| 23 October 2009
You've probably heard by now that former college quarterback and NFL backup Tim Hasselbeck challenged the Seahawks' mental toughness the other day. He said basically that when this team encounters a rough spot (like, say, a 14-point deficit before the offense so much as puts on their helmets), they lack the fortitude to get back in the game. It's a question that's been kicking around in my head the last couple of days.
The gut response is: "Of course we're mentally tough! This is one of the best teams in the league, but dang it all to hades if they aren't also the most injured team in the league. Golly gee, we're doing the best we can, Tim!" (Worth noting is that my gut has been heavily influenced by Joan Cleaver over the years.) The problem with this response is that it is an excuse. If we were mentally tough, would we let the injuries get in the way? The offensive line is one thing -- no team in the NFL would be playing much better than ours has played through these six games with their depth and coaching -- but for every other position, I just don't see the injuries as an excuse.[Read More]
Looking at our injury situation, the side that has been plagued is our defense. Leroy Hill, Lofa Tatupu, Brandon Mebane, Marcus Trufant, Patrick Kerney, Josh Wilson. Those are six key starters who have missed a combined 80 quarters (that's 20 games, for those keeping track at home). After the bye, Hill, Mebane, Trufant and Wilson will all be back, with Kerney up in the air. Still, our defense has actually played fairly well. Even with the Colts game and the awful first quarter on Sunday, the Hawks defense ranks 7th in points per game, 10th in 3rd Down situations and 10th in red zone percentage. They are also right in the middle of the pack for yards per game and yards per pass play (14th and 16th).
Offensively, we've actually stayed fairly healthy -- Hasselbeck missed 2.5 games, but no key WR, TE, or RB injuries (though Justin Griffith's health has been missed in the run game). Our offensive line has been hammered on the left side though, as we all know -- Jones, Locklear, Wahle, Sims, Frye, as well as our center Spencer -- but it's possible that Sims will be back for the Dallas game (and McIntosh should be fine at LT), and hopefully Locklear will return for the Detroit or Arizona game. The Hawks offense is 22nd for yards per game, 20th for yards per pass play, 19th most effective on 3rd down, and 24th in the red zone. That's not good enough.
The leader on offense is unequivocally Matt Hasselbeck. That's okay. He is the quarterback, he is experienced, he has a super bowl appearance and three pro bowls under his belt. He is solid emotionally and has that mental toughness that you look for in a leader. The question is, is he enough? Of late, as Robbie Tobeck pointed out on Brock and Salk yesterday, Matt has been the only leader on that offense. Houshmandzadeh was brought in for his swagger and leadership, but he's been too busy yearning for the 4-2 Bengals and critiquing everything but himself. Chris Spencer has toyed around with the idea of stepping up, but hasn't really done it yet. Nate Burleson is a mentor to the younger guys, but he's not a leader for the team. Julius Jones has too much to prove, Edgerrin James is a good locker room guy but has never really been a team leader, Walter Jones is injured, Mike Wahle retired . . . the list goes on and on.
So when a guy like Jones goes down, Locklear takes his place on the line, but he can't carry Jones' burden. Locklear is not the hall of famer that Jones is, he isn't looked up to in the same way and he won't ever be. When Wahle goes down, Sims steps up admirably but can't stay healthy. Spencer has been plagued with criticism, but has generally played well this year -- better than most 26 year old centers -- but he has not stepped up to be a leader. Julius Jones hasn't and won't, Housh doesn't seem eager or perhaps even capable of looking outside the personal tragedies he has endured this year (like not being thrown the ball on every offensive snap [I think that's called Marvin Harrison disease. -Ed.]).
So, do the Seahawks lack the mental toughness? No, I don't think they do. They do, however, lack leadership on offense. You need your quarterback to be the best guy on the field, not the toughest. If Trufant goes down, Lucas and Wilson step up. If Lofa goes down, Grant can lead and Hawthorne can play. If Matt goes down, the offense completely crumbles. It didn't last year, at least, not moreso, but this year it seems he's all we have. Unless someone steps up and leads, steps up and becomes a tough MFer, steps up and puts the team on his back when Matt can't bear the weight, this team is going nowhere fast.
Fingers crossed, I guess.
Comments (29)
Valid
written by MonroeCoug, October 23, 2009
written by MonroeCoug, October 23, 2009
Considering they haven't been able to win on the road and it has been atleast a couple of seasons since they have had a good comeback win as an underdog I would say their mental toughness should be questioned.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by WiiHawk, October 23, 2009
written by WiiHawk, October 23, 2009
Mental toughness. Heart. These are just stupid terms tossed out by the media, and mean absolutely nothing in coming from 14 points behind after the first quarter. By taking us down that far so early, the Cardinals forced us to throw more than we should have, and our offensive line couldn't handle that pressure. We lose because of lack of talent, experience and game plan. Let's quit pretending this mythical "heart" and "mental toughness" have anything to do with it. Talent and execution win football games, not unicorns and fairies.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Steve S., October 23, 2009
written by Steve S., October 23, 2009
Do the Seahawks lack "mental toughness" (henceforth "MT") on the offensive side? I don't see how you can differentiate between MT and the sheer fact that 60-80% of the offensive line on any given play are a bunch of clowns who don't belong out there. I don't know how we can blame the receivers for lack of MT when it's simply impossible for a receiver to get open on any route longer than four yards in less than 1.8 seconds, which is how much time the QB has to find a receiver. I've been critical of Julius Jones, but I don't know how we can blame him for lack of MT when there are two or three defenders in his face the instant he gets the handoff. It doesn't matter how much MT you have when your offensive line is a clown posse that can't block.
