I’ve got one last thing on the final play of the Seahawks-Packers game, and then it’s time for sweet, sweet stats.  As you can see in this photo posted earlier today by Danny O’Neil, the disputed catch looks a lot different from behind.  He also imbedded some video of the play, courtesy of Q13, but if you’re having trouble viewing it like I did, try this link instead.  All I’ll say is that if that angle had been made available during the game, we might’ve been able to avoid a lot of the ensuing frenzy (or not -- it’s not like the national media to let a little thing like contradictory evidence get in the way of a good mad-on).

*        *        *

(Note: For explanations of some of the stats included in this piece, please see the first article in the series.)

Rushing Averages

Against the Packers, the Seahawks went with their usual strategy of slowly wearing the opposing defense down with the running game.  That’s a perfectly acceptable way to go, so long as you’re willing to wait until late in the game to see big gains, but Seattle’s inability to convert first downs in the second half shot that game plan in the foot. As it turns out, it’s awfully hard to wear a defense down if you run it at them twice then throw an incompletion and punt, let them rest for five game minutes, run it at them two more followed by another incompletion and punt, let them rest another six game minutes, etc.

But despite rushing for a season-low 29 attempts (as opposed to 33 and 41 in weeks 1 & 2, respectively), the Seahawks were able to keep their rushing average in the mid-4 yards per attempt range for the second straight week.  However, it’s important to note that those stats are inflated by a single 11-yard run by Washington and a 6 yds/att average for Wilson’s three scrambles.  By himself, Lynch averaged just 3.92 yds/att on his 25 carries, which is isn’t bad, but it’s a half-yard short of the team’s average.

Likewise, the run stats allowed by the defense are also a bit misleading.  The Packers’ offense was more successful than either the Cardinals or Cowboys at running against the Seahawks, but that rushing average is inflated by a 20-yard run by Randall Cobb and a 16-yard scramble by Aaron Rodgers on the first play of their first drive.  Their workhorse back, Cedric Benson, was held to a reassuringly-low 2.65 yds/att on his 17 carries, an average which is more in keeping with what Seattle’s run defense usually allows.

(To continue reading, please click on "Read More" below.)

A night that was supposed to go down in history as one of the greatest regular season finshes ever has been clouded in drama and controversy. Everywhere you turned on Tuesday morning was a debate over the final play of last night’s thrilling victory (or is it, say the so-called experts) over Green Bay. It was inescapable; even non-sports fans didn’t hear the end of it. And there we are as Seahawks fans in the middle of it, not sure whether we should be proud of that victory last night. After hearing all the national criticism and people saying we shouldn’t be proud being 2-1, I’m here to say that I fully disagree and I think you as Seahawk fans should too. There are three things I’ve heard in particular that have continued to bug me (I’m sure you too). Here is what they said, and why they are wrong.

1. “The replacement officials were to blame for the Green Bay’s loss.”
   
   The rage goes on about how the real NFL officials need to replace their replacements; that I strongly agree with. What disgusts me is the argument that the final call was “bad” purely because it was made by replacement officials. Who is to say that the call would have been correct had those officials been the regular NFL ones? There is no way anyone can say that, and those who do are likely in the wrong. How many times in previous seasons do you as fans jump up and scream at the TV on a Sunday afternoon, clamoring at a bad call made during the game? I’m willing to bet plenty of times. Bad calls are part of the game, and many times the Seahawks are on the tail-end of the call. Super Bowl 40, anyone? Take this fortunate call and run with it (although in my opinion, it’s arguable that it was fair to begin with!).
   
   My point is that you can’t put the blame about the outcome of the game solely on the replacement officials. You win a game by playing out the entire 60 minutes, not just 59 minutes and 48 seconds of it. I’m not going to sit here and argue whether it was a catch or not either; that debate would be endless. What I will say, is that it was a hard call to make in real-time. Sure, everyone can sit back on their TV’s or laptops and dissect the play to see what was correct. But in real-time? It’s a totally different ballgame. That catch happened so quickly that anyone could have gotten the call wrong, professional or not. Even if it was a bad call, mistakes happen and it’s football. Time to move on, it’s a big-boy sport is it not?
   
