What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

1985 Bears... 2000 Ravens... 2013 Seahawks? (1 Viewer)

Yes, they got Kaep twice, but when the team is in desperate catchup mode and the running game has been removed, it ain't hard to get there a couple of times.
They sacked him when the score was 0-0, 2-0, and 12-3. Which one of those scores put them into desperate catchup mode?
Point taken. I do admit, I only watched the game out of the corner of my eye.
Translation: I'm full of ####.
No, a proper translation would be:I won't let one game define my overall view of something.

Not one game (42-13), not one half (GB - 8 sacks), not one play (BEASTQUAKE!!!) I will leave taking miniscule samples and defining everything in that light to... well... you know the rest.
You mean other than spouting off about something you later admit you know nothing about? That's called being FoS. You're not taking any sample size. You're just making it up as you go along and got called out for it. So, the proper translation is : I'm full of ####. Try to spin it all you want. You talked out of your ###, made up some BS to "support" your crap and got called on it.
I'm taking two games. One they got two sacks. One they got three. That's about par for where they were and about par for where I expect them to finish. 2.5 sacks per game is 40 sacks. Pretty near average.

They have the same secondary they had last year, and the pass rush was middle-of-the-pack. Avril and Bennett are decent pass-rushers, but not great. Avril in particular benefitted from interior lineman who could collapse a pocket. Also, the numbers they get are not going to be totally independent from what Clemons accumulates on his return. There will be a large amount of overlap, where one is getting their sack at the expense of another. If Clemens gets his double-digit total, then Bennett and Avril won't be getting what they got last year.

The only unknown in the equation that I can see is Irvin. If he comes back and takes a huge leap in his second year, then there's a good chance I'm wrong on my projection for the team total. But having not seen him andhow he's adapting to life at OLB where he'll occasionally be asked to cover in space, I'm not gonna bank on a huge uptick in his production until next season.

Look, I'm not saying they aren't an exceptional defense. Anyone saying their D is better than Seattle's would have a mammoth dissertation on their hands to make that case. I'm just saying that their are parts that aren't as good as other parts. The secondary is elite... the best I can come up with in recent memory. The LBs are underrated. They crush the run. They just don't rush the passer to a great level.

Like I said... if they finish top 10 in sacks, I'll stand up and own it. But I feel fairly confident that won't happen.
What was that you were saying about only getting sacks against SF when they were forced to throw?
That was me making assumptions about something I only half payed attention to. I've already admitted it. Apparently beating a dead horse is a great way to avoid addressing any of the points I made. Unless you are somehow saying that not paying in-depth attention to one game negates everything I shared from an off-season of crafting opinions based on facts and stats.

Or are you simply pointing out that Seattle -couldn't- get any sacks during a point in the game when they knew the Niners would be passing. And that somehow that deficiency means they've got "pass rushers extrordinaire" written all over them.

I am starting to understand why ImThe is shunned by you guys. Yes, he is an uber-homer, but he does it with a broad brush. The QB, the secondary, the RB, the team as a whole... he sticks to the big-picture elements. He's not shunned because of how he handles his business... he's shunned because he doesn't attribute "best in, you know, like... evah" to everything about the team. Maybe if he came out and bragged about how CLINK nacho vendors give the highest cheese-to-chip ratio not just in the NFL but in all of sports, then maybe you guys would accept him back.
The more I read your posts the more I am convinced that you are a closet Seahawk fan. You just can't admit it because it feels dirty, your friends won't understand, and your parents would be disappointed.

It's 2013...it's ok to be a Seattle fan.

 
How many times do they get to play the Superbowl at home?
You are ducking the point. I still want to know

how they don't have enough offense.
I'm not ducking anything. I am of the opinion that come playoff time, they will not have enough offense. Kind of like last year.

I don't feel like their offense has improved. Maybe that will change if/when Harvin comes back or they have more success in the coming weeks. But for now, I see flaws on Wilson's game and nothing tells me just yet that it will improve.
Huh? In the game they lost, they scored 28 points at Atlanta, who had given up an average of 17 PPG at home all season. That is not enough offense? I don't know the stats, but I am guessing that if you score 28 points in a playoff game, you probably win around 75-80 percent of the time. That is enough offense.
Post-merger (since 1970) road teams are 46-22 (67.6%) when scoring 28 or more points (including 7-6 since 2010). Home teams are a whopping 137-8 (94.5%).

 
Yes, they got Kaep twice, but when the team is in desperate catchup mode and the running game has been removed, it ain't hard to get there a couple of times.
They sacked him when the score was 0-0, 2-0, and 12-3. Which one of those scores put them into desperate catchup mode?
Point taken. I do admit, I only watched the game out of the corner of my eye.
Translation: I'm full of ####.
No, a proper translation would be:I won't let one game define my overall view of something.

Not one game (42-13), not one half (GB - 8 sacks), not one play (BEASTQUAKE!!!) I will leave taking miniscule samples and defining everything in that light to... well... you know the rest.
You mean other than spouting off about something you later admit you know nothing about? That's called being FoS. You're not taking any sample size. You're just making it up as you go along and got called out for it. So, the proper translation is : I'm full of ####. Try to spin it all you want. You talked out of your ###, made up some BS to "support" your crap and got called on it.
I'm taking two games. One they got two sacks. One they got three. That's about par for where they were and about par for where I expect them to finish. 2.5 sacks per game is 40 sacks. Pretty near average.

