| 23 August 2009
Just a quick thought here before I run off to get food, more coverage will be coming a bit later. I think the first string defense looked bad yesterday, with few exceptions. There was hardly any penetration through the Broncos' (very good) offensive line. We were missing a lot of tackles, not attacking the ball, and generally looking sluggish. The defense looked a lot more like it did in 2008 than 2005. Darryl Tapp and DD Lewis were, however, standouts in that unit (note though that neither one of them will be regular season starters).
And that might be okay.
What I mean is, it's good to play like crap in preseason, at least once. I wish we had lost, because honestly we were goofy one left-handed pass away from going into the half down 17-14. We turned it around and looked great in the second half, which is nice and all, but we can't guarantee that same thing would have happened in the regular season. The Broncos are a bad team, and we made them look good. That's not okay.
But this gives Mora a chance to really come down on the players, force them into accountability, point out every mistake and remind them that (especially on defense) no one's job is safe because we have the depth to replace them. (Maybe not the secondary, but you know what I mean.) We need every single one of our linemen playing with the same intensity and intelligence that Nick Reed does. Reed will most likely make the team now, and he deserves it, but if you're a first string guy it's embarassing to have a 3rd string end come in and be the paragon of your teams pass rushing; but he has been thus far. Whose fault is that?
If this game can be as much of a learning experience as I think it can be, then looking terrible was a great thing. That falls back on Mora now. This should be his first real game-based reaction period, and he better be fuming mad when they look over film today.
What do you guys think? Is losing (or looking like we did in the first half) a good thing in the preseason, or am I just blowing smoke? I remember last year we talked about how great it was that the Hawks looked terrible in one of the games, then were able to bounce back. Well, we know which team showed up in the regular season, so what will we get in 2009?
Comments (19)
...
written by JimAK, August 23, 2009
written by JimAK, August 23, 2009
The 'Hawks gave up 182 passing yards in the first half as Orton went 18-26. Last week, San Diego put up 329 yards in the air, 303 from Volek and Whitehurst, not exactly All-Pros.
This can't continue if Seattle is going to contend.
This can't continue if Seattle is going to contend.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by IdahoSeahawksFan, August 23, 2009
written by IdahoSeahawksFan, August 23, 2009
I think this was a good game for the 1st string defense to be aware of. Mora will use this to his advantage. He will research the film big time from the game and then call the DL out. They will then try to improve those things. If we did not miss a lot of tackles the Defense and the Offense would have shut Denver down on both sides. Remember that Denver's offensive line is one of the best in the league and Denver's defense knows how to block against the cut and run method from Knapp. You were seeing yesterday what would happen in the regular season if we went against a powerful offensive line. Good news: this is preseason and Mora will make sure that this doesn't happen again.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by IdahoSeahawksFan, August 23, 2009
written by IdahoSeahawksFan, August 23, 2009
Teruski: What? your point numbers 1, 2, 4, and 6 are way off. JJ didn't even play and TJ was awesome last night. Did you see the game?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by MMF, August 23, 2009
written by MMF, August 23, 2009
I was at the game after all the talk of we are going to be a run first offense we were not,we could not.worse then that we are going to get Hasselbeck injured,the O line looked lost.The first string defense,it was a given they are going to be good this year,well I for one am worried.TJ and Butler looked great would likes to of seen Burleson and Nick Reed was an animal
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by JohnnyB, August 23, 2009
written by JohnnyB, August 23, 2009
Hey, Chris, I love all your writing and keep it up. One thing. We tend to forget that in pre-season, plenty of slugs, subs, and wanna be's are playing on the other team.
I doubt if Reed's performance is embarrassing any of the lineman and it might not even be getting him on the active roster because *who is he going up against?* A third string player? A guy who is never going to make it in the NFL? Until we know that (and the coaches and players *do* know that) we don't really know how good Nick Reed is.
If Reed is that good, the coaches will try him in the first quarter/half against first stringers. Have they? He hasn't shown up against first stringers so far.
I doubt if Reed's performance is embarrassing any of the lineman and it might not even be getting him on the active roster because *who is he going up against?* A third string player? A guy who is never going to make it in the NFL? Until we know that (and the coaches and players *do* know that) we don't really know how good Nick Reed is.
If Reed is that good, the coaches will try him in the first quarter/half against first stringers. Have they? He hasn't shown up against first stringers so far.
-
- +0
-
-
Tapp will get significant playing time
written by phxhawk, August 23, 2009
written by phxhawk, August 23, 2009
Tapp is as much of a starter as Darren Sproles. He's going to get a bunch of snaps in a platoon of D-linemen.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by teruski, August 23, 2009
written by teruski, August 23, 2009
Idaho...
My point was, aside from (3rd running back) Forsett and (rookie) Moore I haven't seen our running game light any fires. Yes, I know JJ didn't play last night, but he did play last week and I didn't think he looked that great (my opinion). I am concerned about the running game, that's all. I think Knapp will make some improvements and I am hoping our running backs will prove me wrong.