   
2. “Seattle was handed a victory by the Packers and the referees.”
   
   The conversation about who caught the ball was controversial. The quote about us being “handed” the win is not; it’s dead wrong. On a night where the hawks played their hearts out in front of a national audience, nothing was just given to them. Garnering 8 sacks in one half is not a “gift” they were given, they earned it! Holding Green Bay’s offense, one of the most potent ones in the league, to just 12 points? That’s not something that was “handed” to them (not to mention it might have been under 12 if there was no blatant pass-interference call on Kam Chancellor on their lone touchdown drive, but that’s besides the point). The final call itself was not “handed” to us either. We put ourselves in position for that call to happen. We kept the game close enough for a game-winning drive, drove down the field on that drive to set up that final throw, and Golden Tate fought for the ball and put the officials in position to have to make the call. Any of those components missing, and we’d have a completely different conversation. We put ourselves in position to win that game; no one else did that for us. The predicament the officials were in at the end was just a result of what we did to put them in that situation. The final play is not necessarily something we should be overjoyed about, but the team that we saw on the field last night? Impressive, be happy that you have them.
   
   
3. “Golden Tate is full of ** too. Saying he should have caught that is embarrassing! ** jokers!” –Josh Sitton, Packers Guard
   
   I just find this quote funny. Coming from a tough offensive lineman makes it hilarious. Imagine you are Golden Tate for a moment. The game is on the line, you leap for a jump ball, and then you come down with it simultaneously with another player. You both have possession (yes, they BOTH did indeed have some possession when they hit the ground), although the other guy might have just a bit more. You have two options: Hold onto the ball and try to win possession, or let go of the ball and tell the official “Oh darn, he had a bit more of the ball than me. He won fair and square.” Which would you choose? THE FIRST ONE, OF COURSE! What kind of competitor, teammate, and athlete would you be if you chose the second?! I find it funny that Sitton would even tweet about something like this. Would Sitton have done the same as Tate if he were in the same predicament? Heck yeah he would have. I find it astonishing.

My point here is that we should be proud of the team we saw out there last night, as well as their victory. They competed, they played through the whistle, and they deserved to win. Both teams did, but we were in the right position at the right time. There is nothing shameful in finishing with 8 sacks and holding THE Green Bay Packers and their MVP quarterback to 12 points. I hope you agree with me; but whether you do or not, the fact of the matter is the Seahawks are 2-1 and they hope to improve to 3-1 this Sunday. It is time to move on, go Seahawks.

At 1:30 PST, I'll be doing a radio interview with 808s & Fastbreaks over in New York.  I've been told the interview will be about ten minutes long and will cover the last play of the game against the Packers, plus maybe something about the replacement refs and expectations for the Seahawks.  You can listen in by going to the WCW Sports website and clicking on the listen live button, or you can link directly to the stream by clicking here.  I'll also be sure to post a link to the interview when it's put on their Tumblr site later for download.

Who knows, maybe I'll even say something listenable.

UPDATE (4:44): Here's the link to the interview segment from the show.  And in case you're curious, you can find the show's interview with Devin Shanley of the Acme Packing Company Packers blog by clicking here.  As you can see, their response to the game has been really quite reasonable and mature.

Let me be clear here: both teams deserved to win that game, largely on the strength of their defensive play.  The Seahawks' defense shut down one of the best offenses in the NFL.  Forget top five, the way the Seahawks are playing right now they could be the top defense, period.  And while I am still not convinced that the Packers have a strong defense, or even a good one, they put in a legitimately solid performance on that side of the ball.  The Seahawks' offense is clearly a work in progress, but even so they are much better than Green Bay allowed them to be last night.

Of course, none of that is going to get the attention it deserves because of the ruling on the last play of the game.  After watching it several more times, I can see evidence for an argument in favor of simultaneous possession, but I don't know how much of that conclusion I'm basing on actual objective analysis and how much of it is just me being a Seahawks fan.  What I am sure of is that it was just one of many, many instances of questionable officiating in this game. 

I'm not just talking about the pass interference call on Chancellor that kept the Packers' final scoring drive alive, either.  On a scale from one to ten, with one being a hippie love-in and ten being nuclear armageddon, the conflict between the wide receivers and defensive backs on both teams was about a seven.  There was enough contact on every other route to put the XFL to shame, and enough on every third or so route to substantiate sexual harrassment charges.