They have the same secondary they had last year, and the pass rush was middle-of-the-pack. Avril and Bennett are decent pass-rushers, but not great. Avril in particular benefitted from interior lineman who could collapse a pocket. Also, the numbers they get are not going to be totally independent from what Clemons accumulates on his return. There will be a large amount of overlap, where one is getting their sack at the expense of another. If Clemens gets his double-digit total, then Bennett and Avril won't be getting what they got last year.

The only unknown in the equation that I can see is Irvin. If he comes back and takes a huge leap in his second year, then there's a good chance I'm wrong on my projection for the team total. But having not seen him andhow he's adapting to life at OLB where he'll occasionally be asked to cover in space, I'm not gonna bank on a huge uptick in his production until next season.

Look, I'm not saying they aren't an exceptional defense. Anyone saying their D is better than Seattle's would have a mammoth dissertation on their hands to make that case. I'm just saying that their are parts that aren't as good as other parts. The secondary is elite... the best I can come up with in recent memory. The LBs are underrated. They crush the run. They just don't rush the passer to a great level.

Like I said... if they finish top 10 in sacks, I'll stand up and own it. But I feel fairly confident that won't happen.
What was that you were saying about only getting sacks against SF when they were forced to throw?
That was me making assumptions about something I only half payed attention to. I've already admitted it. Apparently beating a dead horse is a great way to avoid addressing any of the points I made. Unless you are somehow saying that not paying in-depth attention to one game negates everything I shared from an off-season of crafting opinions based on facts and stats.

Or are you simply pointing out that Seattle -couldn't- get any sacks during a point in the game when they knew the Niners would be passing. And that somehow that deficiency means they've got "pass rushers extrordinaire" written all over them.

I am starting to understand why ImThe is shunned by you guys. Yes, he is an uber-homer, but he does it with a broad brush. The QB, the secondary, the RB, the team as a whole... he sticks to the big-picture elements. He's not shunned because of how he handles his business... he's shunned because he doesn't attribute "best in, you know, like... evah" to everything about the team. Maybe if he came out and bragged about how CLINK nacho vendors give the highest cheese-to-chip ratio not just in the NFL but in all of sports, then maybe you guys would accept him back.
The more I read your posts the more I am convinced that you are a closet Seahawk fan. You just can't admit it because it feels dirty, your friends won't understand, and your parents would be disappointed.

It's 2013...it's ok to be a Seattle fan.
Why... because of how closely I pay attention to them? Sorry, but I wouldn't really do the in-depth analysis I have with them if it weren't for the fact that we are approaching the one-year anniversary of the Arachnophobia-esque unleashing of Squawk fan unto an unsuspecting population. With as much time as I spend in various NFC West forums, ludicrous claims needed to be countered.

For the record, Seattle is an easy team to like*.

* If you could remove the fans from the equation**

** Which you can't

 
Yes, they got Kaep twice, but when the team is in desperate catchup mode and the running game has been removed, it ain't hard to get there a couple of times.
They sacked him when the score was 0-0, 2-0, and 12-3. Which one of those scores put them into desperate catchup mode?
Point taken. I do admit, I only watched the game out of the corner of my eye.
Translation: I'm full of ####.
No, a proper translation would be:I won't let one game define my overall view of something.

Not one game (42-13), not one half (GB - 8 sacks), not one play (BEASTQUAKE!!!) I will leave taking miniscule samples and defining everything in that light to... well... you know the rest.
You mean other than spouting off about something you later admit you know nothing about? That's called being FoS. You're not taking any sample size. You're just making it up as you go along and got called out for it. So, the proper translation is : I'm full of ####. Try to spin it all you want. You talked out of your ###, made up some BS to "support" your crap and got called on it.
I'm taking two games. One they got two sacks. One they got three. That's about par for where they were and about par for where I expect them to finish. 2.5 sacks per game is 40 sacks. Pretty near average.

They have the same secondary they had last year, and the pass rush was middle-of-the-pack. Avril and Bennett are decent pass-rushers, but not great. Avril in particular benefitted from interior lineman who could collapse a pocket. Also, the numbers they get are not going to be totally independent from what Clemons accumulates on his return. There will be a large amount of overlap, where one is getting their sack at the expense of another. If Clemens gets his double-digit total, then Bennett and Avril won't be getting what they got last year.

The only unknown in the equation that I can see is Irvin. If he comes back and takes a huge leap in his second year, then there's a good chance I'm wrong on my projection for the team total. But having not seen him andhow he's adapting to life at OLB where he'll occasionally be asked to cover in space, I'm not gonna bank on a huge uptick in his production until next season.

Look, I'm not saying they aren't an exceptional defense. Anyone saying their D is better than Seattle's would have a mammoth dissertation on their hands to make that case. I'm just saying that their are parts that aren't as good as other parts. The secondary is elite... the best I can come up with in recent memory. The LBs are underrated. They crush the run. They just don't rush the passer to a great level.

