Weird game

[kearly]

Wilson and Hill combined for 0 TDs and 3 INTs, but I thought both played extremely well.

Wilson was getting the ball out quick and a few times evaded pressure in a way that only he could. Even with some ill-timed drops, Wilson still finished with nearly 10 yards per attempt.

Hill was a zone killer in the second half, and when he had to drop dimes to beat man coverage he did that too. His first interception was just weird, and the second wasn't his fault. Hill was later robbed of a TD in brutal fashion by ET.

Even though the game felt like a defensive battle, the teams combined for 482 passing yards with high completion rates and YPA. This was essentially the same as the first game, a shootout that ended with a relatively low score. Weird.

 

[DavidSeven]

The two 1H turnovers threw the game out of whack for Seattle, especially the Lynch fumble. I thought Seattle had St. Louis on their heels right before Lynch dropped it. The screen pass was otherwise a great call and executed well. Willson's drops and poor awareness were also pretty brutal.

On the flip side, St. Louis actually moved the ball extremely well in 4Q. Their good work was mainly undone by Jordan Hill's INT and Earl's amazing strip at the 1.

Turnovers were definitely big in this game.

 

[Seahawks Guy]

Every time we play the Rams...its a hell of a struggle. This goes back to last year....we played them at our house to end the season and we had to capitalize on some big plays to eek out the win. Of course, we went on to win the Super Bowl so I'm not worried one bit. The Rams give the players one final taste of physicality so that we are ready to destroy softer teams like GB, Dallas, etc...

 

[seahawksny]

Seattle will not see another D like that in any remaining playoff games. Wilson was fine

 

[MidwestHawker]

Seattle will not see another D like that in any remaining playoff games. Wilson was fine

Detroit has a significantly better defense than St. Louis. But hopefully we won't see them anyway.

 

[pehawk]

The Rams bring out the worst in Bevell and this Hawks offense. Pretty much every game the Seahawks can run the ball, whenever they want, but still struggle. It's just a weird phenomenon most likely attributable to familiarity.

 

[seahawksny]

Seattle will not see another D like that in any remaining playoff games. Wilson was fine

Detroit has a significantly better defense than St. Louis. But hopefully we won't see them anyway.

I disagree.

St Louis sees us twice a year and thats a HUGE advantage over someone like Detroit.
Also its the Front 7 of St Louis that we have troubles with, I think their Front 7 is better than Det.


Dont count Detroit out against Dallas, its virtually an indoor game and Dallas doesnt play as well at home. I dont think Detroit wins, but would not count them out.

 

[smerfy01]

Seattle will not see another D like that in any remaining playoff games. Wilson was fine

Detroit has a significantly better defense than St. Louis. But hopefully we won't see them anyway.

statistically over the course of the season, yes.

the last month? no.

and STL has a MUCH better defensive line.

 

[MidwestHawker]

Seattle will not see another D like that in any remaining playoff games. Wilson was fine

Detroit has a significantly better defense than St. Louis. But hopefully we won't see them anyway.

I disagree.

St Louis sees us twice a year and thats a HUGE advantage over someone like Detroit.

Why is that familiarity more an advantage for their defense against us than it is for our offense against them? The familiarity thing cuts both ways.

 

[LawlessHawk]

What like 42 yards rushing? And with out really looking it seemed most of Hill's passing yards came against our normal 4th qtr formula of letting them kill themselves by giving them the underneath-the-zone completions to burn clock and then tightening up in the red zone...

 

[MidwestHawker]

Seattle will not see another D like that in any remaining playoff games. Wilson was fine

Detroit has a significantly better defense than St. Louis. But hopefully we won't see them anyway.

statistically over the course of the season, yes.

the last month? no.

and STL has a MUCH better defensive line.

Reducing the sample size and going off of the most recent samples is not an especially effective measuring tool unless there is something about one defense or the other that is fundamentally different from what it was two months ago. If the personnel is largely the same, probably nothing much has changed in terms of expected performance going forward.

 

[45Hawker]

I'm a little nervous how effective Shaun Hill was in the 2nd half. Discounting the turnovers, he was quickly hitting receivers on short/intermediate routes.

Did the Rams find a weakness in our D? Were they executing perfectly? Did we change up our defense once leading 20-6? Thank goodness for the TO's, but I was like, "Is Shuan Hill really driving on us???" the entire 4th quarter.

 

[seahawksny]

Seattle will not see another D like that in any remaining playoff games. Wilson was fine

Detroit has a significantly better defense than St. Louis. But hopefully we won't see them anyway.

I disagree.

St Louis sees us twice a year and thats a HUGE advantage over someone like Detroit.

Why is that familiarity more an advantage for their defense against us than it is for our offense against them? The familiarity thing cuts both ways.

Not when you are starting a 3rd string center

 

[MidwestHawker]

Not when you are starting a 3rd string center

Well for starters, Pete is playing him over another healthy player who I assume you're calling the #2 center (Jeanpierre), which functionally makes Lewis the second-string center...