The defensive side is another matter. I've been pointing out for years that they've been a Jekyll and Hyde outfit that often just gives up on the road. One suggestion I've made is that Tatupu should be converted to outside LB and a "real" MLB acquired. I was laughed at for that one, but it hasn't looked quite so outrageous over the last twenty games. Tapp and Kerney need to figure out ways to get after the QB on the road. Curry looks like he has a bit of the right attitude home or road, so that's a good start. More of that, please.
The defensive side is another matter. I've been pointing out for years that they've been a Jekyll and Hyde outfit that often just gives up on the road. One suggestion I've made is that Tatupu should be converted to outside LB and a "real" MLB acquired. I was laughed at for that one, but it hasn't looked quite so outrageous over the last twenty games. Tapp and Kerney need to figure out ways to get after the QB on the road. Curry looks like he has a bit of the right attitude home or road, so that's a good start. More of that, please.
-
- +0
-
-
Injuries ARE an excuse, Toughness is nothing without talent
written by LordTdown, October 23, 2009
written by LordTdown, October 23, 2009
I'm tired of this rubbish about "injuries are no excuse". Of course they are. I'm mentally tough, but regardless of how tough I am, I can't play Left Tackle in the NFL. NFL teams go through the whole draft process and sign contracts etc. because random people off the street cannot play NFL football and be effective.
Frye, Williams and now McIntosh are all players that were not on NFL rosters at the start of the season. These guys are starting in an NFL game off the street.
What if I went in at QB? I'm mentally tough, would that help? Of course not. I'd miss the receivers, fumble the ball and get sacked (if not killed) regardless of how mentally tough I was.
We have non-starters starting for us at LT, LG, and RG and RT and played several games with a backup Center. Recall that Willis is NOT the starting RT, but is only there because Jones and then Locklear were hurt. In preseason, he was working on being the starting RG and may have beaten out Unger for that spot.
We're also missing a starting Pro-bowl CB. Where would the Cardinals be if they started 4 backup OL? Warner would have a broken arm, and they'd probably be 0-6. How about Indy or Minnesota?
You cannot run an NFL offense with starters on the OL that came off the street during the last week, and that is what we are doing. Williams, Frye, McIntosh, all practice squad or waivers guys.
If 11 of us readers were out on the field playing the Cardinals, and found ourselves down 14-0 in the first quarter, we'd lose regardless of how mentally tough we were. Mental toughness is just one part of football talent. You also need size, speed, strength, agility etc..
Recall who started on OL for us during 2005. Jones, Hutch, Toebeck, Gray, Locklear. Every game, all year, and they also played together in that configuration through most of the preseason. Also recall that Jones, Hutch and Toebeck all went to Miami and took Shaun and Matt with them.
Give me those same 5 healthy now and we'd be at worst 5-1. Put the scrubs we have now onto the 2005 team and we've had started that season 1-5 or maybe 2-4.
You need to have talent and cohesion on the OL, and we have none. We haven't started the same 5 OL in any 2 games I can remember, all the way back into the preseason. Is that an excuse? Yes and I make no apologies for it. No NFL team has enough depth to cover 4 missing OL and win.
Frye, Williams and now McIntosh are all players that were not on NFL rosters at the start of the season. These guys are starting in an NFL game off the street.
What if I went in at QB? I'm mentally tough, would that help? Of course not. I'd miss the receivers, fumble the ball and get sacked (if not killed) regardless of how mentally tough I was.
We have non-starters starting for us at LT, LG, and RG and RT and played several games with a backup Center. Recall that Willis is NOT the starting RT, but is only there because Jones and then Locklear were hurt. In preseason, he was working on being the starting RG and may have beaten out Unger for that spot.
We're also missing a starting Pro-bowl CB. Where would the Cardinals be if they started 4 backup OL? Warner would have a broken arm, and they'd probably be 0-6. How about Indy or Minnesota?
You cannot run an NFL offense with starters on the OL that came off the street during the last week, and that is what we are doing. Williams, Frye, McIntosh, all practice squad or waivers guys.
If 11 of us readers were out on the field playing the Cardinals, and found ourselves down 14-0 in the first quarter, we'd lose regardless of how mentally tough we were. Mental toughness is just one part of football talent. You also need size, speed, strength, agility etc..
Recall who started on OL for us during 2005. Jones, Hutch, Toebeck, Gray, Locklear. Every game, all year, and they also played together in that configuration through most of the preseason. Also recall that Jones, Hutch and Toebeck all went to Miami and took Shaun and Matt with them.