Like I said... if they finish top 10 in sacks, I'll stand up and own it. But I feel fairly confident that won't happen.
What was that you were saying about only getting sacks against SF when they were forced to throw?
That was me making assumptions about something I only half payed attention to. I've already admitted it. Apparently beating a dead horse is a great way to avoid addressing any of the points I made. Unless you are somehow saying that not paying in-depth attention to one game negates everything I shared from an off-season of crafting opinions based on facts and stats.

Or are you simply pointing out that Seattle -couldn't- get any sacks during a point in the game when they knew the Niners would be passing. And that somehow that deficiency means they've got "pass rushers extrordinaire" written all over them.

I am starting to understand why ImThe is shunned by you guys. Yes, he is an uber-homer, but he does it with a broad brush. The QB, the secondary, the RB, the team as a whole... he sticks to the big-picture elements. He's not shunned because of how he handles his business... he's shunned because he doesn't attribute "best in, you know, like... evah" to everything about the team. Maybe if he came out and bragged about how CLINK nacho vendors give the highest cheese-to-chip ratio not just in the NFL but in all of sports, then maybe you guys would accept him back.
He's shunned because, like you, he's a tool. He's also a massive "best evah" guy. We'll just chalk it up to yet another example of you forming other people's opinions for them and/or pulling things out of your ### to make your "points" (which now are tainted anyway due to you being caught dead to rights manufacturing them, so why believe anything you say about other stuff?). Enjoy your Ramsturbation.
Someday I'm gonna learn.... with you, no throwaway lines. Otherwise, it's all you focus on and the main point gets dodged once again. Lesson learned by me.
Try not making things up, not projecting what you think other people think and realize that having an honest discussion with you is impossible because of your tendency to do the things above. While there may be kernels of intelligence in some of your posts, they're useless because if your delivery a d the mounds if horse manure they're buried under.

 
Try not making things up, not projecting what you think other people think and realize that having an honest discussion with you is impossible because of your tendency to do the things above. While there may be kernels of intelligence in some of your posts, they're useless because if your delivery a d the mounds if horse manure they're buried under.
Right back atcha, and all Squawk fans in general. An honest discussion is impossible because everything gets wrapped in a thick layer of "everything is the bestest evah." Zero objectivity whatsoever. And I admit, it's hard approaching discussions in a full spirit of non-trolling when the conclusion of "best evah" has been reached about... pretty much everything.

Yes, I missed a few details about the small picture. But everything still fits in the big picture I saw from last year and projected about this year.

The pass rush is middle-of-the-road.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How many times do they get to play the Superbowl at home?
You are ducking the point. I still want to know

how they don't have enough offense.
I'm not ducking anything. I am of the opinion that come playoff time, they will not have enough offense. Kind of like last year.I don't feel like their offense has improved. Maybe that will change if/when Harvin comes back or they have more success in the coming weeks. But for now, I see flaws on Wilson's

game and nothing tells me just yet that it will improve.
Huh? In the game they lost, they scored 28 points at Atlanta, who had given up an average of 17 PPG at home all season. That is not enough offense? I don't know the stats, but I am guessing that if you score 28 points in a playoff game, you probably win around 75-80 percent of the time. That is enough offense.
They lost. To win, you have to outscore your opponent.
 
Try not making things up, not projecting what you think other people think and realize that having an honest discussion with you is impossible because of your tendency to do the things above. While there may be kernels of intelligence in some of your posts, they're useless because if your delivery a d the mounds if horse manure they're buried under.
Right back atcha, and all Squawk fans in general. An honest discussion is impossible because everything gets wrapped in a thick layer of "everything is the bestest evah." Zero objectivity whatsoever. And I admit, it's hard approaching discussions in a full spirit of non-trolling when the conclusion of "best evah" has been reached about... pretty much everything.

Yes, I missed a few details about the small picture. But everything still fits in the big picture I saw from last year and projected about this year.

The pass rush is middle-of-the-road.
:lmao: The only best evah Seahawk fan is Scientist, who you claim isn't. The rest of the people saying that aren't even Seahawk fans, including tools like you that project what others think so you something to fap to. Much like yourassessment of the pass rush against the Niners, its just crap you've made up. FYI, the are in fact the best ever at crowd noise. You wanna make fun of it, fine, but its still true.

 
Try not making things up, not projecting what you think other people think and realize that having an honest discussion with you is impossible because of your tendency to do the things above. While there may be kernels of intelligence in some of your posts, they're useless because if your delivery a d the mounds if horse manure they're buried under.
Right back atcha, and all Squawk fans in general. An honest discussion is impossible because everything gets wrapped in a thick layer of "everything is the bestest evah." Zero objectivity whatsoever. And I admit, it's hard approaching discussions in a full spirit of non-trolling when the conclusion of "best evah" has been reached about... pretty much everything.

Yes, I missed a few details about the small picture. But everything still fits in the big picture I saw from last year and projected about this year.