Along the offensive line, well, I'm not sure that holding is a strong enough call for what they were doing, but until the NFL adds a penalty for offensive tackling to the rulebook it'll have to do.  Remember those eight first-half sacks for Seattle, followed by zero in the second?  Part of the reason for that was Green Bay choosing to run the ball more against the Seahawks' pass rush personnel, but just as big a factor was the Packers finally realizing they could get away with grabbing fistfuls of jersey and never letting go.  The Seahawks' o-line got away with plenty of holds, too, but the difference in sack totals made it particularly noticeable when the Packers had the ball.

The really sad part here is that the replacement refs officiating in last night's game were much better at their jobs than the ones I saw in Sunday's games.  The Ravens-Patriots game in particular was a knife fight from beginning to end, and I have never before seen a personal foul called on a coach for trying to get a official's attention so he can call a time out.  Even worse was the 49ers-Vikings game, wherein Harbaugh the Angrier pulled off something truly jaw-dropping.  Towards the end of the game, the 49ers used their last time out, then Harbaugh successfully challenged the ruling on the field.  Yes, you read that correctly: he was allowed to challenge the play even though he had no time outs.  Zero.  None.  And then after he won the challenge, they gave him the phantom time out back.  This was not a simple rule interpretation mistake like the one that awarded Seattle a fourth time out against the Cardinals, this was a grown man snarling and spitting blood at officials all game long until he bullied them into just letting him have an extra time out.

If nothing else, watching the replacement refs try and fail to not affect the game over the last seven weeks has proven that the NFL referees absolutely deserve the money they're asking for, and they're still a bargain at that price.  Frankly, it's incredible to me that a multi-billion a year sports industry like pro football has gotten away with paying its officials like part-time office jockeys for as long as it has.  NFL officials are an integral part of the game; they make sure the flow of the contest is smooth and watchable, they ensure that us spectators are properly informed, and they keep the on-field muggings to a minimum.  I love watching the Seahawks win, but I'd love it even more if they came out on top at the end of a well-called, cleanly fought game.  Please get on that, NFL owners.

UPDATE (11:36):  The NFL has released a statement in support of the official's ruling, which you can read here.  I don't know whether the league actually believes the ruling was correct or if they're just circling the wagons here, but the most important part is their statement that "The result of the game is final."  I think we all assumed it would be, but it's nice to see it in writing. 

Pete Carroll has also made some statements, both in his post-game comments and again today during an interview on 710 ESPN.  The radio interview goes into some discussion of Carroll's interpretation of how the rules apply to the final play of the game, but his statement regarding the replacement officiating in his post-game comments is quite possibly the most succinct and level-headed evaluation of the situation I've read yet.

This was a bottle and a half of Mylanta sort of game.  I have no words left in me, save for these two:

SEAHAWKS WIN!

The Seahawks have a huge chance this week to prove themselves, although that means completely different things for both sides of the ball.  The defense will be trying to prove they’re one of the best in the NFL when they go up against one of the best quarterbacks in the game, Aaron Rodgers.  Meanwhile, the offense will be trying to prove that they can mount a consistent passing attack to complement their strong run game.

Seahawks Offense v. Packers Defense

At first glance, the Packers appear to have a distressingly strong pass defense.  However, this is one of those situations where averages early in the season are giving us a false positive.  Check out their performances in the two games they’ve played so far:

Right now, Jay Cutler is beginning of what is shaping up to be the worst season of his entire career.  So far, he’s thrown 6 interceptions to 3 touchdowns and racked up the 4th worst completion percentage in the NFL (52.7%), the 3rd worst sack percentage (10.6%), and the second worst quarterback rating¹ (58.6).  Whatever he might have done in the past, right now Cutler is not a good quarterback.

Alex Smith is also not a great quarterback.  Right now he’s a hell of a lot better than Cutler, but he is nowhere near as competent as Green Bay’s defense made him look.  Just to put it in context, Smith has played 73 career games; his performance against the Packers ranks as his 2nd best career game in terms of completion percentage, his 12th best in yards per passing attempt, and his 4th best in quarterback rating.  If they can make a career backup-level performer like Smith look that good, imagine what they could do for Wilson tonight.