Give me those same 5 healthy now and we'd be at worst 5-1. Put the scrubs we have now onto the 2005 team and we've had started that season 1-5 or maybe 2-4.
You need to have talent and cohesion on the OL, and we have none. We haven't started the same 5 OL in any 2 games I can remember, all the way back into the preseason. Is that an excuse? Yes and I make no apologies for it. No NFL team has enough depth to cover 4 missing OL and win.
-
- +3
-
-
O-Line
written by LouieLouie, October 23, 2009
written by LouieLouie, October 23, 2009
Lock, Spencer, Unger, Sims and Willis would be an OK starting O-Line, not great, but adequate. They would be able to protect Hass adequately and open up some holes for Forsett. But only if they get time to play and gel together. If they keep going down with injuries, than it will never happen. If these guys can't stay healthy, then next off season it's time to rebuild the O-Line.
By the way LordT, showing some nards would help too, especially for the defense on the road.
By the way LordT, showing some nards would help too, especially for the defense on the road.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by hawksnest116, October 23, 2009
written by hawksnest116, October 23, 2009
Are the Seattle Seahawks mentally tough? Hell NO!!! Since 2007 we are 5- 13 on the road. When was the last time the Seahawks pulled a upset. When was the last time the Seahawks pulled out a 4th quarter comeback. We are 3-12 outside our division over the last two years. We dont have one player on our deffence that any team fears. Hell when is the last time a Seahawk player laid someone out? The last heavy hitter we had was Ken "The Hammer" Hamlin. Anyone remember the hit he had on Donte Stallworth in our season opener in I think 04'. I jumped out of my seat and gave about 30 high fives to complete strangers at my first game at Quest field.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by jbilko, October 23, 2009
written by jbilko, October 23, 2009
Right now I say no, the are not mentally tough. They are not even physically tough. Ow my ankle, ow my knee, ow my groin, blah blah blah. Just sick of all the injuries. 
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Hawkdude, October 23, 2009
written by Hawkdude, October 23, 2009
I think that we ARE a mentally tough team. We are simply beaten up. I like a lot of the comments thus far that point to the gaping hole that is our O-line. I'm sure Kyle Williams had the desire to do better, but he was simply out-classed by better talent. Our D played quite well with the exception of the first two possessions. Mental toughness is pretty much shutting the door after that type of start missing your #1 corner, losing your captain in Lofa, missing Hill, and playing with a less than 100% Wilson, and Kerney. If you don't believe that the Seahawks are mentally tough, I think you look at the situation again and see how hard they've competed.
Kyle Wiliams is a 4th string LT for a reason.
I'm pretty much a die hard, so my opinion could be tainted. But I do believe that we are tough. We just need to get healthy.
If I were TR, I'd trade for the QB of the future - someone like Quinn, Brenner, or someone who has shown that they are starter worthy. Take a risk on someone who may be able to fill in adequately for Matt if he gets hurt. Allow the individual to duke it out with Teel for the next couple of years. Save our draft choices to pick up help on the O-line, safety, and maybe even some depth at corner. I don't know if we need some monster high priced RB as nobody can run behind the kind of line that we have today.
Are there any good FAs out there for O-line or RB?
Kyle Wiliams is a 4th string LT for a reason.
I'm pretty much a die hard, so my opinion could be tainted. But I do believe that we are tough. We just need to get healthy.
If I were TR, I'd trade for the QB of the future - someone like Quinn, Brenner, or someone who has shown that they are starter worthy. Take a risk on someone who may be able to fill in adequately for Matt if he gets hurt. Allow the individual to duke it out with Teel for the next couple of years. Save our draft choices to pick up help on the O-line, safety, and maybe even some depth at corner. I don't know if we need some monster high priced RB as nobody can run behind the kind of line that we have today.
Are there any good FAs out there for O-line or RB?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Buster, October 23, 2009
written by Buster, October 23, 2009
I feel the frustration too.. But, we are beat up. No need to blame the players so much though. It takes a lot of MT to even make it as far as they have. I think Kyle Williams has the MT. He played hurt when he had to come in 2 weeks ago and do we know really how healthy he was last game ?? He did OK last year when called upon. Not trying to make excuses for him, but he is only 1/5 of the line, but seems to be getting all the heat.
I think the play calling could have been much better. Play to our strengths (whatever they are at this point...) Seahawks of old didn't have great lines... but still could make it exciting, remember Dan Doornik ? Maybe the new regime should go back and look at the old film. Let's have some fun and excitement at least ! Look at the bright side, we have a good long snapper, what's his name?
I think the play calling could have been much better. Play to our strengths (whatever they are at this point...) Seahawks of old didn't have great lines... but still could make it exciting, remember Dan Doornik ? Maybe the new regime should go back and look at the old film. Let's have some fun and excitement at least ! Look at the bright side, we have a good long snapper, what's his name?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by USAFANARC, October 23, 2009
written by USAFANARC, October 23, 2009
LordTDown, I couldn't have said it any better. I agree wholeheartedly with you. There isn't a team out there that could win with the O-line we have fielded in the last few weeks.