Wilson and Jennings seem to have a knack of being glued to the receiver on long routes but sometimes forget to look for the ball and get burned. They did the same thing last year and it was frustrating to watch. Granted on shorter routes they do tend to make plays for the ball...when the receivers are between them and the opposing QB.
The first and last drives in the first half looked very good. I felt the line did a decent job of giving Matt time to throw. Locklear had trouble on the in between drives, but, it looked like a lot of players backed off. Locklear is no WJ, and we were spoiled, but I saw some encouraging things last night.
My point was, aside from (3rd running back) Forsett and (rookie) Moore I haven't seen our running game light any fires. Yes, I know JJ didn't play last night, but he did play last week and I didn't think he looked that great (my opinion). I am concerned about the running game, that's all. I think Knapp will make some improvements and I am hoping our running backs will prove me wrong.
Wilson and Jennings seem to have a knack of being glued to the receiver on long routes but sometimes forget to look for the ball and get burned. They did the same thing last year and it was frustrating to watch. Granted on shorter routes they do tend to make plays for the ball...when the receivers are between them and the opposing QB.
The first and last drives in the first half looked very good. I felt the line did a decent job of giving Matt time to throw. Locklear had trouble on the in between drives, but, it looked like a lot of players backed off. Locklear is no WJ, and we were spoiled, but I saw some encouraging things last night.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Scotia Seahawk, August 23, 2009
written by Scotia Seahawk, August 23, 2009
Late one for me. Sun was up by the end.
Promising - WRs looked pretty decent.
TE's look great, Carlson will be a legend, others stepped up. Just reviewed Newton's catch. Had nodded off.. Pretty sweet
ST's looked ok.
Less promising - Duckett didn't provide much hope. Looked very slow to the the hole.
I'm not high on Wilson either. He may make plays but he gets burned often.
Locklear did look pretty bad at LT. If he is the future then it ain't bright.
Safeties seemed to come on the receiver after the fact.
Promising - WRs looked pretty decent.
TE's look great, Carlson will be a legend, others stepped up. Just reviewed Newton's catch. Had nodded off.. Pretty sweet
ST's looked ok.
Less promising - Duckett didn't provide much hope. Looked very slow to the the hole.
I'm not high on Wilson either. He may make plays but he gets burned often.
Locklear did look pretty bad at LT. If he is the future then it ain't bright.
Safeties seemed to come on the receiver after the fact.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by dj_meatwad, August 23, 2009
written by dj_meatwad, August 23, 2009
It's PRE-SEASON, folks. Teams don't even game plan and play the most vanilla of packages. You can't take pre-season for anything more than what it is - a time to get "used" to playing football, and to evaluate the bottom half of your roster.
No further evidence is needed of this fact than this: remember, the Lions went 4-0 in preseason last year, and we all know what happened to that group ...
No further evidence is needed of this fact than this: remember, the Lions went 4-0 in preseason last year, and we all know what happened to that group ...
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Briankk, August 23, 2009
written by Briankk, August 23, 2009
Just a thought as I watched this game a second time...
After actively seeking a trade partner, if none can be found then what do you guys think abut cutting Deion Branch? It would seem unlikely since Ruskell's pride wouldn't let him do it. But ever since coming into town, Branch has never been in-sync with Matt nor the offense, very injury prone and with all the youngens we have a WR, it may be the way to go. What do you guys think? Total brain fart on my part?
After actively seeking a trade partner, if none can be found then what do you guys think abut cutting Deion Branch? It would seem unlikely since Ruskell's pride wouldn't let him do it. But ever since coming into town, Branch has never been in-sync with Matt nor the offense, very injury prone and with all the youngens we have a WR, it may be the way to go. What do you guys think? Total brain fart on my part?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by maddog12, August 23, 2009
written by maddog12, August 23, 2009
Living in Baltimore the other day I heard that Ravens need a receiver. So there is at least one possible trade partner. Just don't know if the Ravens would give up anything we need and how much we could get for him. Would be nice if Branch could have a big game against KC. If no player/s now then picks in draft would be good.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Seahawk Addicts, August 23, 2009
written by Seahawk Addicts, August 23, 2009
JohnnyB - Reed actually saw a little playing time against the first team last night, as Denver kept their starters in for one series in the second half. Still, point taken. What wins him the roster spot though is not his sack numbers or tackles, it's his motor and his ability to consistently make plays regardless of who he's going up against. He won't be playing in the regular season except perhaps on special teams. He is good enough to rely on in an emergency situation, and I think the coaches will think he is worth developing further. We'll see though! Thanks for reading.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by omarlittle, August 23, 2009
written by omarlittle, August 23, 2009
I think Nick Reed will see more and more playing time as this season goes on. Probably the important aspect of the Tampa 2 is a strong defensive line rotation and I think he will figure into that, that motor of his reminds me of Kerney. I'm sure Atkins is gone soon, maybe use him as a trade package with Branch to get a replacement for Russell this season.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Aaron1122, August 23, 2009
written by Aaron1122, August 23, 2009
Not sure what happen to our 1st team D. I'm praying that it was in fact a result in coaching decisions and play calling while specifically looking for something.... Remember this is the time where they test theory as well....Lets hope that was the case. Because they looked like they were completely lost.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Aaron1122, August 23, 2009
written by Aaron1122, August 23, 2009
What happen to our 1st team D? I'm hoping that it was a result of coaching decisions and play calling, while specifically looking for something.... Remember this is the time where they test theory as well....Lets hope that was the case. Because they looked like they were completely lost.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by JohnnyB, August 23, 2009
So how did he do against them? Was he beating them?