Green Bay’s only real strength on defense its relentless pass rush -- even factoring in the Bears' poor o-line, Clay Matthews is playing like the second coming of Lawrence Taylor this season -- so expect them to push Wilson to the limits of his athletic abilities early and often.  However, that kind of all-out assault on the QB comes at a price.  Observe:

Attacking the passer like Green Bay does leads to a sort of tunnel vision that gives offenses a great opportunity to slip the running back right past the Packers’ defensive linemen & linebackers.  If defensive backs are all that ends up standing between Lynch & Turbin and the end zone, well, those two are going to have a hell of a lot of fun tonight.

Seattle’s Defense v. Packers Offense

The Seahawks are one of the best run-stopping defenses in the NFL, and the Packers’ featured back, Cedric Benson, is good but not great.  Green Bay's offense will succeed or fail solely on the strength of Rodgers' arm, and as we’ve all seen over the last few years they've won a lot of games putting all their eggs in #12's basket.

Rodgers is pretty good at throwing touchdowns, and his completion percentage is just as freakishly high as it was last year.  His performances against San Francisco and Chicago, two very good defensive teams, were virtually identical, and I would expect him to put up similar numbers against the Seahawks.  The key difference between the 49ers' win and the Bears' loss was not their defense's ability to contain Rodgers, but their offense's ability to beat a suspect Packers' defense on the ground and through the air.  And you know what?  The 49ers did it by following the same gameplan the Seahawks used against Dallas: pound them until they're worried sick about stopping the run, then eat up chunks of yardage with passes.  If Alex Smith and Frank Gore can do it, then so can Russell Wilson and Marshawn Lynch.

Special Teams Comparison

Just for the sake of completeness (and because Leon Washington was red-hot last week), here’s how both teams stack up on special teams:

Kickoff cannot get here fast enough.

*        *        *

¹ In case you’re wondering, first place goes to Miami’s Ryan Tannehill, who only edged out Cutler by three tenths of a point (58.3).

Watching the Cowboys lose is always fun, but it’s even more satisfying when the team throttling them is the Seahawks.  As per usual, we’ll hear plenty of that tired old “the Cowboys beat themselves” shtick we’ve all grown to detest over the years, but that’s nothing new.  What’s important here is that we know the Seahawks rocked last Sunday, the only real question is how hard.

To that end, I thought I’d start spending a little time each week using some statistical metrics to examine how well the Seahawks performed in their last game and how they’ve fared over the course of the season to date.  I know that second part doesn’t mean much right now, since we only have two games' worth of stats to work with, but it should become a lot more interesting as we go.

But before we get into all that, let me just say that I won’t be spending any time playing around with advanced stats.  Unlike baseball, where advanced statistical methods like sabermetrics are much easier to implement because the game can mostly be broken down into neat one-on-one matchups – pitcher v. batter, baseman v. runner, etc. – football involves a much more complicated and dynamic interplay of twenty-two moving parts.  The success of a passing play, for example, doesn’t just depend on whether or not a quarterback can beat a given defensive back; among other things, you also have to factor in the blocking of the offensive linemen (both individually and as a group), how well the offensive play call matches up against the defensive play call, the ability of the receivers to recognize the coverage and adjust accordingly, the communication between members of the secondary, the willingness of a given receiver to secure a catch even though it means taking a big hit, and the list goes on.

Because of all those varying factors, I tend to distrust stats that rely on endlessly complex, proprietary formulas that massage stats to within an inch of their life like ESPN’s QBR or measurements that replace the actual stats with a point grading system like Football Outsiders’ DVOA.  That isn’t to say that there’s no value in newer metrics like those, because there is.  I’m glad that there are people out there pouring so much time and effort into examining the game in new and exciting ways, but there’s a big difference between me acknowledging that sabermetrics-style statistical models could potentially be used to examine football and being convinced that one of the above stats is the one to finally do it.  No one’s done it to my satisfaction yet, and until they do I’ll be sticking with stats that I can work out on my own using nothing more advanced than a legal pad, a spreadsheet, a play-by-play printout, and a fistful of pens and highlighters.

