Seahawks all century team

[evergreen]

If Lynch in his prime had been behind the 2005 offensive line, he would have rushed for 35 touchdowns and over 2,500 yards. Easily.

That's a wonderful grand declaration but completely hypothetical and imaginary.

It's really quite logical though. Just add in yards after contact. Alexander didn't get much. Lynch got Adrian Peterson type yards after contact and that '03-05 line was incredible. Any nfl running back would've gotten 1000 yards easily behind that line.

 

[vin.couve12]

As a pure running back, there is no Seahawhs RB in history that I could sanely take over Marshawn.

 

[fenderbender123]

If Lynch in his prime had been behind the 2005 offensive line, he would have rushed for 35 touchdowns and over 2,500 yards. Easily.

That's a wonderful grand declaration but completely hypothetical and imaginary.

True. But only as hypothetical and imaginary as saying he wouldn't... :irishdrinkers:

 

[McGruff]

WR Baldwin instead of Tate
DT Bernard instead of DE Wistrom (slide Bennett to DE)
OLB Peterson instead of just about anyone

 

[kobebryant]

DT Bernard instead of DE Wistrom (slide Bennett to DE)

Rocky is a good call. I may have to reconsider going Randle there; went and looked at Rocky's stats - 8 years of being pretty darn productive.

 

[evergreen]

How could you not keep the LOB intact? Browner steam rolling three cardinals on one play should get him in there in his 1-2 years of prime...

 

[Fade]

OFFENSE:

QB Russell Wilson
RB Marshawn Lynch
WR Doug Baldwin
WR Bobby Engram
WR Tyler Lockett
TE Zach Miller
LT Walter Jones
LG Steve Hutchinson
-C Max Unger
RG Chris Gray
RT Sean Locklear

Note 1: I like this particular trio of WRs because of their ability to run great routes, get separation, and catch the ball. D-Jack always dropped balls, and Tate struggled at times getting separation on his routes.

Note 2: Okung was injury prone, and he never played on the right side, so I went with the more consistent option in Locklear.

DEFENSE:

DE Cliff Avril
DT Michael Bennett
DT Rocky Bernard
DE Chris Clemons
LB Young Lofa Tatupu
LB K.J. Wright
CB Richard Sherman
SS Kam Chancellor
FS Earl Thomas
CB Brandon Browner
NB Jeremy Lane

Note 1: The defense would be in Nickel the majority of the time, so i went with the best pass rushers at each spot. Avril and Bennett on the left side is just lethal. Rocky Bernard is the best interior rushing Seahawk this century not named Michael Bennett. Chris Clemons was a 10 sack guy 2010-2012.

Note 2: Lofa Tatupu's ability to get picks, and his leadership ability edge him out over Wagner.

 

[Tical21]

DE- Bennett
DT- Tez (was a Seahawk in 2000)
DT- Mebane
DE- Sinclair
OLB - Chad Brown
MLB- Tatupu
OLB - Wright
CB - Sherman
CB - Trufant
S - Thomas
S - Chancellor

QB - Russ
RB - Shaun
FB - Mack
WR - Baldwin
WR - DJax
WR - Bob Digi
TE - Graham
O-Line - 2005.

 

[vin.couve12]

I said I wasn't, but the problem that Pete will disagree with seemingly all of the current NFL beliefs is that you don't need to pass if you can run the ball to get first downs and score.

It's just pure logic. If it's effective enough to move the chains and score touchdowns, there's no point in the risk of putting it in the air.

I know pass rushers are the sexy thing, but they only get to eat if a more baseline job is done previously. The best ones are the ones who can do both.

 

[kobebryant]

OFFENSE:

Rocky Bernard is the best interior rushing Seahawk this century not named Michael Bennett. Chris Clemons was a 10 sack guy 2010-2012.

- John Randle and Patrick Kerney at their best are better than Bernard and Clemons at their best.

 

[vin.couve12]

OFFENSE:

Rocky Bernard is the best interior rushing Seahawk this century not named Michael Bennett. Chris Clemons was a 10 sack guy 2010-2012.

