Why the Seahawks Need to be Careful

[TwistedHusky]

What are you talking about Scutter?

Only 3 of 8 teams that didn't play key starters in the preseason won. Most people know that Game 1 is rough regardless.

As for crow? What for?
I pointed out that we should be able to win this one, for the reasons that transpired. (Except the part about Wilson trying too hard, that did not manifest).
I thought we might lose, but IF we lost it would be due to a BS penalty that changed the game.

A key penalty in a close game at the end can flip the outcome, and I picked it to be a close game.
Again, crow for what??
Because Geno had a good half? Did you not expect that?
He was playing a new defense with a new HC that had not played its starters for most of the preseason. Meanwhile he played significantly in the preseason. Now, that said, nobody expected him to be perfect for a half, or play as exceptionally well as he did - but lets not pretend that he was not going to be more in sync than the other team just because of those advantages in playing time.
Expect Geno to continue to play well for 1-2 more games, then defenses will likely be in sync and his advantage will likely dissipate. If that does not happen? Then yes, it makes sense to acknowledge.

(Also I picked us to basically be at .500 this year and not win many NFC West games, that almost implies that out of division games will have to be won.)

 

[Recon_Hawk]

However, he‘s proven to have a good eye for talent and sussing out how the team evaluates / values positions.

English and I used to argue back and for in the draft forum. He's really not much better prediciting the draft than anybody else that puts the work in. I'll give him credit, it seems like he does actually watch tape, which is more than most people, but if you and him watched the same amount if tape you'd hit on the same amount of prospects. It's entertainment. There's so much missing info in amateur draft scouting that scouting purely on tape isn't enough to consider yourself a good talent evaluator.

 

[scutterhawk]

What are you talking about Scutter?

Only 3 of 8 teams that didn't play key starters in the preseason won. Most people know that Game 1 is rough regardless.

As for crow? What for?
I pointed out that we should be able to win this one, for the reasons that transpired. (Except the part about Wilson trying too hard, that did not manifest).
I thought we might lose, but IF we lost it would be due to a BS penalty that changed the game.

A key penalty in a close game at the end can flip the outcome, and I picked it to be a close game.
Again, crow for what??
Because Geno had a good half? Did you not expect that?
He was playing a new defense with a new HC that had not played its starters for most of the preseason. Meanwhile he played significantly in the preseason. Now, that said, nobody expected him to be perfect for a half, or play as exceptionally well as he did - but lets not pretend that he was not going to be more in sync than the other team just because of those advantages in playing time.
Expect Geno to continue to play well for 1-2 more games, then defenses will likely be in sync and his advantage will likely dissipate. If that does not happen? Then yes, it makes sense to acknowledge.

(Also I picked us to basically be at .500 this year and not win many NFC West games, that almost implies that out of division games will have to be won.)

And "Let's Not Pretend" Russell Wilson isn't a VASTLY more experienced upper tier signal caller than ''Their QB" Geno Smith, and it's not even close, + how many snaps did the Seahawks #1's (Lockett & Metcalf play in the preseason? Answer> VERY, VERY FEW.
+ you do realize that both our Offensive Tackles were ROOKIES EH?
AND that it was ROOKIE >Kobe Bryant that Russell Wilson burnt for his Touchdown, right?
Wilson is supposedly a TOP FIVE Quarterback, and Geno Smith was considered ONE OF THE WORST Quarterbacks in the entire League, don't believe me? read all the crap rankings by the so called NFL Experts on Geno leading up to this game, again--> CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE, __>>Pete's TEAM came through for him.
I EXPECT teams to film up on Geno, BUT as the season advances & he can stay healthy, I EXPECT that instead of marching in place, that he will get better as he works with & GROWS his confidence in his Offensive Line & builds a better rapport with his Receiver's, TE's & Rb's.
What we saw from this last game, the Seahawks Offense is FAR from the finished product.

 

[Smellyman]

Yep. He gets real pissy real quick if you disagree on his site. I got banned years ago from SDB for pointing out some small error (something small like what year a player was drafted) and he blew up, told me to start my own website, and banned me. The dude is smart, sure, but he's extremely thin-skinned.

Top Billin does the same thing. His comment replies are a train wreck. He is kind of a couche

 

[Lagartixa]

English and I used to argue back and for in the draft forum. He's really not much better prediciting the draft than anybody else that puts the work in. I'll give him credit, it seems like he does actually watch tape, which is more than most people, but if you and him watched the same amount if tape you'd hit on the same amount of prospects. It's entertainment. There's so much missing info in amateur draft scouting that scouting purely on tape isn't enough to consider yourself a good talent evaluator.