As much as I want us to draft a QB to start grooming next year behind Hass, I'm beginning to think we wait and use both first rounders on OL (if there is sufficient talent still on the board) and a RB in the second (once again, if the player is there). The only way to kick start this offense is in the trenches.
As much as I want us to draft a QB to start grooming next year behind Hass, I'm beginning to think we wait and use both first rounders on OL (if there is sufficient talent still on the board) and a RB in the second (once again, if the player is there). The only way to kick start this offense is in the trenches.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Aaron1122, October 23, 2009
written by Aaron1122, October 23, 2009
Mentally tough? We just need to focus on them getting PHYSICALLY tough....Seems like were done before we start! Im sick of this!
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by nightwulf, October 23, 2009
written by nightwulf, October 23, 2009
USAFANARC,
Yay, another convert to the fold! Welcome, brother
I'm also pulling for us to spend 2 of our first 3 picks next year on the O line (as well as throwing a boatload of money at the best available FA lineman.
The only reason I'm not just saying "use both first rounders" is that we have a chance to get Mays or Berry...we can't pass that up. If we miss on them, use both picks on O line, then use our second rounder on the best available between RB, S and O line. (yeah, we need THAT much help on the line)
Yay, another convert to the fold! Welcome, brother
I'm also pulling for us to spend 2 of our first 3 picks next year on the O line (as well as throwing a boatload of money at the best available FA lineman. The only reason I'm not just saying "use both first rounders" is that we have a chance to get Mays or Berry...we can't pass that up. If we miss on them, use both picks on O line, then use our second rounder on the best available between RB, S and O line. (yeah, we need THAT much help on the line)
-
- +0
-
-
WE ARE MENTALLY TOUGH BUT JUST LIKE LAST YEAR,INJURED
written by MontanaMike, October 24, 2009
written by MontanaMike, October 24, 2009
Agreed so far with the general concensious, We wern't questioning their heart a few weeks ago when we put an alley style ass kicking on Jax. We need hill and trufant badly. We'd have a good O line if everyone was healthy, i believe we would dominate most teams like we did in the pre season.
Last week we lost that game with costly mistakes in the first few minutes. I mean that literaly!
We have to start jumping on other teams early, or at least contain them from scoring on us. I don't know why we always play better in the 2nd than the first quarter but we do. Lastly I hope that after the bye we start kicking ass. I hope to see Walt again however doubtful that may be.
Last week we lost that game with costly mistakes in the first few minutes. I mean that literaly!
We have to start jumping on other teams early, or at least contain them from scoring on us. I don't know why we always play better in the 2nd than the first quarter but we do. Lastly I hope that after the bye we start kicking ass. I hope to see Walt again however doubtful that may be.
-
- +0
-
-
Why So Many Injuries?
written by LouieLouie, October 24, 2009
written by LouieLouie, October 24, 2009
That is the ultimate question about the Hawks. Are the injuries just because of really really bad luck? Are the trainers doing a poor job? Maybe the team just seems to draft and sign injury-prone players
One thing that could be exacerbating all of the above is that the Hawks play in a cold, wet environment. Just playing here, with whatever chemical type of turf they have at Quest and the training facility, could be the ultimate problem. The Hawks practice in the rain during the spring, and play in the fall / winter rain here every year.
If that were the case, it would take a retractable dome on Quest field to change it. The taxpayers of Washington State wouldn't want to put up the 2 or 3 hundred million that would cost. In fact, I would vote against that if it were put on the ballot.
I hope that it is not the case, but our beloved rainy climate could ultimately be what is behind Seattle's injuries. This was never a problem when the Hawks played in the Kingdome.
One thing that could be exacerbating all of the above is that the Hawks play in a cold, wet environment. Just playing here, with whatever chemical type of turf they have at Quest and the training facility, could be the ultimate problem. The Hawks practice in the rain during the spring, and play in the fall / winter rain here every year.
If that were the case, it would take a retractable dome on Quest field to change it. The taxpayers of Washington State wouldn't want to put up the 2 or 3 hundred million that would cost. In fact, I would vote against that if it were put on the ballot.
I hope that it is not the case, but our beloved rainy climate could ultimately be what is behind Seattle's injuries. This was never a problem when the Hawks played in the Kingdome.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by BillT, October 24, 2009
written by BillT, October 24, 2009
USAFANARC,
There were a couple of us last year who were preaching drafting two or even three offensive linemen (or a combination of draft choices and free agents). I personally lobbied for a LT, guard, and center saying that we needed to build a great offensive line as the core of our new offense. Many fans saw it differently although I'd bet a lot of them are converts now.
My reasoning then (as it still is now) was that not only is Walt on his last legs but the quality of some of our Olinemen is suspect namely at center and guard. Everything I've seen so far this season justifies that contention. If we don't make an effort to get a quality LT at the very least next offseason, we'll not be able to take that next step towards becoming an elite team. Locklear will never be anything but an average LT and even Tim Ruskell said that the ZBS doesn't eliminate the need for a top notch guy to protect your QB. The requirements and skill set for LT are the same under the ZBS as any other offensive line blocking scheme.