- John Randle and Patrick Kerney at their best are better than Bernard and Clemons at their best.

At what point in their careers? With the Hawks or other?

 

[kobebryant]

OFFENSE:

Rocky Bernard is the best interior rushing Seahawk this century not named Michael Bennett. Chris Clemons was a 10 sack guy 2010-2012.

- John Randle and Patrick Kerney at their best are better than Bernard and Clemons at their best.

At what point in their careers? With the Hawks or other?

His inclusion of Lockett suggests he's willing to go small sample size in order to field the best squad possible; so that would definitely include '07 Kerney (14.5 sacks) and 01-02 Randle (11 and 7 sacks).

If the hypothetical roster is honorary it looks different (and definitely Clem over Kerney) than if we're building the best possible team of the best each guy was as a Seahawk since '00

 

[JSeahawks]

QB: Russell Wilson
RB: Marshawn Lynch
FB: Mack Strong
WR: Darrell Jackson
WR: Doug Baldwin
TE: Zach Miller
OT: Walter Jones
OT: Russell Okung
OG: Steve Hutchinson
OG Chris Gray
C: Max Unger

DE: Patrick Kerney
DT: John Randle
DT: Brandon Mebane
DE: Michael Bennett

OLB: KJ Wright
MLB: Bobby Wagner
OLB: Julian Peterson

CB: Richard Sherman
CB: Marcus Trufant
S: Earl Thomas
S: Kam Chancellor

This looks about right to me. But I'd put in Alexander over lynch and Clemons over Kerney.

 

[Fade]

OFFENSE:
Rocky Bernard is the best interior rushing Seahawk this century not named Michael Bennett. Chris Clemons was a 10 sack guy 2010-2012.

- John Randle and Patrick Kerney at their best are better than Bernard and Clemons at their best.

John Randle was over the hill by the time he got to the Hawks. Cortez by 2000 was also.

Kerney wouldn't make a good Leo. Clemons was the best Leo. Kerney was a traditional 4-3 LE. Michael Bennett is better at that spot, and then when you go nickel I would rather have Avril's get-off paired with Bennett.

 

[vin.couve12]

OFFENSE:

Rocky Bernard is the best interior rushing Seahawk this century not named Michael Bennett. Chris Clemons was a 10 sack guy 2010-2012.

- John Randle and Patrick Kerney at their best are better than Bernard and Clemons at their best.

At what point in their careers? With the Hawks or other?

His inclusion of Lockett suggests he's willing to go small sample size in order to field the best squad possible; so that would definitely include '07 Kerney (14.5 sacks) and 01-02 Randle (11 and 7 sacks).

If the hypothetical roster is honorary it looks different (and definitely Clem over Kerney) than if we're building the best possible team of the best each guy was as a Seahawk since '00

Hm.

Best single season changes things, but only to a certain extent even given stats.

 

[vin.couve12]

On a side note, bacon, artichoke hearts, and tomatoes are really underrated 3 ingredients on a pizza. Don't know why I never thought of that before....should probably add fresh basil? Or leave it alone?

EDIT: I should note the generous helping of bacon on said pizza. Hence why the acidity of both the artichoke and tomato go well. Uncertainty ensues at the thought of addition.

Eh?

 

[Fade]

Volume stats aren't everything either, if we just went by that --> Alexander > Lynch.

26 year old Bernard vs. 34 year old Randle is a good debate, but I would rather go with Bernard who led all --> interior <-- rushers in sacks w/8.5 in 2005, and didn't even start. Marcus Tubbs, and Chuck Darby were the starters. Granted he spot started some of the time that year. If he had gotten more snaps i.e. volume he would of had more sacks.

Which also ties in with my Tyler Lockett choice, I believe he was criminally under utilized last season, and if given more targets he would have been a pro-bowl receiver as a rookie, not just a pro-bowl returner as a rookie. That is special.

Catch %.
Golden Tate was 53.9% his rookie year.
D-Jack was 57% his rookie year.
Tyler Lockett was 73.9%!