of the 8-8 team. It's the 11-5 team. Unlike the 8-8 team, they have enough talent to be a perennial playoff contender. But they never quite win the big game, ever. They're missing just enough crucial pieces to keep them away from becoming a dynasty.
The most recent example of this playoff "no man's land" is Whatever Team Peyton Manning Is On. I'm concerned that Seattle may become another example, and the reason is our habit of riding the razor's edge with every game. That tends to work for a season because you have sixteen opportunities and just need to win enough. But in a single game, it becomes more dangerous. And as we saw in the Super Bowl, hanging in there can get you burned, especially if the source of one's football woes is a simplistic offense that can be guessed by a scheme-genius coach.
This is why I don't blame fans who are sick of winning in the 4th quarter. They want to see something more like the Patriots: dominant in every aspect of the game, right from the start, thank you very much. Of course, EVERY team wants that. But it's for good reason; the Patriots are the only dynasty out there. We've needed an incredible amount of luck and some of the good ol' home-stadium aura to reach the Super Bowl twice. I'd like to see more.
Which begs the question, why don't we have more.
Is it because a) we're simply not done building, 2) because Pete doesn't believe it's necessary, or 3) because NFL finances may never allow it?
3. Our WR corps.
1) is very likely. Frankly, I'm still just not impressed with our WR corps. Let's be honest: nobody out there is game-planning for any of these guys. Jimmy Graham, maybe. But surprisingly, he's proven less to be a route guy and a zone-sitter than he is just a big body who makes good catches. Tyler Lockett, Paul Richardson, and Doug Baldwin are crafty. They can hit soft spots, succeed in scramble drills, and come back to the QB at the right moments. But they're dependent on Russell Wilson buying them time. These are small guys and they know it; Doug Baldwin recently mentioned that he's almost had to sacrifice personal relationships in his attempts to overcome his small frame and improve his craft.
After him, there's really nobody else on the roster. Kearse is replacement-level. Lockette (God rest his season) was just starting to show some refinement but was not really a technique guy ever. Less so Chris Matthews, who's got questionable speed and work ethic. Same with Luke Willson. And Cooper Helfet who? All of these guys will make the most out of what Wilson gives them. But they can't create anything FOR Wilson. And with the emphasis of teams now bearing straight down on Wilson, that's what he needs: help. From somewhere.
Seattle has been trying to find bargain-bin deals at WR and TE for a long time now. They've done better than most teams. But at the end of the day, it hasn't worked. Pete and John finally threw up their hands and opened their checkbook for Harvin last year and Graham this year. Seattle was certainly on the end of both trades, though I'd still rather have Graham than not. But they're trying. Good thing, because opposing DC's aren't sweating bullets at night thinking about Paul Richardson. More is going to be needed.
3) Might also be the answer; the salary cap may just not afford us the room we need to come up with 22 positions of strengh. In that event, Pete has chosen to stack his deck with the defense. The result is a yearly slate of 16 games that we ARE IN POSITION TO WIN, because of how low the score can go. But it's still a razor's edge. It burned us in the Super Bowl, and it's burnt us four times this year at less ideal times than last year.
But I do hope that it's not 2). I've already pointed out why I think Pete is content with the way we're winning. He believes in his way. He's not entirely without reason to do so. He believes in a simple system executed to perfection. It's worked for the defense.
But for an offense, whose job it is to help keep the defense guessing, I'm not sure it's going to work long-term. We never shake up formations or run unexpected plays from them. We're basically doing what Mike Holmgren did - doing our thing and daring the defense to stop it - but with considerably less talent, experience, and precision. It doesn't feel like a formula for success.
4. Russell Wilson
I place more responsibility for our slow start on both Russell Wilson and Pete Carroll than I do the offensive line. It's the job of the first two to protect the OL with decision-making and scheme. Wilson has struggled, and I'm okay with that. He's had a bigger load to deal with than ever before. Not only is his center new to the scheme, but there's the sense that Pete's development program for him this year (there's clearly been one this entire time) has been to up his ability to shift protections and guard himself against blitzes.
Against Dallas, Wilson was poor until the fourth quarter. His accuracy on a lot of passes, especially shallow crosses, was off. It made me wonder - is this an area of Wilson's development that hasn't been focused on, precisely because Wilson has accuracy problems here? Pete is the kind of guy to believe in capitalizing your strengths and ignoring your weaknesses, unlike most people. It gives me an inkling as to why we haven't seen any of the short passing game; perhaps it's just not Wilson's forte.
Nevertheless, I might just be talking out of my ass. Wouldn't be the first time.
Wilson was just good enough on Sunday to win. A few stalled drives were down to bizarrely inaccurate throws on his part. But he kept his timing and avoided sacks, which a lot of fans seem to value more than incomplete passes. We'll see how that goes. I personally think that sacks are a byproduct of Wilson's magic. But we'll see.
In the meantime, it's possible that Wilson's training as a QB will short-change us this year. I'm all right with that. It had to happen. He had to grow.
5. Darell Bevell
Okay, I lied. I am going to talk about this guy. Again, credit Bevell for finding a way to keep Wilson and the OL clean with the scheme. Some have claimed that Dallas rarely blitzed; I remember differently, at least on third down. But Bevell built a decent gameplan Sunday.
HOWEVER, he's still a bonehead at real-time play calling. I cringe at third-down deep sideline bombs to 5'10" receivers. That's embarrassing. I thought Jeremy Bates left years ago. It's about as low-percentage a play as you can imagine in that down and distance. What is Bevell hoping, that the opposing CBs will be so astonished that we're actually running such a dumb play that he'll pull a Dion Bailey and let Baldwin make the play? And why do you seemingly abandon the run the first chance you get? Wear them down, Darell. Quit overthinking.
6. Our prospects.
We get a nice long time to practice or newfound passing game, get healthy, and recoup before our very-likely-season-deciding showdown with the Cards. It's huge that we're one of the league's healthiest (*slams on nearest wood surface with large club*) teams going into Week 9. Huge.
The good news is that the Arizona offense could yet turn out to be a paper tiger. As happy as I am for Carson Palmer's big season after the horrible luck he's experienced in his career, he's faced the 30th, 26th, 32nd, 7th, 31st, 22nd, 25th, and 16th ranked DVOA pass defenses so far. Seriously, el oh el. And he was beaten by the 7th (Rams) and the 22nd (Steelers). We're ranked 9th and probably better with Kam and Earl disabused of their rust. And while we haven't been a whole lot better, our offense is starting to show signs of clicking.
After that, the schedule looks less intimidating by the week. The 49ers are now going with Blaine Gabbert (so long, Kaep). Pittsburgh blew it at home against Cincy and just lost their primary rusher. The Vikings road game may be crucial in deciding the wild-card seeding, but that's it other than the road matchup with the Cards to end the season. Health assumed, it's not crazy to see Seattle running the table from here on out.
Homefield advantage is probably out of our reach, unless the Panthers drop five games and the Packers four. The #3 seed feels quite within our reach.
So...yeah. I'm feeling pretty good.