Anyway, enough with the preamble.  Let’s start with some basic averages for the Seahawks.

Rushing Averages

The defense began this season with the potential a top five unit, and through two weeks they’ve been able to be just that against the run.  Holding teams to less than 100 yards a game rushing is pretty good, but holding them to less than 50 is on a whole ‘nother level, especially when one of those performances happens against a guy who gashed the Seahawks last season for 139 yards and 6.3 yards per carry.

The improvement in the offense’s run game in week two is also encouraging.  After finishing the Cardinals game with less than three and a half yards per carry, against the Cowboys Lynch & company improved their average by nearly a full yard per carry.  Looking ahead, the offense’s season averages should only improve as the Seahawks’ next three opponents, the Packers, Rams, and Panthers, currently rank 30th (5.1 ypc), 32nd (5.5 ypc), and 24th (4.7 ypc) against the run, respectively.

Passing Averages

(Note: net yards per game = passing yards - sack yards; sack % = sacks / (pass attempts + sacks))

I’m not entirely sure how to read the stats for the Seahawks’ pass defense just yet. They did a great job last Sunday bottling up Romo and his receivers, but the week before they posted almost identical averages against the Cardinals, a team that hasn’t been known for its passing game since Kurt Warner retired after the ’09 season.  For now, I’m inclined to wait until I can see how the defense fares against Aaron Rodgers before I jump to any conclusions.  About the only thing we can say for sure right now is that sacks are still concerningly few and far between this season.

The offense’s passing game made great strides last week by improving their averages in nearly every category, but week one’s stats are low enough to keep the Seahawks’ season averages in the cellar.  As with the defense, I’m going to wait until after I see how Russell Wilson and his receivers perform against the Packers (their pass defense is currently ranked 2nd in the NFL) before I take too hard a look at their numbers.

Special Teams Averages

Special teams got off to a rough start in 2011, but solidified as the season wore on.  Aside from a single blocked field goal against the Cardinals, this year special teams has been strong right from day one.  Leon Washington is back to eating up large chunks of yardage in the return game thanks to improved blocking downfield, kick and punt coverage has been solid, and Jon Ryan is doing his usual great job of giving the defense plenty of room to maneuver. 

Steven Hauschka's one miss this year came on a blocked field goal in the Cardinals game.  Hauschka’s career percentage on long field goal tries (42.86% from 50+ yards) isn’t going to make anyone forget Josh Brown or Olindo Mare, but over the last three years (one with Denver, two with Seattle) he’s been very reliable on field goals shorter than 50 yards (94.74%).

Run-Pass Differential & Turnover Differential

Here’s where we start to get beyond the basics.  As I explained in this article from last season, the run-pass differential is a simple formula

(Rush Attempts + Pass Completions) – (Opponent’s Rush Attempts + Pass Completions)

that’s helpful in gauging the quality of a win.  When you combine it with the team’s turnover differential (takaways – turnovers) for the game, it becomes even more useful.  Here are the results from the 2011 season:

As you can see, teams that finished games positive in both differentials won the game 91.7% of the time, teams that finished positive in turnovers but negative in run-pass differential won 57.7% of the time, and so forth.  The main usefulness of this measurement is in predicting how sustainable a team’s success is.  Win when you’re positive in both stats and you probably deserved your victory; win when you’re negative in both and odds are you just got lucky.  Here’s how the Seahawks have stacked up in both categories to date:

And there you have it, more proof that the Seahawks didn’t steal a win from the Cowboys, they earned it.  And while Seattle lost to Arizona, they did finish that game ahead in run-pass differential and equal in turnovers; if you look back to the table above, you'll see that teams that finished games similarly last year won the game 72.7% of the time.  Statistically speaking, the Cardinals got away with one.

Toxic Differential

This is one of a few stats I’ve picked up in the last year or so from reading up on Brian Billick.  He’s best known these days for his nine years as head coach of the Ravens, a team that’s synonymous with great defense, but prior to that Billick was known as one of the best offensive minds in the game.  In three of his six seasons as offensive coordinator for the Vikings, his offense was one of the top ten in the NFL.  In 1998, his last season as Minnesota’s OC, the Vikings set the NFL record for most points scored in a season with 556.  The dude knows his offense.