The pass rush is middle-of-the-road.
:lmao: The only best evah Seahawk fan is Scientist, who you claim isn't. The rest of the people saying that aren't even Seahawk fans, including tools like you that project what others think so you something to fap to. Much like yourassessment of the pass rush against the Niners, its just crap you've made up.FYI, the are in fact the best ever at crowd noise. You wanna make fun of it, fine, but its still true.
Sorry, but I am sharing why I think Seattle's pass rush is just as pedestrian as it ever was, and you have done nothing but make excuses and attach conditions to why it is great. You don't acknowledge that they were middle-of-the-road last year. You point to elements that existed last year (excellent secondary) and say that they help this year. You point to new people who have come in, but the results after two games is right on pace for what happened last year.

You say you aren't part of the "best evah" crowd, but you are deny everything staring you in the face to say that six sacks should be a layup. Wanna talk about holding Jacksonville under 100 yards? Shutting them out? I wouldn't have said a word. They'd be capable of all of that. But to talk about them like they are just as elite at pass rushing as they are at so many other things is... simply untrue. It was untrue about the 2012 team, and nothing has shown itself in the admittedly-small sample size this year to indicate it's changed all that much.

And the fact that you can't see it, much less say it, makes it impossible for me to see you as anything but part of the "best evah" crowd.

 
Try not making things up, not projecting what you think other people think and realize that having an honest discussion with you is impossible because of your tendency to do the things above. While there may be kernels of intelligence in some of your posts, they're useless because if your delivery a d the mounds if horse manure they're buried under.
Right back atcha, and all Squawk fans in general. An honest discussion is impossible because everything gets wrapped in a thick layer of "everything is the bestest evah." Zero objectivity whatsoever. And I admit, it's hard approaching discussions in a full spirit of non-trolling when the conclusion of "best evah" has been reached about... pretty much everything.

Yes, I missed a few details about the small picture. But everything still fits in the big picture I saw from last year and projected about this year.

The pass rush is middle-of-the-road.
:lmao: The only best evah Seahawk fan is Scientist, who you claim isn't. The rest of the people saying that aren't even Seahawk fans, including tools like you that project what others think so you something to fap to. Much like yourassessment of the pass rush against the Niners, its just crap you've made up.FYI, the are in fact the best ever at crowd noise. You wanna make fun of it, fine, but its still true.
Sorry, but I am sharing why I think Seattle's pass rush is just as pedestrian as it ever was, and you have done nothing but make excuses and attach conditions to why it is great. You don't acknowledge that they were middle-of-the-road last year. You point to elements that existed last year (excellent secondary) and say that they help this year. You point to new people who have come in, but the results after two games is right on pace for what happened last year.

You say you aren't part of the "best evah" crowd, but you are deny everything staring you in the face to say that six sacks should be a layup. Wanna talk about holding Jacksonville under 100 yards? Shutting them out? I wouldn't have said a word. They'd be capable of all of that. But to talk about them like they are just as elite at pass rushing as they are at so many other things is... simply untrue. It was untrue about the 2012 team, and nothing has shown itself in the admittedly-small sample size this year to indicate it's changed all that much.

And the fact that you can't see it, much less say it, makes it impossible for me to see you as anything but part of the "best evah" crowd.
:lmao: I haven't even come close to saying anything like that. Then again, what people actually say is of little interest to you. Look at my first post in the thread and then tell me how I'm part if the best evah crowd. You haven't denied molesting collies either, so your silence leads me to believe that you're a red rocketeer. See how that works?

 
Try not making things up, not projecting what you think other people think and realize that having an honest discussion with you is impossible because of your tendency to do the things above. While there may be kernels of intelligence in some of your posts, they're useless because if your delivery a d the mounds if horse manure they're buried under.
Right back atcha, and all Squawk fans in general. An honest discussion is impossible because everything gets wrapped in a thick layer of "everything is the bestest evah." Zero objectivity whatsoever. And I admit, it's hard approaching discussions in a full spirit of non-trolling when the conclusion of "best evah" has been reached about... pretty much everything.

Yes, I missed a few details about the small picture. But everything still fits in the big picture I saw from last year and projected about this year.

The pass rush is middle-of-the-road.
:lmao: The only best evah Seahawk fan is Scientist, who you claim isn't. The rest of the people saying that aren't even Seahawk fans, including tools like you that project what others think so you something to fap to. Much like yourassessment of the pass rush against the Niners, its just crap you've made up.FYI, the are in fact the best ever at crowd noise. You wanna make fun of it, fine, but its still true.
Sorry, but I am sharing why I think Seattle's pass rush is just as pedestrian as it ever was, and you have done nothing but make excuses and attach conditions to why it is great. You don't acknowledge that they were middle-of-the-road last year. You point to elements that existed last year (excellent secondary) and say that they help this year. You point to new people who have come in, but the results after two games is right on pace for what happened last year.

You say you aren't part of the "best evah" crowd, but you are deny everything staring you in the face to say that six sacks should be a layup. Wanna talk about holding Jacksonville under 100 yards? Shutting them out? I wouldn't have said a word. They'd be capable of all of that. But to talk about them like they are just as elite at pass rushing as they are at so many other things is... simply untrue. It was untrue about the 2012 team, and nothing has shown itself in the admittedly-small sample size this year to indicate it's changed all that much.