Staton appears to think that after looking at video of prospects, his slightly informed opinion is the objectively correct view on which prospects are worthwhile and in what order they should be drafted, and then if the Seahawks don't draft the players he wanted, his conclusion is that the Seahawks are wrong and are mismanaging the team. And as others have noted, if anyone disagrees even slightly with him in the comments, that person is banned immediately, the attitude looking to this outsider like "how dare you disagree with my objectively correct positions on my blog?!"

 

[keasley45]

I struggle to see how fan narratives and gamesmanship impacts future game preparation. I agree that one game tells us nothing about the Wilson/Carroll situation. But I also think that's a pointless debate because it has no bearing on the team's success. Instead, it's a fun narrative.

So Rob's point is that the team should care more about beating the Niners than celebrating a moral victory over Wilson. Alright. We have no evidence to support his fears other than their excitement after a win. So his message is intended to be a warning to optimistic fans, which is fine, I guess.

Exactly this. It comes off as an overreaction from a guy who was probably confident Geno and the Hawks had no chance. From that perspective, for them to have won would mean they'd have to be over the moon and likely drunk off their good fortune.

The reality is that since camp, this team has been motivated to prove that they can contend THIS SEASON. Not just against the Broncos. The notion that these 53 guys have worked their asses off to just win one game because it was the Broncos is lunacy and entirely antithetical to the ethos of the franchise under Pete and John. Yes, their game vs Denver was a championship game for them, but every week is a championship game for Carroll's Hawks.

Lord, soooo many people were off about this team, Pete, Geno. The reactions, from trying to couch their victory more as a loss by Denver, a team getting lucky, or them just blowing their wad is nothing more than a bunch of butt hurt feelings and maneuvering to smooth over the reality that they were wrong.

So many Steve Youngs before the season began. It's what you get when you don't do your homework and instead either get bloated on your own ego, or are too lazy to actually do real research before formulating an opinion.

The team might not win Sunday - the 9ers will be fired up and determined to not start 0-2, but the Hawks aren't going to lay down for anyone and have enough talent and coaching to win more than a handful of games.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

Staton appears to think that after looking at video of prospects, his slightly informed opinion is the objectively correct view on which prospects are worthwhile and in what order they should be drafted, and then if the Seahawks don't draft the players he wanted, his conclusion is that the Seahawks are wrong and are mismanaging the team. And as others have noted, if anyone disagrees even slightly with him in the comments, that person is banned immediately, the attitude looking to this outsider like "how dare you disagree with my objectively correct positions on my blog?!"

Unfortunately, there's a lot of this attitude in the draft community. It's like they heard a GM say, "would you pound the table for this prospect?" and took this on as their whole persona when discussing players. In their minds, confidence projects being right. I suppose you want that out of a professional scout, but it really only works with pro scouts because they have consequences when they are wrong. There's little to no consequences in the amateur draft community, so they can act like their opinion is fact for the months leading up to the draft and when their early round draft prediciton falls to the later rounds, it's never brought up again or is excused somehow. It's entertainment and there's so much missing info in the scouting process, so I try not to take any fan's view of a player too seriously, but it is sometimes annoying when you end up arguing against group think because an honest debate is not allowed.

 

[toffee]

Rob on point once again.

Anyone got a bio on Rob Stanton?

 

[Lagartixa]

Anyone got a bio on Rob Stanton?

Staton. S-T-A-T-O-N. Just one "n," and it's at the end of his name. There isn't another one in the middle.

 

[HawkStrong]

Staton. S-T-A-T-O-N. Just one "n," and it's at the end of his name. There isn't another one in the middle.

FWIW I call him Stanton because he gets his panties in a twist over it.

 

[ElvisInBlue]

Exactly this. It comes off as an overreaction from a guy who was probably confident Geno and the Hawks had no chance. From that perspective, for them to have won would mean they'd have to be over the moon and likely drunk off their good fortune.

The reality is that since camp, this team has been motivated to prove that they can contend THIS SEASON. Not just against the Broncos. The notion that these 53 guys have worked their asses off to just win one game because it was the Broncos is lunacy and entirely antithetical to the ethos of the franchise under Pete and John. Yes, their game vs Denver was a championship game for them, but every week is a championship game for Carroll's Hawks.

Lord, soooo many people were off about this team, Pete, Geno. The reactions, from trying to couch their victory more as a loss by Denver, a team getting lucky, or them just blowing their wad is nothing more than a bunch of butt hurt feelings and maneuvering to smooth over the reality that they were wrong.

So many Steve Youngs before the season began. It's what you get when you don't do your homework and instead either get bloated on your own ego, or are too lazy to actually do real research before formulating an opinion.

The team might not win Sunday - the 9ers will be fired up and determined to not start 0-2, but the Hawks aren't going to lay down for anyone and have enough talent and coaching to win more than a handful of games.

Except Staton picked the Hawks to win and has consistently railed against the calls to tank for draft position.