A big part of Billick’s success as a coach was his willingness to spend hours at his computer analyzing statistical trends and tendencies.  In 1998, he hit on something he called the toxic differential (toxic because it kills your chances of winning if you’re on the wrong side of it), and since then it’s proven to be a remarkably accurate predictor of a team’s chances of making the playoffs.  Simply put, the toxic differential combines a team’s turnover differential with a team’s explosive play differential.  The higher your toxic differential, the more successful you’re likely to be.

Billick defines explosive plays a bit differently than the NFL does:

Explosive plays are measured by the NFL as gains of 20 yards or more.  A more detailed analysis shows a more valid measure being runs of 12 yards or more and passes of 16 yards or more.  These levels of production proved to be more significant as to what is needed to constitute and gain the effects of an “explosion.”¹

Using that definition, I went back through the play-by-play stats for both of the Seahawks’ games and here’s what I found:

A -2 differential isn’t all that heartening, I know, but at least the Seahawks appear to be headed in the right direction.  Also, two of the plays being counted against the Seahawks here are Wilson’s interception on a hail mary pass to end the first half of the Cardinals game and a 23 yard completion thrown by Romo on the very last play of the Cowboys game against soft coverage, but exceptions like those should begin to balance out as the season progresses.

First Down Efficiency

In this section I'm going to look at two different stats Billick talks about in Developing an Offensive Game Plan, the first being how many yards a team gains on first down.  His belief that a good team should gain enough yardage to put itself in a manageable second and medium situation is hardly new², he just happens to be the first person I’ve seen put a percentage on how often a successful offense does it.  According to him, NFL teams typically gain 4+ yards on first down about 40-50% of the time, and the better offenses in the league are at the top of that range.  Here’s how the Seahawks have done on first down:

As with the toxic differential, the Seahawks’ offense still has plenty of room for improvement.  They did improve slightly from week one to week two, but it’s small enough that it could simply mean that the Cardinals played better defense than the Cowboys did.  We’ll learn more as we add in more game stats.

The defense’s stats are much more encouraging, with them holding both the Cardinals and Cowboys well below the 40-50% range.  I’m interested to see how they hold up in this category against the Packers’ pass-heavy assault.

The second statistic looks at how often a team converts on first and second down instead of third down.  According to Billick, only about 25-35% of a team’s first down conversions should occur on third down.  That means 65-75% of a team’s conversions need to happen on first and second down plays.  Here’s the Seahawks’ stats:

(Note: penalties resulting in first downs and all scoring plays are counted here as conversions.)

Here we can see improvement on both sides of the ball.  The offense is still below the norm here, but hopefully it will continue its upward trajectory.  After the defense let the Cardinals finish in the bottom end of the normal range, seeing them force a more competent offense like the Cowboys to make a higher percentage of their conversions on third down is a positive sign.

Red Zone Efficiency

How often a team scores any points (FG or TD) when it enters the red zone.  This one is pretty simple: an offense should score points every time it enters the red zone.  The league average is 80%, so the goal on offense is to meet or exceed that mark, while the defense is going to want to keep teams at or below that mark.  Here’s the Seahawks’ stats:

Seattle’s offense has failed to score on just one red zone trip, the one at the end of the Cardinals game where they failed to score in seven attempts at the end zone.  That one hurt, but it’s good to know that they’ve come away with points on every other visit they’ve made this season

Looking through the play-by-play stats for the Cowboys game, I was pleasantly surprised to find out that the Cowboys didn’t visit the red zone until Romo connected on a pass to Felix Jones on the very last play of the game (his earlier touchdown pass was thrown from just outside the red zone).  That was just a great all-around defensive effort.

Penalties

Since penalties have been a big problem for the team under Pete Carroll, I thought I’d finish with a running tally of the Seahawks’ penalties to date:

After finishing last year as the second-most penalized team in the NFL (i.e. 31st), 28th isn't much of an improvement.  Oddly enough though, it's the offense, not the defense, that's been committing the majority of the penalties this time around.  I don't think that really counts as progress, but it's something.

