Seahawks leapfrogged in ESPN's "Future Power Rankings" by GB

[ptisme]

I remember Murray being not a huge factor most of that game. They kept him in check and as I recall he got most of that in two or three second half runs.
Lynch had a great second half and did what he does...
In both games the defense played well enough to win against two of the top rushing teams in the league.

Regardless if they played well enough to win the games your original point was about how improved your defense was vs the run in the last 8 games, not about playing well enough to win. I showed how that defense played mostly weak run teams and odds are that was a big factor in how improved your defense was in those games. See how that works? I can care less if they played well enough to have a chance to beat Seattle and for winning against the Cowboys as that was not the original intent of your earlier message.

Couple points:
1. I'm not suggesting the Packers have the second coming of the 85' bears defense. I'm refuting your statement that Green Bay has done nothing to address its run defense and that the run defense is still a team weakness. The run defense was improved since they benched their two slow ILB's. Matthews was thrust into an all new position that he will now have an off season to learn. Barrington was a rookie who played very well and now he'll have an off season and should also take a step. Raji is said to be in the shape of his life and has been moved back to the position he excelled at in 2010.
2. Green Bay doesn't need the best defense in the league to win, just needs to be respectable. They weren't in 2011. They are respectable now. I think they played well enough to win in Seattle and certainly held their own against New England and Dallas.

It's funny how you believe that the Packers can win with just a "respectable" defense when they haven't won a Super Bowl since 1968 without a top two defense in the league and have never won one when their defense was ranked lower than fifth in the league. NONE of the Packers vaunted Hall of Fame QBs could win it all without a top defense. Why don't we ever hear Rodgers being knocked like the constant rambling on about Russell only winning because of the Seahawks defense?

new England just won it all with the 13th ranked defense. I think if Green Bay can get into that range and Rodgers stays healthy they will be right there at the end, like last year... Seattle has a great team and Green Bay better be ready to keep the foot on the gas for four quarters if it expects a different outcome this time....

 

[ptisme]

To the OP, should we or do we care? 3 years in the NFL is like 100 years anywhere else.

@ptisme, I hope you stick around when it matters and myself among many others speak with you when it's past bored time because I almost think you could hang here when it gets real.

I mean it isn't like our short greedy quarterback didn't outplay yours in every way that actually counts in real games not fantasy football and it may have been decently close then.

See the deal is Wilson is much like Aikman and in many ways like Montana (we'll get that question answered this year given he finally has receivers almost as good as Montana started with, almost).

Like them it's not clear cut as to how good he actually is in that same point in their career hence the money furor amongst fan base.


Modern economy says just pay the man though. Glad I'm not JS because ladies and gentlemen we're seeing big boy quarterback negotiations front row and center and it's not pretty to see. But when it's done you have yourself a 12 win team for the next 10 years EVERYBODY hates especially the NFCW.

You're set up to win with Wilson... You aren't set up to have that kind of defense for years to come as those boys are going to want to get theirs and you can't pay them all....

Wrong! They got their's already. Anybody that matters on defense is locked up for the next four years or so.

Sans Bobby Wagner, which will hopefully get done ASAP.
Richard Sherman (Until 2019)
Earl Thomas (Until 2019)
Kam Chancellor (Until 2018)
Michael Bennett (Until 2018)
Cliff Avril (Until 2019)
K.J. Wright (Until 2019)

As long as we continue to develop a couple ready defensive contributors in each draft class, this defense will have a chance to keep on rollin'.
2015: Frank Clark and Tye Smith (maybe Ryan Murphy and Obum Gwacham)
2014: Kevin Pierre-Louis, Eric Pinkins, and Cassius Marsh (maybe Jimmy Staten)
2013: Jordan Hill and Tharold Simon (maybe Jesse Williams)
2012: Bobby Wagner, Bruce Irvin, and Jeremy Lane (maybe Greg Scruggs)

I wasn't aware of that.... Your front office is really outstanding!

 

[RichNhansom]

I have to admit I am very curious to see that game 2 in Green Bay. These two teams have been battling for several years now and seem to be developing a pseudo rivalry and yet somehow Seattle keeps coming out on top and in a couple occasions NFCC game and Tate's hail Mary catch, the results were pretty murky.

Now the big question. How much of it is home field advantage? The hail Mary game was Wilson's rookie year and it feels like the team has improved pretty drastically from that time and we did handle them pretty soundly in the first meeting of the year so which game is the real example of how these two teams match up? The NFCC Game or the first game of the year last year?

Factors for GB. Rogers wasn't 100% on that ankle though it didn't visibly appear to affect him. Still it's hard to say if that ankle did actually slow him down or not. He was 100% healthy in the first match up and still lost 36-16.

For Seattle it was a freaky game. The weather seemed to have a huge negative affect on us but even so 4 turn overs in one game is so out of character for this team. At least when giving them away. I also think GB appeared much more mentally hyped for this game and I wonder how much the first meeting played into that for both teams. Seattle actually came out looking very flat as if they already had the game wrapped up or in general just way to over confident. Take away even two of those TO's and the game looks like Seattle wins it easily. Ever wonder what this game would have looked like if GB had thrown 4 Int's with three being in their own end of the field instead of Seattle?