There are still a number of fans who think after we get Locklear, Spencer, and Sims back healthy, we'll have a good offensive line and we'll start winning. I would call that an average offensive line at best and I don't think we'll win a championship behind Locklear at LT and Spencer at center. While there is no next Walter Jones to be found as he's probably the best there has ever been, there are certainly much better LT's than Locklear. Especially if we're going to go with a mature QB who can slice and dice an oppopnent up if he's able to stand in the pocket and throw the ball, we need an above average LT who can protect him.
We also need to get someone else at center or move Unger there and replace him at guard with another talent like him. I could see an offensive line of NEW LT, Sims, Unger, NEW guard, and Locklear with the experience of Willis, Wrotto, Frye, Spencer (if we resign him) and either Williams or Vallos backing them up as being a very good line after playing together for a half season and gelling. I don't see any quick fixes for the situation. There is almost never an experienced high quality LT available in free agency with tread left on his tires. If there was, he'd probably get QB like money in a bidding war. Left tackles are up there with QB's and CB's as the mopst valuable positions on the team. A good one can make or break your team.
The rub is that we're probably going to have to committ our two first round draft choices to getting that above average LT unless we collapse this season or Denver does and we end up with one of our two picks being a top 5 again. If we end up with a couple of mid twenties picks in the first round, that won't buy us a top notch tackle unless we bundle them and move up to where those quality players are taken.
The problem is going to be the same as last year. Right now, most fans would do that in a heartbeat but after the season's over the thought of spending our top two picks just to get a tackle (not a sexy pick) will become unpopular and talk will get back to drafting a running back, safety, QB, CB, or WR and examples of some team who drafted a LT in the 5th round who turned out to be a good one will be offered as proof we don't need to spend our valuable high round picks on a LT.
My good friend Phil did a study last season of all the top LT's for the last 13 years IIRC and found out that a very high percentage came out of the top 10 picks in the draft. It's a very low percentage gamble to try and get a good one when you move out of the top 10 picks. We could burn a number of valuable draft picks over a number of years trying to get our next LT that way and field a mediocre team in the meanwhile.
Like I said last year, what good is drafting a RB or WR if we don't have a line capable of opening holes or holding back the pass rush? A great safety or cornerback is fine but last Sunday after the first two scores from the Cardinals, the Seahawks defense held Arizona to three points for three quarters and our offense couldn't even cross midfield let alone get to the red zone where we could put some points on the board. A crushing defense won't win any games if the offense can't score and the offense can't score with a crappy ofensive line. If we field an average Oline, we'll field an average team. If you want a great team, you need a great offensive line.
If Tim Ruskell is the GM I think he is, he'll do what needs to be done and fix the offensive line this offseason putting a priority on it. He doesn't have to do it my way but somehow he has to do it. He's a master at coming up with a plan or player that no one saw coming but that's one of the reasons I like him so well. He has vision and a thorough understanding of who's available and how well they would fit the Seahawks. If TR doesn't address the Oline this offseason, I'll be dissapointed and he'll lose a lot of my support (like he cares ).
There were a couple of us last year who were preaching drafting two or even three offensive linemen (or a combination of draft choices and free agents). I personally lobbied for a LT, guard, and center saying that we needed to build a great offensive line as the core of our new offense. Many fans saw it differently although I'd bet a lot of them are converts now.
My reasoning then (as it still is now) was that not only is Walt on his last legs but the quality of some of our Olinemen is suspect namely at center and guard. Everything I've seen so far this season justifies that contention. If we don't make an effort to get a quality LT at the very least next offseason, we'll not be able to take that next step towards becoming an elite team. Locklear will never be anything but an average LT and even Tim Ruskell said that the ZBS doesn't eliminate the need for a top notch guy to protect your QB. The requirements and skill set for LT are the same under the ZBS as any other offensive line blocking scheme.
There are still a number of fans who think after we get Locklear, Spencer, and Sims back healthy, we'll have a good offensive line and we'll start winning. I would call that an average offensive line at best and I don't think we'll win a championship behind Locklear at LT and Spencer at center. While there is no next Walter Jones to be found as he's probably the best there has ever been, there are certainly much better LT's than Locklear. Especially if we're going to go with a mature QB who can slice and dice an oppopnent up if he's able to stand in the pocket and throw the ball, we need an above average LT who can protect him.
We also need to get someone else at center or move Unger there and replace him at guard with another talent like him. I could see an offensive line of NEW LT, Sims, Unger, NEW guard, and Locklear with the experience of Willis, Wrotto, Frye, Spencer (if we resign him) and either Williams or Vallos backing them up as being a very good line after playing together for a half season and gelling. I don't see any quick fixes for the situation. There is almost never an experienced high quality LT available in free agency with tread left on his tires. If there was, he'd probably get QB like money in a bidding war. Left tackles are up there with QB's and CB's as the mopst valuable positions on the team. A good one can make or break your team.
