So the experts say the Hawks will suck this season?

[adeltaY]

Avril, Kam, Sherman, Richardson and Benett. That's a lot of really good players to lose from a defense.

When we faced the NFL's #1 offense last year (Philadelphia), how many of those guys played?

Yeah and the Dolphins made the Pats look inept last year, the Lions beat the Vikings, flippin Bears beat the Steelers, etc. Inferior teams beat SB contenders, it happens every year. The Fisher rams did it to us, as did the Arians Cards. Fact of the matter is this team played five games against playoff teams and won only two of those games. We just weren't that good. Our record post-Sherm and Kam was 3-4 and we were 25th in points allowed over that stretch... That's a massive impact many here are smoothing over.

Also by what metric were the Eagles the NFL's number one offense? The Eagles were #3 in points, #8 by DVOA, 7th in drive success rate, 11th in yards per drive. They were pretty damn good, but not amazing.

 

[sdog1981]

It is the lazy analysis that national types always do. We as Seahawk fans knew how good the Rams were when they were going 5-11 7-9 every year. We knew that team was loaded with talent that was being held back by bad coaching. But to the national types, the low win totals meant that the team was bad.

The same thing is happening with the Seahawks. National types look at a team that has won 10 games or more for 4 seasons then wins only 9 so to them they think the team has lost a step. They don't know that the Seahawks had the worst production from running backs in NFL history and still won 9 games. They get hung up on the team only winning 9 games.

 

[toffee]

The national types’ opinions were based mostly on:

1. Our OL was epically bad, and yet Pete/John seemingly did nothing in term of FA signing and drafting this off season to improve the line.

2. We lost two major receiving asset in Jimmy and Richardson, again we didn’t do much to replace them.

3. Wholesale exodus of stars on defense side. Most replacements were underwhelming.

Can’t fault the above logic. My take:

On the defense:
I have faith in Pete knows what he is doing. Our major stars were mostly underwhelming before Pete’s magic. It may take more than one season, but I bet by mid next season our defense will be premium again.

Our new punter could single handedly add 10 more yards for the opposing offense to conquer.

On offense:
On OL, I trust that Pete’s inaction was partially if not mostly based on Solari’s input after his evaluation of our roster. They must felt that the lack of running game were due to lacking a premium back, and blocking help from TE and FB position. So instead of throwing money at OL, they focused on a franchise RB and blocking TEs.

With a functioning running game, pressure would be off quite a bit on Russ and OL.

Pass blocking and WR Corp remains our problems, however, major question marks.

With a developing defense and two question marks on offense, I think 8-8 should be about it. Unless:

Ifeldi makes major improvement, which is not impossible, and they sign another OG with proven record. I don’t have too much confidence in Pocic and Fluker. Guard plays were identified as problem area in ‘16. John tried to fix it with Joekel and Lang. Lang didn’t sign and Joekel was a joke. We needs interior linemen and just don’t think Fluker would be the answer.

One of our young receivers step up, we have quite a few fast, tall, young WRs. Can one or two of them become serviceable?

A motivated young team with good coaching can surprise people, as a Hawks homer, I predict 10-6!!






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KiwiHawk]

Avril, Kam, Sherman, Richardson and Benett. That's a lot of really good players to lose from a defense.

When we faced the NFL's #1 offense last year (Philadelphia), how many of those guys played?

Yeah and the Dolphins made the Pats look inept last year, the Lions beat the Vikings, flippin Bears beat the Steelers, etc. Inferior teams beat SB contenders, it happens every year. The Fisher rams did it to us, as did the Arians Cards. Fact of the matter is this team played five games against playoff teams and won only two of those games. We just weren't that good. Our record post-Sherm and Kam was 3-4 and we were 25th in points allowed over that stretch... That's a massive impact many here are smoothing over.

Also by what metric were the Eagles the NFL's number one offense? The Eagles were #3 in points, #8 by DVOA, 7th in drive success rate, 11th in yards per drive. They were pretty damn good, but not amazing.

At the time they played us they were #1. We hurt their average a little.

And you can look at the negative and say a sucky team got lucky, or you can look at the positive and say even down so many big names, our defense is still capable of stopping the best.

 

[brimsalabim]

So much depends on the OL and if our new OC can get the ball out of Russell’s hands fast enough to keep him from getting killed but still score more points early and late than we did last season. If our OL play isn’t substantially better right off the bat we could lose our QB first game against Denver. I wouldn’t expect too high a finish if we lost Russ then.

 

[adeltaY]

Avril, Kam, Sherman, Richardson and Benett. That's a lot of really good players to lose from a defense.

When we faced the NFL's #1 offense last year (Philadelphia), how many of those guys played?

