Despite my griping when you post non-Mariner related tidbits (mostly...soccer...because I find soccer unwatchably corrupt and unfair...not to mention tedious), I was, believe it or not, looking forward to your take on the Seahawks game. I only saw highlights and a roster breakdown, so I have less knowledge than you. But I came away with the same impression you did that the Seahawks are like the 2004 Mariners, but with more heart. A roster filled with aging veteran stopgaps and no flexibility...but playing its' heart out. I think the only way to fix this mess for Seattle is to draft well. They need a young franchise QB, a couple of RB options and a much more talented front-line receiver duo to have the capacity for non-stagnent offense. Right now, if you're an opposing defensive coordinator, the Seahawks are ridiculously easy to gameplan for...like the 2010 Mariner offense, they all have the same style and you just line yourself up to beat it.
You can't set yourself up with a blitzing game against the Hawks (their line is large and all the pass plays are slings and zings...three-step drops), so you just play a super-aggressive nickel and keep them to 4-7 yard nibbles and then slam on the brakes on their anemic running game. Defensively, the Hawks are tougher-looking than last year, but they're stil vulnerable to big plays IMHO despite the good results in game one. I dunno...I think they'll go about 6-10...and it'll be uninteresting to watch it.
.......
We pos-i-tron the Mariners from the 3rd deck; from the Seahawks it's more like the 7th deck, if not from the space station. That's okay. Sometimes the experts are a little too close to the situation.
How about a naive take on the day's action?
.
=== Context ===
Seahawks lose game one, which is a divisional road game. The operative word being "road." Also, we can write off game two in Pittsburgh.
These dubious NFC West teams seem to swap home-and-home games, and here's a division where .500 would probably keep you in the hunt.
At Qwest (yeah) the Seahawks probably would have won the game ... hey, if they hadn't given up a KO return late, they mighta won. After Carroll's halftime adjustments, the Seahawks had outscored SF by 17-3 leading up to the special teams breakdown.
SSI was quite surprised at the Seahawks' competitiveness on the road in this game. It was a game that could have been played by a 10-6 team.
No particular worries, as far as the 0-2 record, but the Qwest* crowd will have to get the Seahawks rolling immediately in game three.
.
=== Defense ===
Carroll rolled in several sides of beef last second, sort of like the Mariners adding a bunch of Chris Rays late in spring training. Usually when you triple-park 330-pound nose tackles on the defensive line, you're punting your pass rush in order to avoid embarrassment in the trench (rushing) warfare.
Frank Gore, who twice has run rampant 200+ yards against us, was held to 50-some yards on 20 carries. Wow. Who knew you could buy a Steel Curtain on the waiver wire.
However, the 49'ers were sacked 0 times to the Seahawks' 5. As with big-ticket movies, video games, and mobile information --- > the NFL becomes more and more about pass rush as the millennia glide along. Were the Seahawks to suffer 80 sacks on the year and achieve 0, I'm guessing that the run defense wouldn't matter.
...
Still. The rigidity of the front seven is a launching point; blitzing, dogging, and creative QB pressures can be added later.
This was a defense advertised (by national pundits) as one of the 5 worst in the league. Then, in game one, a Frank Gore-led 49'ers offense piled up a massive 209 net yards -- at home.
Overall, Seahawk fans should be startled that Carroll wired this together the way he did. They can afford to hope for an evolution from "scary bad" to "dubious" to "scrappy" (now) to "tough" (later).
No two ways about it. The mainframe calls Game One good news, very good news, on the defensive half... gonna need some pressure, no debating that.
.
=== Sidebar ===
It seemed like every time we turned the game on in 2010, the Seahawks were giving up a 25-, 35-, 60-yard pass. I read somewhere that they led the league in long pass plays coughed up.
Earl Thomas looks on an arc up to me. Plot spoilers ahead: here's at least one player you could win your next Super Bowl with.
Have no idea who that Chancellor guy is, but he looks like the real deal.
No pass pressure, and no downfield passes coughed up? Game balls all around for the nickel package. True, it wasn't Peyton Manning, but did the 2010 Seahawks give up 0 sacks and 0 downfield passes in any game?
.
Comments
Yesterday's game REMINDED me of English soccer. :- ) A dreary war of attrition.
But, of course, the Chuck Knox was is frequently the best chance to win... there are days when staying in bed gives me the best chance to win...