And the fact that you can't see it, much less say it, makes it impossible for me to see you as anything but part of the "best evah" crowd.
Because I would want someone to tell me if I were in your shoes: You are doing poorly here.

 
I am a huge Seahawks, but please stop. Only 2 weeks of football and comparing them to the best defenses in NFL history is beyond asinine.
Me too.

They do have some issues that people may not fully understand. The Seattle front seven isn't really all that special as individual talents, but they all play their roles well in the overall defense. We can expect them to struggle with their pass rush against some teams. The secondary is special, but without a dynamic pass rush any NFL QB will be able to pick apart any NFL secondary given enough time.

The Seahawks are an interesting defensive unit. They play 4-3 with 3-4 personnel. During games you'll see them morph into different fronts depending on down and distance. Sure, most teams do this, but Seattle creates weird situations. They almost dare teams to run at the LEO position (This has been Clemons during the past three years), but they know its coming and flow to the ball so well teams constantly fall for it.

If someone really wanted to learn more in depth details about this unit I would highly recommend reading the material on Fieldgulls.com.

 
I am a huge Seahawks, but please stop. Only 2 weeks of football and comparing them to the best defenses in NFL history is beyond asinine.
Me too.

They do have some issues that people may not fully understand. The Seattle front seven isn't really all that special as individual talents, but they all play their roles well in the overall defense. We can expect them to struggle with their pass rush against some teams. The secondary is special, but without a dynamic pass rush any NFL QB will be able to pick apart any NFL secondary given enough time.

The Seahawks are an interesting defensive unit. They play 4-3 with 3-4 personnel. During games you'll see them morph into different fronts depending on down and distance. Sure, most teams do this, but Seattle creates weird situations. They almost dare teams to run at the LEO position (This has been Clemons during the past three years), but they know its coming and flow to the ball so well teams constantly fall for it.

If someone really wanted to learn more in depth details about this unit I would highly recommend reading the material on Fieldgulls.com.
Agree. It's been two weeks. Two good weeks, but they're a long way from being in the best defense ever conversation. They probably just played their best defensive game of the year though. Biggest rival (who won the NFC last year), at home, coaches dislike each other a lot. If there was every going to be a game you'd be up and focused for, that was it.

Nothing wrong with saying you think they're going to be, though. Lots of guys predict what's going to happen in football around here. It's kind of why the website exists.

 
How many times do they get to play the Superbowl at home?
You are ducking the point. I still want to know

how they don't have enough offense.
I'm not ducking anything. I am of the opinion that come playoff time, they will not have enough offense. Kind of like last year.I don't feel like their offense has improved. Maybe that will change if/when Harvin comes back or they have more success in the coming weeks. But for now, I see flaws on Wilson's

game and nothing tells me just yet that it will improve.
Huh? In the game they lost, they scored 28 points at Atlanta, who had given up an average of 17 PPG at home all season. That is not enough offense? I don't know the stats, but I am guessing that if you score 28 points in aplayoff game, you probably win around 75-80 percent of the time. That is enough offense.
They lost. To win, you have to outscore your opponent.
:lol:

So basically, you have no argument.

 
When Wilson has bad games against good defenses, it's because he sucks

When Wilson has good games against bad defenses, it's because the defenses suck

HTH

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.
They have an inconsistent pass rush, but without understanding their overall defensive philosophy this is an oversimplification.

Over the past few years they've played a lot of zone and tried to keep everything in front of them. The idea is to force teams into long drives with no big plays. Depending on who's under center for the opposition, they want the other team's QB to sit in the pocket and throw to short underneath routes. Their secondary tackles well. Its tough to convert four or five consecutive third downs. Very good teams convert on less than 50% of third downs. If Seattle shuts down the run and creates long third down situations they're generally thrilled to give up a short completion that comes up short as opposed to sending the entire house looking for a sack.

 
I honestly believe that at the end of this season, you'll hear this year's Seattle defense mentioned in the same breath as those other two legendary defenses. This isn't just a reaction to the first two games -- I picked them to win it all in the Super Bowl prediction thread last month.

This unit is insane. A defense that you cannot throw on in this day and age is an absolutely remarkable thing.

Love watching them play at home, too.
You forgot one, Raider fan.

 
Try not making things up, not projecting what you think other people think and realize that having an honest discussion with you is impossible because of your tendency to do the things above. While there may be kernels of intelligence in some of your posts, they're useless because if your delivery a d the mounds if horse manure they're buried under.
Right back atcha, and all Squawk fans in general. An honest discussion is impossible because everything gets wrapped in a thick layer of "everything is the bestest evah." Zero objectivity whatsoever. And I admit, it's hard approaching discussions in a full spirit of non-trolling when the conclusion of "best evah" has been reached about... pretty much everything.

Yes, I missed a few details about the small picture. But everything still fits in the big picture I saw from last year and projected about this year.