Week two should have a healthy Rogers and I would bet my house we won't turn it over four times but now this one is in GB. Fortunately for Seattle it is early in the year and it is a prime time game but you can bet the hype for this game and the mental preparation for both teams will be impressive.

It's hard not to like Seattle in this match up. GB looked like they were so hyped for this game that they burnt themselves out by the 4th quarter and that is what allowed us to come back. Seattle on the other hand got better as the game went on. Even in the face of extreme adversity do to TO's the team never quit or wilted. Next match up I expect to see both teams mentally prepared and that should be advantage Seattle. To beat a team like us you have to be physical and play with 100% intensity. Something Seattle is and does. Trying to manufacture that for one game will likely only result in seeing your team get burnt out and mentally beat by games end.

I also think at this point Seattle has to be in GB's collective head and part of that credit goes to the 9ers. Even before we were having these battles the 9ers were doing the same thing to them with the same style of play and constantly coming out on the winning end. GB isn't just battling us they are battling a demon at this point in trying to overcome the style of play they have failed at consistently over the last few years.

Seattle has to feel if not for the turn overs we dominate that last game and knowing those TO's were such a fluke there is good reason to believe that shouldn't be a factor in this next game. But they have also had to live with the questions all off season about should they have won that game or not? Were we just lucky? Add to that the power polls and Vegas are actually sliding in GB's direction and you have all the bulletin material we could ever ask for.

Roll up your sleeves. I think this game is going to be a fun one to watch.

 

[Popeyejones]

Roll up your sleeves. I think this game is going to be a fun one to watch.

Yeah it will. Probably the non-9ers game I'm most looking forward to early in the season. I won't really be rooting for or against either team (I'd root for the Packers if I thought the 9ers had a shot at the division this year, but I don't), but just as a straight matchup with some awesome recent history this game is definitely one I'm looking forward to.

 

[ctrcat]

These are three year future rankings right? Hate him all you want, and I do with the best of them, but not having the Colts in the top 10 and having a 41 year old Brady and 37 year old Romo over a 28 year old Newton and Luck is a bloody joke.

Also not sure how they pulled the "draft" metric out of their rear ends.

Yeah, cause Cam is a 'freight train' and they aren't. Back to your container, cat, BACK I say! [emoji12]

?

Cam is 1-0 head-to-head vs Brady by the way.

Like the Packer fan, I didn't realize the entire list of those on D that were inked over the next 3-4 years, and the Hawks FO has done an amazing job, as I've said many times.

I am interested in what happens with Irvin. He's been a huge X factor in helping contain Cam vs the Panthers. I hope he doesn't go to Atlanta.

 

[Popeyejones]

I am interested in what happens with Irvin. He's been a huge X factor in helping contain Cam vs the Panthers. I hope he doesn't go to Atlanta.

If they had ANY intention of keeping him at all they would have used the fifth year option on him, as it is only guaranteed for injury, or in the very least would be talking to him about an extension if they didn't believe he was worth the 7 million on the fifth year. Even if that were true though, they would have exercised the option as leverage to get a long term deal done, and then just revoked it if the deal couldn't happen.

The Seahawks, quite wisely IMO, are like the 9ers in this regard: if a player even gets to FA, you can already count him as gone.

 

[hawknation2015]

The Seahawks, quite wisely IMO, are like the 9ers in this regard: if a player even gets to FA, you can already count him as gone.

What about Michael Bennett last year?

 

[Popeyejones]

^^^^ re-signed before FA started.

 

[hawknation2015]

^^^^ re-signed before FA started.

True but it was after the free agency negotiation period began, with Bennett turning down offers from at least two other teams to re-sign with the Seahawks.

Lemuel Jeanpierre was re-signed this year, a month into free agency. Ditto for Will Tukuafu. And they waited another two months into free agency to re-sign Tavaris Jackson.

 

[RichNhansom]

I am interested in what happens with Irvin. He's been a huge X factor in helping contain Cam vs the Panthers. I hope he doesn't go to Atlanta.

If they had ANY intention of keeping him at all they would have used the fifth year option on him, as it is only guaranteed for injury, or in the very least would be talking to him about an extension if they didn't believe he was worth the 7 million on the fifth year. Even if that were true though, they would have exercised the option as leverage to get a long term deal done, and then just revoked it if the deal couldn't happen.

The Seahawks, quite wisely IMO, are like the 9ers in this regard: if a player even gets to FA, you can already count him as gone.

I think his hissy fit pretty much tells you all you need to know about him and why the Seahawks passed on that 5th year option. The guy has tons of talent but never materialized as the player he was drafted to be and then on top of that tested positive for PED's. He has developed into a good LB and may be worth 7-8 mill a year if he continues to develop but we don't have enough cap room to sign everyone and keeping him means another star has to go. Who would you let walk to keep him? I think the FO has already decided to let him walk for a comp pick. Hopefully he plays lights out and that comp pick is a 3rd rounder.

I believe a big part of why this FO does so well in the later rounds is because sometimes those highly talented earlier picks don't fully buy in and that is a minimum requirement to stay on this roster and get on the field. A 5th rounder might be less sure of his ability to walk onto any roster so buying in might be easier.

I think this is why C-Mike will probably not make the 53 and also why we didn't try so hard to keep Tate. Harvin pretty obviously falls into this as well.