*        *        *

Now that I’ve gotten all the introductory explanations for these stats out of the way, I’ll leave them out in upcoming weeks and just link back to this article for those who want to read them again.  That way I can keep these short and spend the majority of my time each week writing about other stuff.

If there are any statistical metrics I’ve forgotten to include that you’d like to see me track as we go along or if you notice a mistake I’ve missed, don’t hesitate to tell me.

*        *        *

¹ From Developing an Offensive Game Plan by Brian Billick (1997), page 11.

² “First down: Use a strong play that should make five yards or more if it works.” From Championship Football by D.X. Bible (1947), page 170.  This is just the first example that came to mind.

Yes, you read that headline right. 

And, brace yourselves - the following sentences are recaps of NFC West team achievements after two weeks of regular-season action, and contain no typos:

The Cardinals beat the New England Patriots on the road.  

The Rams upset the new-look Washington Redskins.

Last week, the 49ers shocked the Green Bay Packers at Lambeau Field. 

And today, the Seahawks dominated the Dallas Cowboys today at CenturyLink Field, 27-7. 


We're only in Week 2 of the 2012 NFL season, but the teams in the oft-mocked NFC West have done enough in that short amount of time to force people to pay attention. The 49ers were clearly the best team in the division last year, with the Cardinals finishing 8-8 and the Seahawks coming to within a field goal of the same record. The Rams were a mess, and were lucky to win two games. 

In 2012, the 49ers still look impressive, as they've kept 11 of 12 starters on defense, and Alex Smith continues to lead the offense effectively. But the Seahawks and Cardinals have both impressed with unexpected victories today, highlighted by strong defensive showings that leave no room for so-called experts to make any excuses. 

The Seahawks completely shut down Tony Romo and the Cowboys' offense today, after a first half that included a fumble recovery on the opening kickoff return, and a blocked punt return for a touchdown. The Seahawks led 10-0 after the first five minutes, and would never cede their advantage throughout the afternoon.

Granted, there was much of last week's game in the Arizona desert that Seahawk fans wish they could have back: Dropped end-zone passes that would've resulted in game-winning touchdowns, for example. But the third quarter of that game gave a glimpse of what this defense is capable of: Five three-and-outs out of six possessions (the other resulting in a punt) is nothing to scoff at, especially since the Cardinals just went to New England and shocked the country with a road win against a 14-point favorite.

Meanwhile, the St. Louis Rams edged out a win against the Washington Redskins, who were led to victory by the best rookie QB start in NFL history from Robert Griffin III.

Did anyone see any of this coming?

You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who would say "yes."

Remember when the Seahawks won the division two years ago with a 7-9 record? Rest assured that record won't be winning any accolades this year; let alone lead to a playoff berth. 

With today's freakishly surprising upsets from the NFC West, the division has quickly ascended from bottom-feeders and perennial underdogs to arguably the most exciting and competitive division in the National Football League. 

And if the Seahawks continue to raise the bar they've set today, the potential they have will only continue to be realized.  

Beating the Cowboys at Century Link would go a long way toward making people feel better about the Seahawks' chances this season.  Mainly, Russell Wilson needs to recapture some of his preseason magic, the offensive line needs to straighten up and fly right, and the punt unit needs to improve their blocking in the center of the line.

Here's hoping we get to see Romo cry again.

*        *        *

The Livefyre comment system appears to be down at the moment.  Hopefully it'll be back up and running soon, but in the meantime here's some observations on the game so far:

First Half Positives

1) Russell Wilson is airing the ball out more in this one.  After last week's dink-and-dunk performance, this is a big step in the right direction

2) The defensive line is putting more pressure on the QB.  Granted, it's only a slight increase, but it's something.

3) Special Teams.  Hell yes.

First Half Negatives

1) The defense's pass coverage on third down.  There's no excuse for Jason Witten being that open -- it's not like his ability to catch a ball is a well-guarded secret or anything.

2) The offensive line is still making mental errors.  Committing drive-killing false starts at home is inexcusable.  Also, seeing Sweezy step back in at right guard makes me wonder just how well Moffitt really has recovered from that elbow surgery.

3) Romo is not crying yet.  Please fix that, Seahawks.