Yes, I agree completely. So how will he do against starters? We have yet to find out I guess.
Yeah, we'll see. He probably is good enough in emergency situations. Perfect for the practice squad, I guess. And yeah, hard working guys like him have the best chance of getting bigger faster and stronger enough to put it all together eventually.
written by JohnnyB, August 23, 2009
JohnnyB - Reed actually saw a little playing time against the first team last night, as Denver kept their starters in for one series in the second half.
So how did he do against them? Was he beating them?
Still, point taken. What wins him the roster spot though is not his sack numbers or tackles, it's his motor and his ability to consistently make plays regardless of who he's going up against.
Yes, I agree completely. So how will he do against starters? We have yet to find out I guess.
He won't be playing in the regular season except perhaps on special teams. He is good enough to rely on in an emergency situation, and I think the coaches will think he is worth developing further. We'll see though!
Yeah, we'll see. He probably is good enough in emergency situations. Perfect for the practice squad, I guess. And yeah, hard working guys like him have the best chance of getting bigger faster and stronger enough to put it all together eventually.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by nightwulf, August 23, 2009
written by nightwulf, August 23, 2009
Johnny, Reeds first sack of the night, the one where he just made a complete fool of the LT, was against Denver's 1st team..He just gave the guy a slap, and ran around him like he was standing still...and you can bet that Denver was using it's starting ST, when he tipped that punt...but yeah, I DO want to see more of him against starters...but I really don't think we'll be able to stash him on the practice squad, someone's bound to grab him.
Briank, no offense, but since you asked, brain fart on your part. When Branch has been healthy, he and Hass have combined for some awesome stuff...when he's healthy, he kicks butt, it's just that he's not healthy often enough...
And folks, one more time, we're not going to be able to trade someone that we'd otherwise cut...the only "trade bait" that we have is players who we know are going to make the team.
And yes, we don't know if the ineffectiveness of the D was due to some lack on their part, or that the coaching staff was looking for something specific...Remember, these are PRACTICE games...winning them counts for precisely nothing. Doing things that will create teaching points on game film is far more useful, even if it makes the team look bad...We won't really know what we've got until the fourth game of the reg season...
Briank, no offense, but since you asked, brain fart on your part. When Branch has been healthy, he and Hass have combined for some awesome stuff...when he's healthy, he kicks butt, it's just that he's not healthy often enough...
And folks, one more time, we're not going to be able to trade someone that we'd otherwise cut...the only "trade bait" that we have is players who we know are going to make the team.
And yes, we don't know if the ineffectiveness of the D was due to some lack on their part, or that the coaching staff was looking for something specific...Remember, these are PRACTICE games...winning them counts for precisely nothing. Doing things that will create teaching points on game film is far more useful, even if it makes the team look bad...We won't really know what we've got until the fourth game of the reg season...
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by JohnnyB, August 24, 2009
Who was the Denver player? Was it their starting LT? Damn it, I think it's time for me to get DVR.
written by JohnnyB, August 24, 2009
Johnny, Reeds first sack of the night, the one where he just made a complete fool of the LT, was against Denver's 1st team..He just gave the guy a slap, and ran around him like he was standing still...
Who was the Denver player? Was it their starting LT? Damn it, I think it's time for me to get DVR.
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
The offense played very good the first series, very good sign of things to come. These guys are tired and the first units don't really have a lot to play for (except pride) in the preseason. They are on the team and just working on situational stuff. Yes, they let down after the first drive, but showed they could crank it back up a notch when they want to (2 minute drill).
The starting defense looked like they were playing a very vanilla scheme. These guys are on the team too. The backups have EVERYTHING to play hard for, they are fighting for their football lives. I'm not worried about the starters, they will be ready when the games count. And, I really like the competition for backup roles.
A couple of obvious points.
1. Our running game is non-existent
2. Our cornerbacks are afraid to turn and look for the ball in the air.
3. Nick Reed is a stud.
4. Our O-line showed they can play well (see first and last drives with Hass)
5. Carlson and Housh are the real deal.
6. T.J. and J.J. are not the real deal.
All in all, seeing the first units come back at the end of the half was encouraging. We will be fine.
The sky isn't falling and the world is not about to end. IT'S PRE-SEASON
GO HAWKS