The pass rush is middle-of-the-road.
:lmao: The only best evah Seahawk fan is Scientist, who you claim isn't. The rest of the people saying that aren't even Seahawk fans, including tools like you that project what others think so you something to fap to. Much like yourassessment of the pass rush against the Niners, its just crap you've made up.FYI, the are in fact the best ever at crowd noise. You wanna make fun of it, fine, but its still true.
Sorry, but I am sharing why I think Seattle's pass rush is just as pedestrian as it ever was, and you have done nothing but make excuses and attach conditions to why it is great. You don't acknowledge that they were middle-of-the-road last year. You point to elements that existed last year (excellent secondary) and say that they help this year. You point to new people who have come in, but the results after two games is right on pace for what happened last year.

You say you aren't part of the "best evah" crowd, but you are deny everything staring you in the face to say that six sacks should be a layup. Wanna talk about holding Jacksonville under 100 yards? Shutting them out? I wouldn't have said a word. They'd be capable of all of that. But to talk about them like they are just as elite at pass rushing as they are at so many other things is... simply untrue. It was untrue about the 2012 team, and nothing has shown itself in the admittedly-small sample size this year to indicate it's changed all that much.

And the fact that you can't see it, much less say it, makes it impossible for me to see you as anything but part of the "best evah" crowd.
:lmao: I haven't even come close to saying anything like that. Then again, what people actually say is of little interest to you. Look at my first post in the thread and then tell me how I'm part if the best evah crowd.You haven't denied molesting collies either, so your silence leads me to believe that you're a red rocketeer. See how that works?
Ah, we're playing that game*, are we? Well, let me have my turn.

All I ever said is that Seattle, for all the exceptional parts of their defense, has only an average pass rush.

To support my claim, I point to the fact that they finished 16th out of 32 (the very definition of average), and after two games are on pace to get one sack more than last year's total.

That's "all I ever said." Okay... mixed in with some rampant disdain for Squawk fans. Distill out the disdain, and it's all I ever said.

So since you never said "A team with an average pass rush should still be able to get 6 sacks against Jacksonville," is it any wonder I got wrapped up into thinking the debate about whether their pass rush is average or potentially great was about... you know.... whether their pass rush is average or potentially great?

* The game where person A says "X will happen," person B says "X will not happen because of Y and Z," then A and B debate points Y and Z endlessly.... but A never really says anything, so that when all is said and done, they can fall back to ""All I ever said was X will happen" after two pages of debating Y and Z. "Idiotic deniability."

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.
You mean last year when they had Irvin and Clemons and finished 16th out of 32... average? And the new additions are, in my opinion, overrated. Plus, some of the sacks the two new guys get are going to come from sacks Clemons and Irvin would have gotten.

And if I'm thinking this year, they are on pace to get one whole entire sack more than last season.

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.
They have an inconsistent pass rush, but without understanding their overall defensive philosophy this is an oversimplification.

Over the past few years they've played a lot of zone and tried to keep everything in front of them. The idea is to force teams into long drives with no big plays. Depending on who's under center for the opposition, they want the other team's QB to sit in the pocket and throw to short underneath routes. Their secondary tackles well. Its tough to convert four or five consecutive third downs. Very good teams convert on less than 50% of third downs. If Seattle shuts down the run and creates long third down situations they're generally thrilled to give up a short completion that comes up short as opposed to sending the entire house looking for a sack.
Hey look, an opinion I can respect.

I thought that with Brwoner and Sherman, they'd play a lot more press. After all, with their size, that should be their strength. But what you are describing is eerily similar to what the Rams are playing this year, which is... wait for it now... working to negate the Rams pass rush. So if you are saying the Seattle pass rush is being minimized by the style of defense they are playing on the back end, I'd be more than willing to listen to that. I'm not sure I'd agree, but since I haven't watched them as much as you have, I'd be willing to defer to you at the moment.

 
the best part of Seattle's defense is the 12th man. It's a different team home vs away. btw this thread title is a little premature, the seahawks are not even 1st ranked defense. that's the chiefs. 2nd is the Jets.

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.
They have an inconsistent pass rush, but without understanding their overall defensive philosophy this is an oversimplification.

Over the past few years they've played a lot of zone and tried to keep everything in front of them. The idea is to force teams into long drives with no big plays. Depending on who's under center for the opposition, they want the other team's QB to sit in the pocket and throw to short underneath routes. Their secondary tackles well. Its tough to convert four or five consecutive third downs. Very good teams convert on less than 50% of third downs. If Seattle shuts down the run and creates long third down situations they're generally thrilled to give up a short completion that comes up short as opposed to sending the entire house looking for a sack.
Except for last year they were one of the worst teams for getting off the field on third down.
 
Except for last year they were one of the worst teams for getting off the field on third down.
I don't disagree, but there's more to story. The plan is to make teams convert many consecutive first downs resulting in scoring drives. They excelled in keeping scoring drives to a minimum. That's the bigger picture. I don't understand why anyone would consider the top defense as the team that yields the fewest yards. Give me the team that yields the fewest points every time.

 
the best part of Seattle's defense is the 12th man. It's a different team home vs away. btw this thread title is a little premature, the seahawks are not even 1st ranked defense. that's the chiefs. 2nd is the Jets.
Team A is 4-1 in their last 5 road games, including playoffs, outscoring those opponents by 71 points.