The rub is that we're probably going to have to committ our two first round draft choices to getting that above average LT unless we collapse this season or Denver does and we end up with one of our two picks being a top 5 again. If we end up with a couple of mid twenties picks in the first round, that won't buy us a top notch tackle unless we bundle them and move up to where those quality players are taken.
The problem is going to be the same as last year. Right now, most fans would do that in a heartbeat but after the season's over the thought of spending our top two picks just to get a tackle (not a sexy pick) will become unpopular and talk will get back to drafting a running back, safety, QB, CB, or WR and examples of some team who drafted a LT in the 5th round who turned out to be a good one will be offered as proof we don't need to spend our valuable high round picks on a LT.
My good friend Phil did a study last season of all the top LT's for the last 13 years IIRC and found out that a very high percentage came out of the top 10 picks in the draft. It's a very low percentage gamble to try and get a good one when you move out of the top 10 picks. We could burn a number of valuable draft picks over a number of years trying to get our next LT that way and field a mediocre team in the meanwhile.
Like I said last year, what good is drafting a RB or WR if we don't have a line capable of opening holes or holding back the pass rush? A great safety or cornerback is fine but last Sunday after the first two scores from the Cardinals, the Seahawks defense held Arizona to three points for three quarters and our offense couldn't even cross midfield let alone get to the red zone where we could put some points on the board. A crushing defense won't win any games if the offense can't score and the offense can't score with a crappy ofensive line. If we field an average Oline, we'll field an average team. If you want a great team, you need a great offensive line.
If Tim Ruskell is the GM I think he is, he'll do what needs to be done and fix the offensive line this offseason putting a priority on it. He doesn't have to do it my way but somehow he has to do it. He's a master at coming up with a plan or player that no one saw coming but that's one of the reasons I like him so well. He has vision and a thorough understanding of who's available and how well they would fit the Seahawks. If TR doesn't address the Oline this offseason, I'll be dissapointed and he'll lose a lot of my support (like he cares
).
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by MMF, October 24, 2009
written by MMF, October 24, 2009
Bill, I remember you were all over the O-line pick last year.I too wanted it but knew we would go for Curry if he was there.There is no other choice next year we have to get lineman.
-
- +0
-
-
Playoff? Playoffs?
written by LouieLouie, October 24, 2009
written by LouieLouie, October 24, 2009
Going into last year's off season, I thought that the number one priority was on the interior D-Line. We needed a big guy in there. We got Cole in free agency. Early in the draft season, I thought that we might get B.J. Raji, who went to Green Bay where we signed Cole from.
You are absolutely right BillT, we will have to address Left Tackle this off season. Who knows how good Lock could be because he never plays long enough to settle into the position. As long as he is the LT, we'll always have 2nd and 3rd stringers playing there for significant portions of the season.
Maybe not this coming off season, but we will need to address the QB position. I would like to see Mr. Locker in a Seahawk uniform. If there was any chance of that happening, it would become the #1 priority.
You are absolutely right BillT, we will have to address Left Tackle this off season. Who knows how good Lock could be because he never plays long enough to settle into the position. As long as he is the LT, we'll always have 2nd and 3rd stringers playing there for significant portions of the season.
Maybe not this coming off season, but we will need to address the QB position. I would like to see Mr. Locker in a Seahawk uniform. If there was any chance of that happening, it would become the #1 priority.
-
- +1
-
-
Mentally tough?
written by seahawk, October 24, 2009
written by seahawk, October 24, 2009
I say not yet only because of the previous regime. I think we were a finesse team and Mora is in the process of building a tough team. Jury is out and we will see.
-
- +0
-
-
Great question, Chris...
written by Steve Kelley, October 24, 2009
written by Steve Kelley, October 24, 2009
Love the blog.
I always question this about the 'hawks. But, it's got to go a little further than that right now. How do you solve a problem like The Seahawks? You look at everything and everyone. Look at how many years we've been plagued with injuries... has anyone questioned the training staff? Are our guys required to stretch and workout as much as, say The Pittsburgh Steelers? Does our training staff enforce mandatory stretching? Why are we so fragile? Should we fire that whole department and rebuild? Look at Griffey. Remember him in pre game warmups back in the kingdome? Nope. Because he was never there. He never stretched and took part in warmup drills... and look what it did for him later in life, his career was severely shortened... now look at guys like Walter Jones.
Every department has problems. Their mental toughness? Yes. Their physical toughness? Yes, that too.
I always question this about the 'hawks. But, it's got to go a little further than that right now. How do you solve a problem like The Seahawks? You look at everything and everyone. Look at how many years we've been plagued with injuries... has anyone questioned the training staff? Are our guys required to stretch and workout as much as, say The Pittsburgh Steelers? Does our training staff enforce mandatory stretching? Why are we so fragile? Should we fire that whole department and rebuild? Look at Griffey. Remember him in pre game warmups back in the kingdome? Nope. Because he was never there. He never stretched and took part in warmup drills... and look what it did for him later in life, his career was severely shortened... now look at guys like Walter Jones.