He’s obviously not a Pete fan (has been a heavy critic of roster construction for several years), but acknowledges that Pete is a motivator and will win games.

Ironic that you accuse him of not doing his homework yet base your post on faulty assumptions that five minutes on his blog would have cleared up.

 

[toffee]

Staton. S-T-A-T-O-N. Just one "n," and it's at the end of his name. There isn't another one in the middle.

my bad, any got bio of this Rob Staton dude? He has a blog, and active in podcast, but who is he and his qualifications? Not a word about him on his blog, there wasn't an "about Rob" page.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

Anyone got a bio on Rob Stanton?

He's a sports journalist for the BBC. I think he covers mostly soccer and maybe the NFL games when they play in England.

He started his draft blog around 2008/2009? I think it was a couple years after he watched his first football game, the Seahawks playing in Seattle and after that became a dedicated, big time Hawks fan. He's seems like a smart guy with well voiced opinions, just sometimes stubborn. He's mastered holding abd defending his position.

In football credibility, he's as smart fan but misses on a lot, as much as we all do.

 

[toffee]

He's a sports journalist for the BBC. I think he covers mostly soccer and maybe the NFL games when they play in England.

He started his draft blog around 2008/2009? I think it was a couple years after he watched his first football game, the Seahawks playing in Seattle and after that became a dedicated, big time Hawks fan. He's seems like a smart guy with well voiced opinions, just sometimes stubborn. He's mastered holding abd defending his position.

In football credibility, he's as smart fan but misses on a lot, as much as we all do.

Sounded like background and professional training wise, he is not unlike any one of us since he didn't play the game, never coached the game, or worked with any of the teams in a professional capacity.

 

[keasley45]

Except Staton picked the Hawks to win and has consistently railed against the calls to tank for draft position.

He’s obviously not a Pete fan (has been a heavy critic of roster construction for several years), but acknowledges that Pete is a motivator and will win games.

Ironic that you accuse him of not doing his homework yet base your post on faulty assumptions that five minutes on his blog would have cleared up.

I was speaking generally in response to the basis of his blog, as its the same kind of take many who are anti pete / pro hawks, or anti pete and by proxy, anti hawks, have. Whether they're jaded by their bias against the coach or just parroting the latest media hot-take on Seattle, which rarely mirrors reality or is based on actual research, doesnt matter. Rob may be a Hawks supporter but his view of the team's roster has been generally negative, preferring to predict future performance based on past play. For example, being down on Dissly for averaging x number of yards per game when in part, the reason he's been underwhelming as a receiver has been due to the QB prefrerred to not use him.
His crictocism of Geno has been equally as negative. He characterized him as a 31 year old qb who's done nothing, and that's all who he'll ever be. he dismissed his good performances last year and in the preseason entirely, but latched onto the N.O. game as proof of how bad Geno is.
He thinks DK is pretty good
He thinks Penny's performace an anomally.
He was positive about the draft, but then loaded his opinion with but this and but that.
And on and on...

Doesnt matter that he picked the Hawks. He's a fan and was smart to do it because it allowed him to be right regardless of the outcome. the roster sucks, but they won ---but no they need to be careful... Much better than poopooing on the roster and Pete and picking them to lose because then you just look like a hater.

The dude has an accent going for him. Makes him sound informed. That's it

 

[Rock_the_Hawk]

Rob on point once again.

Anyone got a bio on Rob Stanton?

I was speaking generally in response to the basis of his blog, as its the same kind of take many who are anti pete / pro hawks, or anti pete and by proxy, anti hawks, have. Whether they're jaded by their bias against the coach or just parroting the latest media hot-take on Seattle, which rarely mirrors reality or is based on actual research, doesnt matter. Rob may be a Hawks supporter but his view of the team's roster has been generally negative, preferring to predict future performance based on past play. For example, being down on Dissly for averaging x number of yards per game when in part, the reason he's been underwhelming as a receiver has been due to the QB prefrerred to not use him.
His crictocism of Geno has been equally as negative. He characterized him as a 31 year old qb who's done nothing, and that's all who he'll ever be. he dismissed his good performances last year and in the preseason entirely, but latched onto the N.O. game as proof of how bad Geno is.
He thinks DK is pretty good
He thinks Penny's performace an anomally.
He was positive about the draft, but then loaded his opinion with but this and but that.
And on and on...

Doesnt matter that he picked the Hawks. He's a fan and was smart to do it because it allowed him to be right regardless of the outcome. the roster sucks, but they won ---but no they need to be careful... Much better than poopooing on the roster and Pete and picking them to lose because then you just look like a hater.