Team B is 2-4 on the road during the same stretch, outscored in those games by 50 points.

One team is the Seahawks, the other is the 49ers.

Care to guess?

 
Except for last year they were one of the worst teams for getting off the field on third down.
I don't disagree, but there's more to story. The plan is to make teams convert many consecutive first downs resulting in scoring drives. They excelled in keeping scoring drives to a minimum. That's the bigger picture. I don't understand why anyone would consider the top defense as the team that yields the fewest yards. Give me the team that yields the fewest points every time.
The only way I would agree with you on this is if the team also has an efficient offense. If they do, then shortening the game and number of possessions absolutely plays into the favor of the team stretching drives out, forcing teams to move the chains repeatedly. If the offense is more hit-n-miss, I think the defense that gets off the field quick is the way to go so you get your offense more chances.

Having not watched every Seahawk snap as closely as a fan would have, I'd be interested in your take on how you see their offense in this regard. I can go through the schedule and pick apart scores, but without the long view of something like possession efficiency, I can see that it doesn't, as you like to say, tell the whole story.

 
I'd be interested in your take on how you see their offense in this regard.
They're goal is exactly this on offense, and they're not shy about saying it. Every press conference Carroll has given over the past three years has preached the same mantra. They want to run the ball. Control the clock. Shorten the games. If you look back at the Carolina game I think you'll find that both teams had only 8 or 9 possessions each. There were several other games that weekend where teams had nearly double that amount.

I love that Seattle has an overall team philosophy. What they do on offense complements what they do on defense. They're all about playing mistake free and physical football.

 
Grahamburn said:
I honestly believe that at the end of this season, you'll hear this year's Seattle defense mentioned in the same breath as those other two legendary defenses. This isn't just a reaction to the first two games -- I picked them to win it all in the Super Bowl prediction thread last month.

This unit is insane. A defense that you cannot throw on in this day and age is an absolutely remarkable thing.

Love watching them play at home, too.
You forgot one, Raider fan.
No, I didn't.

Defenses only attain "All-Time Great" status when they win a Super Bowl without having the opposition's playbook.

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.
They have an inconsistent pass rush, but without understanding their overall defensive philosophy this is an oversimplification.

Over the past few years they've played a lot of zone and tried to keep everything in front of them. The idea is to force teams into long drives with no big plays. Depending on who's under center for the opposition, they want the other team's QB to sit in the pocket and throw to short underneath routes. Their secondary tackles well. Its tough to convert four or five consecutive third downs. Very good teams convert on less than 50% of third downs. If Seattle shuts down the run and creates long third down situations they're generally thrilled to give up a short completion that comes up short as opposed to sending the entire house looking for a sack.
Except for last year they were one of the worst teams for getting off the field on third down.
Right, last year they couldn't get off the field on 3rd down because of lack of pressure to the opposing QB. The point is they've upgraded the skill and added depth at pass rush.

With two legit CBs in BB (Pro Bowler) and Sherm (All Pro) and arguably the best Safety that can play center fielder and go sideline to sideline in the league Earl (All Pro), all you need is a bit of pressure to either sack the QB or force them to throw into dangerous territory. Once their pass rushers come back, they're either going to get more interceptions and more sacks on 3rd down.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.
They have an inconsistent pass rush, but without understanding their overall defensive philosophy this is an oversimplification.

Over the past few years they've played a lot of zone and tried to keep everything in front of them. The idea is to force teams into long drives with no big plays. Depending on who's under center for the opposition, they want the other team's QB to sit in the pocket and throw to short underneath routes. Their secondary tackles well. Its tough to convert four or five consecutive third downs. Very good teams convert on less than 50% of third downs. If Seattle shuts down the run and creates long third down situations they're generally thrilled to give up a short completion that comes up short as opposed to sending the entire house looking for a sack.
Except for last year they were one of the worst teams for getting off the field on third down.
Right, last year they couldn't get off the field on 3rd down because of lack of pressure to the opposing QB. The point is they've upgraded the skill and added depth at pass rush.

With two legit CBs in BB (Pro Bowler) and Sherm (All Pro) and arguably the best Safety that can play center fielder and go sideline to sideline in the league Earl (All Pro), all you need is a bit of pressure to either sack the QB or force them to throw into dangerous territory. Once their pass rushers come back, they're either going to get more interceptions and more sacks on 3rd down.
"Once we get everything we had last year, things will be better than last year."

 
I honestly believe that at the end of this season, you'll hear this year's Seattle defense mentioned in the same breath as those other two legendary defenses. This isn't just a reaction to the first two games -- I picked them to win it all in the Super Bowl prediction thread last month.

This unit is insane. A defense that you cannot throw on in this day and age is an absolutely remarkable thing.

Love watching them play at home, too.
You forgot one, Raider fan.
No, I didn't.

Defenses only attain "All-Time Great" status when they win a Super Bowl without having the opposition's playbook.
Oh, they're still comparable in spite of the 269 total yard, 5 sack, 5 turnover (3 of which were returned for touchdowns), performance in the Super Bowl while having the #1 offense's playbook.