Every department has problems. Their mental toughness? Yes. Their physical toughness? Yes, that too.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Aaron1122, October 24, 2009
written by Aaron1122, October 24, 2009
Excellent point Steve. I'd be curios to peak into their conditioning regimen and compare it to other teams. There has to be a reason why we can't stay healthy, and I want to know if its something that can be fixed with a new approach toward preparing physically.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by USAFANARC, October 25, 2009
written by USAFANARC, October 25, 2009
Is anyone else having trouble with this site?? The site keeps freezing my browser....won't let me surf away from the site. I've tried it on two computers and it's doing the same thing on both. I have to close the browser and reopen it to go to a different site. Am I alone?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by BillT, October 25, 2009
written by BillT, October 25, 2009
USAFANARC,
I'm having some of the troubles you are and more. It won't let me make a comment sometimes saying that my userid has already been taken and it keeps logging me off so if I leave for an hour, when I come back, I'm not logged into the site anymore as me. It also freezes my browser like you're saying on a refresh.
Chris?
I'm having some of the troubles you are and more. It won't let me make a comment sometimes saying that my userid has already been taken and it keeps logging me off so if I leave for an hour, when I come back, I'm not logged into the site anymore as me. It also freezes my browser like you're saying on a refresh.
Chris?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by bleedshawkblue, October 25, 2009
written by bleedshawkblue, October 25, 2009
ALL about the training staff, man.
Football, like any profession, is occupied in the executive ranks by those of a previous generation that did things a certain way and saw success. In that era. Just like any other business, executives tend to insist on having things done the way it worked when they were in the trenches 25 years ago.
Leaving strength and conditioning up to a player is a recipe for disaster. Griffey is exhibit A. Robert Parish of the Celtics dynasty of the 80s mentioned that if Bird and McHale had paid attention to strength, flexibility and nutrition then they would have both played 5 years longer at a high level like he did and would have won at least a couple more championships. The people in current executive positions are from that era of the 70s and 80s when stretching, nutrition and conditioning were barely coming out of the dark ages. The fact that people still put enormous stock in bench press and 40 numbers (Hi, Mr. Al Davis!) is a reflection of this.
The fact that something as simple as selecting a proper orthotic or shoe that complements a player's individual biomechanics or correcting muscle strength and flexibility imbalance is still considered of minor importance or even irrelevant is further proof that those in charge are doing things the way it worked in the good old days (which weren't that good, either - check league wide injury rates and career lengths then - they were every bit as brutal).
Nobody is going to win against the likes of Darnell Dockett and Bertrand Berry if they had been holding a sign on an I90 onramp that says "Will play Left Tackle (Guard, Center...) for food" the week before. I assert the amount of mental toughness it takes to square off against that kind of competition when you know you're completely outclassed talent-wise should never be questioned. Good point, though, about leadership. Hasselbeck is the man, and with Walter out, there isn't someone that is commanding the necessary magical combination of talent and style that others can rally around.
Not nearly as concerned about the D as Curry can do it by himself with his fine-him-every-game intensity plus some other guys with credibility like Grant who are able to command the attention of all when things hit the fan. I say use the money we were going to pay Kerney and Branch next year to find a stud and another decent FA lineman (Spencer?) and draft another lineman high, then RB, then Safety. And the rest of the picks on Cornerbacks...
Football, like any profession, is occupied in the executive ranks by those of a previous generation that did things a certain way and saw success. In that era. Just like any other business, executives tend to insist on having things done the way it worked when they were in the trenches 25 years ago.
Leaving strength and conditioning up to a player is a recipe for disaster. Griffey is exhibit A. Robert Parish of the Celtics dynasty of the 80s mentioned that if Bird and McHale had paid attention to strength, flexibility and nutrition then they would have both played 5 years longer at a high level like he did and would have won at least a couple more championships. The people in current executive positions are from that era of the 70s and 80s when stretching, nutrition and conditioning were barely coming out of the dark ages. The fact that people still put enormous stock in bench press and 40 numbers (Hi, Mr. Al Davis!) is a reflection of this.
The fact that something as simple as selecting a proper orthotic or shoe that complements a player's individual biomechanics or correcting muscle strength and flexibility imbalance is still considered of minor importance or even irrelevant is further proof that those in charge are doing things the way it worked in the good old days (which weren't that good, either - check league wide injury rates and career lengths then - they were every bit as brutal).
Nobody is going to win against the likes of Darnell Dockett and Bertrand Berry if they had been holding a sign on an I90 onramp that says "Will play Left Tackle (Guard, Center...) for food" the week before. I assert the amount of mental toughness it takes to square off against that kind of competition when you know you're completely outclassed talent-wise should never be questioned. Good point, though, about leadership. Hasselbeck is the man, and with Walter out, there isn't someone that is commanding the necessary magical combination of talent and style that others can rally around.