The dude has an accent going for him. Makes him sound informed. That's it

To put it bluntly the dude is the definition of a wanker...lol

 

[seatownlowdown]

I was speaking generally in response to the basis of his blog, as its the same kind of take many who are anti pete / pro hawks, or anti pete and by proxy, anti hawks, have. Whether they're jaded by their bias against the coach or just parroting the latest media hot-take on Seattle, which rarely mirrors reality or is based on actual research, doesnt matter. Rob may be a Hawks supporter but his view of the team's roster has been generally negative, preferring to predict future performance based on past play. For example, being down on Dissly for averaging x number of yards per game when in part, the reason he's been underwhelming as a receiver has been due to the QB prefrerred to not use him.
His crictocism of Geno has been equally as negative. He characterized him as a 31 year old qb who's done nothing, and that's all who he'll ever be. he dismissed his good performances last year and in the preseason entirely, but latched onto the N.O. game as proof of how bad Geno is.
He thinks DK is pretty good
He thinks Penny's performace an anomally.
He was positive about the draft, but then loaded his opinion with but this and but that.
And on and on...

Doesnt matter that he picked the Hawks. He's a fan and was smart to do it because it allowed him to be right regardless of the outcome. the roster sucks, but they won ---but no they need to be careful... Much better than poopooing on the roster and Pete and picking them to lose because then you just look like a hater.

The dude has an accent going for him. Makes him sound informed. That's it

i used to follow staton. he was doing something in the community that wasn't being dutifully done in seahawk land at the time- draft analysis, prospect evals, with a bit of rosterbation. his whole website was built around "open" discussions around these topics. but the reason why the website/blog never really took off was always that because it was never really an open forum. it's "his" site, he moderates it, and he's always tried to dismiss, silence, or ban the slightest opposing viewpoints. maybe that's just a UK thing? idk, but it's turned many of us off. also, i would entertain that he never offered much detail in prospect or schematic analysis anyway... perhaps because of then being at risk of being exposed as a "b" tier analyst by actual scouts, coaches and actual pro talent evaluators. i'd consider his analysis more or less as "projections" based off of apparentness or general consensus.

i'll give him ifedi, he absolutely nailed that pick back in the day.

and well... ever since he was given radio appearances he's morphed even more into of a "hot take" guy that pumps up narratives and strawman arguments. he's really just a content creator. seems clicks and youtube superchats ($) are more important to him than adding substance. who knew

 

[HawkStrong]

i used to follow staton. he was doing something in the community that wasn't being dutifully done in seahawk land at the time- draft analysis, prospect evals, with a bit of rosterbation.

There were people that did it, maybe not as solely focused upon it. Rob Rang absolutely nailed a Seahawks draft before Rob Staton probably ever watched a Seahawks game: https://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Local-teacher-becomes-expert-on-NFL-draft-1202078.php

 

[seatownlowdown]

There were people that did it, maybe not as solely focused upon it. Rob Rang absolutely nailed a Seahawks draft before Rob Station probably ever watched a Seahawks game: https://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Local-teacher-becomes-expert-on-NFL-draft-1202078.php

ah, total nostalgia. i like rang. rang was kind of a pioneer. i remember reading his scouting evals in the nfl scouting magazines like Lindy's. i would have to go on these long summer roadtrips and would buy a Lindy's or whatever for the journey... those were my go-to to pass time. Rang would cover all the draft picks for each team. i'd read the mags over and over in the car, lol. i nerded out. i like football now, but i LOVED football then. wonder if i can find some of those old football mags for nostalgia's sake

 

[keasley45]

i used to follow staton. he was doing something in the community that wasn't being dutifully done in seahawk land at the time- draft analysis, prospect evals, with a bit of rosterbation. his whole website was built around "open" discussions around these topics. but the reason why the website/blog never really took off was always that because it was never really an open forum. it's "his" site, he moderates it, and he's always tried to dismiss, silence, or ban the slightest opposing viewpoints. maybe that's just a UK thing? idk, but it's turned many of us off. also, i would entertain that he never offered much detail in prospect or schematic analysis anyway... perhaps because of then being at risk of being exposed as a "b" tier analyst by actual scouts, coaches and actual pro talent evaluators. i'd consider his analysis more or less as "projections" based off of apparentness or general consensus.

i'll give him ifedi, he absolutely nailed that pick back in the day.

and well... ever since he was given radio appearances he's morphed even more into of a "hot take" guy that pumps up narratives and strawman arguments. he's really just a content creator. seems clicks and youtube superchats ($) are more important to him than adding substance. who knew

Exactly.

Content creator is a great description. Just like the majority of the media. They have segments to fill, and unless there's something to cover, they'll gloss over facts to get at whatever click story is hottest.

Russ left. Bobby left. 90% of the talk in the media was how we had no talent but DK and Tyler... maybe Diggs.

Countering that with the facts of what we actually have isn't homerism. It's just pushing back on 'experts' that know little about out team and won't take the time to earn more until they feel there's a story there.

That's just how it works.