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
Right, no pass rush... ever heard of Chris Clemons, Cliff Avril, Michael Bennett, Bruce Irvin ? Maybe you're thinking about last year.
They have an inconsistent pass rush, but without understanding their overall defensive philosophy this is an oversimplification.

Over the past few years they've played a lot of zone and tried to keep everything in front of them. The idea is to force teams into long drives with no big plays. Depending on who's under center for the opposition, they want the other team's QB to sit in the pocket and throw to short underneath routes. Their secondary tackles well. Its tough to convert four or five consecutive third downs. Very good teams convert on less than 50% of third downs. If Seattle shuts down the run and creates long third down situations they're generally thrilled to give up a short completion that comes up short as opposed to sending the entire house looking for a sack.
Except for last year they were one of the worst teams for getting off the field on third down.
Right, last year they couldn't get off the field on 3rd down because of lack of pressure to the opposing QB. The point is they've upgraded the skill and added depth at pass rush.

With two legit CBs in BB (Pro Bowler) and Sherm (All Pro) and arguably the best Safety that can play center fielder and go sideline to sideline in the league Earl (All Pro), all you need is a bit of pressure to either sack the QB or force them to throw into dangerous territory. Once their pass rushers come back, they're either going to get more interceptions and more sacks on 3rd down.
"Once we get everything we had last year, things will be better than last year."
Yep, half of our best pass rushers are out. Four is better than two.

 
I agree that it's a little early for this discussion. However, it's not difficult to see that this team was smartly built and looks the part. In six weeks we'll see more clearly. Until then, I'm sold.

 
I honestly believe that at the end of this season, you'll hear this year's Seattle defense mentioned in the same breath as those other two legendary defenses. This isn't just a reaction to the first two games -- I picked them to win it all in the Super Bowl prediction thread last month.

This unit is insane. A defense that you cannot throw on in this day and age is an absolutely remarkable thing.

Love watching them play at home, too.
You forgot one, Raider fan.
No, I didn't.

Defenses only attain "All-Time Great" status when they win a Super Bowl without having the opposition's playbook.
Oh, they're still comparable in spite of the 269 total yard, 5 sack, 5 turnover (3 of which were returned for touchdowns), performance in the Super Bowl while having the #1 offense's playbook.
Not really.

 
I do have to say, I'm pretty sure Seattle is off to the hottest start by any defense since the absolutely punishing Denver Broncos squad from 2009. Those Broncos gave up just 16 points and 644 yards over the first three games of the season, posting 8 takeaways and 10 sacks. That kind of run to open the season will be hard for Seattle to match- they'll need to hold Jacksonville to 6 points and 184 yards, and they'll need 6 sacks and a takeaway. It's a tall order, but I think Seattle might just be up to it.
"No" to the six sacks. Seattle, for all their many strengths, doesn't have a pass rush.
That's why they went out and got two pass rushers, both if whom had a sack against the best OL and fastest QB. Their backfield gives plenty of time for the D to get to the QB. I doubt Henne is going to outrun sacks as well as Kaep did. Even without them they had 8 in a single half against GB. If you want to start or contribute to a discussion, don't begin with a blatantly incorrect position.
They got two injured pass rushers to back up an injured pass rusher. Yes, they got Kaep twice, but when the team is in desperate catchup mode and the running game has been removed, it ain't hard to get there a couple of times. It still doesn't show they have a six-sack game in them, even against a team that has zero chance of being productive offensively.

If they get six sacks, I will come in here for a full helping of crow.

If they get four sacks, I'll at least acknowledge I shouldn't have stated things so absolutely.

If they finish the season in the top ten in sacks, I'll come in for a full serving of crow with a side order of crow and a Diet Crow to wash it all down.
Going over some game stats for a second time, and I noticed.... while there were only 3 sacks credited to Seattle players, the team was credited with four sacks. My guess is Henne was forced to run out of bounds or some such thing. But four sacks is four sacks, and I'm a man of my word.

6 sacks could have been possible for Seattle. I should not have stated so absolutely that it was beyond their reach.

That said, if their pass rush is what fans say it is, that should have happened by the middle of the second quarter.

 
They disappointed me big time fantasy-wise this week. JAX got their first TD when Wilson threw a pick inside his own 5.

Then the backups were in for most of the 2nd half and the Jags ran up garbage yardage. Guess I should have anticipated that possibility. This D will actually look better against good teams, as crazy as it sounds, because the starters will be forced to play 60 minutes.

 
I honestly believe that at the end of this season, you'll hear this year's Seattle defense mentioned in the same breath as those other two legendary defenses. This isn't just a reaction to the first two games -- I picked them to win it all in the Super Bowl prediction thread last month.

This unit is insane. A defense that you cannot throw on in this day and age is an absolutely remarkable thing.

Love watching them play at home, too.
You forgot one, Raider fan.
No, I didn't.

Defenses only attain "All-Time Great" status when they win a Super Bowl without having the opposition's playbook.
Oh, they're still comparable in spite of the 269 total yard, 5 sack, 5 turnover (3 of which were returned for touchdowns), performance in the Super Bowl while having the #1 offense's playbook.
Not really.
2002 Bucs - 196 points allowed

1985 Bears - 198 points allowed

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top