But besides that, what? That one starter being out is the reason that familiarity is a huge advantage for their defense and not one for our offense?

 

[seahawksny]

I'm a little nervous how effective Shaun Hill was in the 2nd half. Discounting the turnovers, he was quickly hitting receivers on short/intermediate routes.

Did the Rams find a weakness in our D? Were they executing perfectly? Did we change up our defense once leading 20-6? Thank goodness for the TO's, but I was like, "Is Shuan Hill really driving on us???" the entire 4th quarter.

Maybe we should just come to terms that there are QBs in this league that happen to be pretty good not named Brady, Rivers, Manning or Brees or Rodgers.

This "Elite QB" debate is so misconstrued is not even funny. Im not saying you are on that bandwagon, but Hill has been playing for that team for almost the entire year. He has experience and against 3 of the best Defenses in the league. SEA, AZ and SF.

Who is a better QB? Eli or Peyton? Yet one plays well in playoffs and one does NOT so its irrelevant to me in all honesty.

Ryan Lindley looked good yesterday too at times and might even pull off a win next week in Carolina.

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

The Rams bring out the worst in Bevell and this Hawks offense. Pretty much every game the Seahawks can run the ball, whenever they want, but still struggle. It's just a weird phenomenon most likely attributable to familiarity.

Like how pesky the Jets are to the Patriots.

Good word, Kearly... weird. That's the first thing I said as the game clock ticked down to :00... that was a weird game. At this point, I don't really care too much about how it played out - other than I didn't think it would've been possible to be even more impressed with the Defense. Grateful the Hawks got the victory.

Anyone note the comment on nfl network this morning (I think by Michael Silver) who said something like "what would that team have been like with Sam Bradford." Not that this couldn't be entertained in some far flung fantasy land of the mind at another time - perhaps off-seson. But, how was that appropriate when the headline being reported was, "Seahawks #1 seed" going into the playoffs? "Only if" comment about a perennial last place team? It was a tag comment after giving props to the Rams Defense, which I can see. But, I remember when the Hawks had the dominant defense and no offense during the Tez years. Were the mediots saying at the end of the season "only if" instead of talking about the playoff teams? Nah.

I know it's black monday and they've got more pressing things to report on. So, maybe I'm jumping to conclusions a bit. But, there's something to that, no doubt about it.

Too, I had a NYG fan (friend of mine) texting me after the game with references to the lack of intelligence of the good people of the PNW (essentially unwelcomed Canadians to him.) I think it was mostly tongue-in-cheek, but I've lived through a lot of that (as we all have), so the history of that garbage is beyond just offering me a snickers.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Sports is about matchups, and the Rams are just not a good matchup for us. They have the D-line to control Russell and we don't have the WR's yet to blow the top off their press cover 8-9 guys in the box to stop Lynch defensive scheme.

Luckily their offense is awful, so we normally end up winning.

I would like Pete and Bevell to throw the ball deep in the first half against the Rams more, instead of waiting for the game to play out more in the 2nd half before taking shots. Cause that's the way you beat the Rams D.

 

[AgentDib]

Remember that part of the Seahawks offensive struggle against an offensively challenged team is by design. If we needed to score 30+ to stay in the game then the game plan would be a lot different, but with our defense we can feel very confident in a win if we limit turnovers and score 20. There's no reason to be throwing it deep right off the bat and introducing randomness into the mix more than it needs to be, even if the result looks like an ugly offensive performance.

You shouldn't put too much stock in the depth chart at center right now; Schilling was playing before IR and Lem missed most of the season. With Unger hopefully healthy for the playoffs, we'll find out what they really think about our backup center situation during camp next year.

The Rams just have a scary defensive front. Aaron Donald has been an amazing rookie addition and when you have great interior pressure along with Brockers it makes life a lot easier for Quinn and Long on the outside who are very good in their own right. When you add really good linebackers (Laurinitis/Ogletree/Dunbar) who can keep Wilson in a collapsing pocket it's a tough recipe for our passing offense. That did cost them, however, and trying to keep Wilson hemmed in led to some pretty big holes in the running game.

It's a shame to see Willson take a step back. I still think he can be a key red-zone contributor but it seems like he is constantly hearing footsteps out there. I'm not sure what the best way to get him some confidence is but it should be a high priority.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

It's a shame to see Willson take a step back. I still think he can be a key red-zone contributor but it seems like he is constantly hearing footsteps out there. I'm not sure what the best way to get him some confidence is but it should be a high priority.

That's cause he IS constantly hearing footsteps.

Not sure how to explain the difference between Russell at home and on the road, his stats are so much better on the road. Doesn't make sense, should be the opposite.

The only thing I can think of is Russell is being told by Pete and Bevell not to take risks at home because of how well our D plays, so he's extra conservative.

 

[AgentDib]

I was referring to Luke but Russ has definitely been off a few times at home. I agree that it's mostly due to conservative play - assuming we don't need to score much to win - but would like to see the ball come out quicker anyway against a team with a monster pass rush even if he is just throwing it out of bounds.