*        *        *

A 27-7 win over Dallas feels pretty satisfying, especially since the offensive line's protection and the defense's coverage on third down were greatly improved in the second half.  Looking at the final stats, Russell Wilson completed 75% of his passes, Marshawn Lynch rushed for 4.7 yards per carry, and Golden Tate and Anthony McCoy turned in legitimately solid performances as receiving threats.  One of my favorite moments in the whole game was watching a wide-open Jason Witten start to reel in a pass, then drop it a half-second later after turning his head to see Kam Chancellor bearing down on him.  There's still plenty of room for improvement (for one, the offense converted only 5 of 14 third downs), but the explosive Seahawks team that excited us so much in the preseason finally showed up on the field today.

And while Romo never actually shed any tears on the field, I'm pretty sure he was crying on the inside.  That still counts, right?

This week, a lot of folks seem to be making a point of having Grave Concerns about the performance of the offensive line.  More specifically, they want to know why the o-line failed so very hard and broke our hearts and ruined our season and we should just toss the entire line in the trash and buy some better players from that nice offensive lineman store down the block (‘cause it’s just that easy), woe is us, etc.

My maudlin exaggeration aside, I think there’s something very important getting lost in all this: the Cardinals were playing in that game, too.  Really, I’m reminded here of something Jon Madden used to do as an announcer.  With him, it was never “the Seahawks won that game,” it was always “the Raiders/Chargers/etc. lost that game,” as though the other team went out there unopposed and somehow managed to lose to the goalposts or the refs or something. 

Listening to Madden do that to the Seahawks never failed to drive me up a wall, and I’m not about to turn around and do the exact same thing to the Cardinals.  Yes, our offensive line wasn’t spectacular, but they weren’t bad, either.  Like it or not, Arizona’s defense may just be that good.  In particular, they have a hell of a defensive line, their linebackers played disciplined and assignment-correct all game long, and they dialed up some great blitz packages.  Credit where credit's due, you know?

Anyway, after finally being able to fully review the coaches' film from the game, here's how the offensive line fared in the first half, along with the tight ends and fullback.  Again, I apologize for how late this analysis ended up being, but now that I've got the technical bugs worked out I should be able to actually get film analysis articles to you earlier than, say, the morning of the following week's game.

First off, I should point out that I have no training of any sort in grading offensive linemen.  In general, I looked at whether or not a blocker had an overall positive impact on a play.  For example, if a blocker whiffed on a cut block but still delayed the defender enough to keep him out of the play I marked it positive; if a blocker walled a guy off for most of the play but then let his guy shed the block & tackle the ballcarrier, I marked it negative.  And if the blocker was never in position to affect the play in any way (or if I just wasn't sure) I gave them a neutral grade.

I know this isn't as dire a gradeout as some of you were probably expecting, but it's important to keep in mind here that on any given play it only takes one guy failing to do his job to derail the whole thing.  Individually, most of these guys did reasonably well, but as a group they tended to take turns screwing up.  If Okung let some blitzers through on one play, then on the next one Giacomini would get manhandled by Dockett, or Sweezy would opt to help double team a DT instead of blocking the LB blitzing through his now-vacant spot on the line, etc.

One thing that really surprised me was how well McQuistan came out in the final tally.  Looking over the tape, he reminded me a lot of Chris Gray: he's not the fastest, biggest, or strongest guy on the line, and as such he is eminently replaceable, but more often than not he managed to do just enough right to get the job done.

Sweezy was rarely beaten outright, but he made a lot of mental errors and needs some serious work on his cut blocks.  Unger spent most of the half rocking so hard it hurts.  Okung was up-and-down; he'd play flawlessly for a few plays, then freeze up and let guys blow right past him.  Giacomini got away with a few penalties the refs failed to notice -- he really needs to reign in his temper and play a much smarter game than he did versus the Cardinals.

Robinson did his usual excellent job, but for whatever reason Miller saw a lot of snaps lined up in the fullback position instead of Robinson.  Several of Miller's screwups were on plays where he was attempting to lead block for Lynch.  McCoy had a couple of absolutely dominating blocks, but he had some trouble blocking defenders in space.

If you'd like to look at the notes I took on the blocking for each play, you can see them here.  Among other things, they include observations on the blocking done by running backs and wide receivers during the first half.