Not nearly as concerned about the D as Curry can do it by himself with his fine-him-every-game intensity plus some other guys with credibility like Grant who are able to command the attention of all when things hit the fan. I say use the money we were going to pay Kerney and Branch next year to find a stud and another decent FA lineman (Spencer?) and draft another lineman high, then RB, then Safety. And the rest of the picks on Cornerbacks...
-
- +0
-
-
This site has issues!
written by Aaron1122, October 25, 2009
written by Aaron1122, October 25, 2009
USAFANARC im having the same problem...the site wont come up and i get an "error" or abort message. Ive also tried two different computers.....Cant figure out why it does this. Happens about 99% of the time. I was lucky to be able to post this message!
-
- +0
-
-
ummm NO!
written by Shmolzer, October 26, 2009
written by Shmolzer, October 26, 2009
I'm as big of a seahawks fan as anyone is....but I tend to disagree on this topic. You see it all the time in games, the hawks have lost that cockiness, that swagger about them. Everytime another team gets a bit of a lead...it seems to deflate us on both sides of the ball....
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by cheap ugg boots uk, October 10, 2010
written by cheap ugg boots uk, October 10, 2010
The ugg types boots are your best choice in this cold winter. In order to give all of our customers a warm and fashion winter, we are now recommand you for a serious boots, eg:
cheap chocolate tall uggs, cheap ugg boots online, cheap classic tall ugg boots,
cheap ugg boots for sale,
cheap ugg kensington boots,
cheap short uggs,
cheap womens ugg boots, cheapest ugg boots uk.
The ugg classic tall and
ugg classic short and ugg cardy boots are the best sell in all of our
ugg boots store. We offer diverse styles UGG boots for all of the customers, for example,
ugg classic cardy boots,
ugg sunset, ugg classic cardy cream
And ugg half waterproofing,
And ugg stripes boots. For ugg tall boots,
We have
ugg classic tall, ugg classic tall leopard and
ugg classic tall sand.
ugg classic short ,
UGG boots classic short chestnut,
NEW UGG Tassel Short Boots,
UGG Classic Short Paisley Sand.
Our ugg bailey button, ugg cardy boots,
ugg women's bailey button triplet,
UGG Classic Crochet Boots,
UGG Patent Paisley Boots,
mini ugg boots,
ugg Classic Mini Chestnut,
ugg argyle knit boots
ugg sundance boots,
ugg nightfall boots,
ugg argyle knit boots,
ugg ultra short boots,
ugg classic crochet sand,
and
ugg classic cardy rose are hot sale. So it’s a nice choose for you to select the one you like in our store. You can find
discount ugg ,
cheap uggs sale at our
ugg boots store. For more information, we have ugg sheepskin handbags. We all know that fashion handbags are necessary for all the ladies. Why not order one for yourself or for your friends now!
Our UGG shop online sells many styles of UGG boots,such as:
UGG classic short ect..
pink ghd straighteners
ghd curling tongs
cheap ugg boots uk
ugg
ugg boots
ugg shop
cheap chocolate tall uggs, cheap ugg boots online, cheap classic tall ugg boots,
cheap ugg boots for sale,
cheap ugg kensington boots,
cheap short uggs,
cheap womens ugg boots, cheapest ugg boots uk.
cheap chocolate tall uggs, cheap ugg boots online, cheap classic tall ugg boots,
cheap ugg boots for sale,
cheap ugg kensington boots,
cheap short uggs,
cheap womens ugg boots, cheapest ugg boots uk.
The ugg classic tall and
ugg classic short and ugg cardy boots are the best sell in all of our
ugg boots store. We offer diverse styles UGG boots for all of the customers, for example,
ugg classic cardy boots,
ugg sunset, ugg classic cardy cream
And ugg half waterproofing,
And ugg stripes boots. For ugg tall boots,
We have
ugg classic tall, ugg classic tall leopard and
ugg classic tall sand.
ugg classic short ,
UGG boots classic short chestnut,
NEW UGG Tassel Short Boots,
UGG Classic Short Paisley Sand.
Our ugg bailey button, ugg cardy boots,
ugg women's bailey button triplet,
UGG Classic Crochet Boots,
UGG Patent Paisley Boots,
mini ugg boots,
ugg Classic Mini Chestnut,
ugg argyle knit boots
ugg sundance boots,
ugg nightfall boots,
ugg argyle knit boots,
ugg ultra short boots,
ugg classic crochet sand,
and
ugg classic cardy rose are hot sale. So it’s a nice choose for you to select the one you like in our store. You can find
discount ugg ,
cheap uggs sale at our
ugg boots store. For more information, we have ugg sheepskin handbags. We all know that fashion handbags are necessary for all the ladies. Why not order one for yourself or for your friends now!
Our UGG shop online sells many styles of UGG boots,such as:
UGG classic short ect..
pink ghd straighteners
ghd curling tongs
cheap ugg boots uk
ugg
ugg boots
ugg shop
cheap chocolate tall uggs, cheap ugg boots online, cheap classic tall ugg boots,
cheap ugg boots for sale,
cheap ugg kensington boots,
cheap short uggs,
cheap womens ugg boots, cheapest ugg boots uk.
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
