So think back for a minute, to the Holmgren offenses of Matt Hasselbeck, Shaun Alexander, Walter Jones, Hutch, Darrell Jackson, and the rest. In 2003, 2004, our offense could move the ball and score points against ANYBODY. We still lost a lot of games, because we had a crap defense, and sometimes we committed excessive turnovers on offense.
Now, fast forward from there to 2005. We drafted Lofa Tatupu, and our defense improved over the course of the year, from an absolute crap defense, to an "average" NFL defense. We had that Holmgren offense firing on all cylinders, with the big-time running game that nobody could truly stop, and the offense truly hit its stride, scoring on long, punishing drives, controlling the clock, and scoring points. We make it to the Super Bowl with an amazing, league-best offense, and an average defense. And we should have a Lombardi in the case from that year, but we don't; topic for another thread.
OK, back on topic. This Seattle offense, and Russell Wilson, are looking Holmgren-Hasselbeck-2005-good. We don't need a historic 2013 Seahawks defense for this team to win. We just need an average, yes Richard, a "mediocre" defense, for this team to do well and have a deep playoff run. That 2005 Hawks defense wasn't very good at the start of the season. But, they improved over the year, all the way to "average" by the end of the season. That could be the story this year; the defense keeps improving a little each week, the offense keeps playing lights out, with a big-time running game, and by playoff time, the D is a little "above average". The pieces are in place. The unexpected acquisition of Jadaveon Clowney. The return of Jarran Reed. Ziggy Ansah getting healthy. The continued development of our young secondary players, Hall, Flowers, Thompson. A key rookie or two stepping up... Marquise Blair, maybe? If this D improves to "average" it could be a special season. Pete seems to have mentally made the tradeoff, lights out QB and offense + average defense = Super Bowl.
Is Ken Norton holding back this defense? I honestly don't know, topic for another thread. I just know it often times doesn't look like the the Pete Carroll defenses we're used to seeing. But, I think we need to give things a little more time to gel.