Yeah and the Dolphins made the Pats look inept last year, the Lions beat the Vikings, flippin Bears beat the Steelers, etc. Inferior teams beat SB contenders, it happens every year. The Fisher rams did it to us, as did the Arians Cards. Fact of the matter is this team played five games against playoff teams and won only two of those games. We just weren't that good. Our record post-Sherm and Kam was 3-4 and we were 25th in points allowed over that stretch... That's a massive impact many here are smoothing over.

Also by what metric were the Eagles the NFL's number one offense? The Eagles were #3 in points, #8 by DVOA, 7th in drive success rate, 11th in yards per drive. They were pretty damn good, but not amazing.

At the time they played us they were #1. We hurt their average a little.

And you can look at the negative and say a sucky team got lucky, or you can look at the positive and say even down so many big names, our defense is still capable of stopping the best.

Ah, I did not remember that the Eagles were #1 at the time, my b.

I'm not trying to be negative, just realistic. It's great that we did beat them and showed that we were capable of doing so, but in an NFL season it's not about what you're capable of doing, it's what you're consistently able to do that defines you. There are a few exceptions, like the 2011 Giants, but I'd rather be the team that dominated all the way to the #1 seed and lost a few games to inferior opponents than a solid team that punches above its weight a few times a year. The same collection of guys who stifled the Eagles and the Cowboys also let Kerwynn Williams and Drew Stanton move the ball with ease on us at home while it was still possible for us to make the playoffs (Atlanta hadn't won yet).

I think the defense will be better with Maxwell having more time to re-acclimate and Quill having another year of experience, but I'm very concerned about the pass rush because we lost two of our best pressure producers in Mike B and Sheldon.

 

[seahawkfreak]

I just don't see how our O-Line can get any worse barring injury. Let's see how this OC does. Responsibility is on him in regards to play calling and not some ridiculous split decision making. As far as I am concerned we can only improve on the OL, running the ball and play calling.

I have full confidence this will be a fun season and not a frustrating one.

 

[original poster]

I just don't see how our O-Line can get any worse barring injury. Let's see how this OC does. Responsibility is on him in regards to play calling and not some ridiculous split decision making. As far as I am concerned we can only improve on the OL, running the ball and play calling.

I have full confidence this will be a fun season and not a frustrating one.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

 

[Own The West]

I'm between 10-6 and 11-5. This defense is not the legion of boom, so my wavering is based on how long it takes for them to find their new identity.

Our offense will be improved. A) Because it's new and coaches won't be able to game plan against it for 4-5 weeks, and B) Because we stood pat on our line. That should give them continuity and a confidence, which is what they needed most the last few years.

As for the rest of the division:

The Rams are all in. They are loaded, but it's only going to be for this year. They may be a historically good team, or they may implode since everyone's going to have a eye on the door if they have a slow start. Chargers and Vikings could help make that happen.

The 9ers are going to regress to the mean. The 5-0 finish last year won't translate into a 5-0 start this year. First, teams have tape and know what to expect. Second, teams will be paying attention when they play the 9ers this year.

The Cardnials never got over the hump, and now they've regressed. Fitz hasn't retired yet, but will soon. They will be stuck in transition for the next few years.

Back to the Seahawks: We have a winning tradition, just got rid of the old guard on D -- which may have held back the younger voices or competed with Pete's --, and are tooled up to be a much more physical, ball control offense (which will help the D). I think last year was our fall, which wasn't that far, and that we will recover and grow faster than the 9ers and Cards. Next year, after the cap purge in LA, we'll be in a position to control the division again.

 

[ZagHawk]

Okay first off the team always has the potential to become a 12-13 win team if somehow some of the rookies just break out, the team stays healthy, other teams turn out to be worse than we thought they would be, and the new coaching staff also just gels. But realistically all of that is NOT going to happen.


Taking off my blue and green glasses this is what I see as factors to consider:

- The team ended last year at 9 wins and then this is the off-season we're looking at:
- Loss of several probowl (and in some cases All-Pro) caliber players on both sides of the ball : Sherman, Avril, Chancellor (I don't think he's playing), Bennett, Graham, Richardson.
- No rookies really broke out last year (I can't think of one, can you?) to make us think "oh we'll be fine so and so is gone" like how we thought the Hawks would be fine when Rawls looked amazing to replace Lynch
- Arguably the worst O-Line didn't look to be getting any better towards the end of the year, a new coach is a wild card, and its not like they drafted anyone or spent money on a quality FA in this area.
- Arguably your best defensive player (outside of Wagner) is having contract issues and may be unmotivated to play and/or hold out creating more drama within the team. (deny it all you want, just like we denied the drama with previous years and turns out a lot of it was true)
- Anything "GOOD" coming out of the off season, I see it taking at least 2 years to come to fruition...that's not next season
- top the above with the Rams will still kick ass, and the Niners look ready to break out themselves.


That all being said. Can this team win 12-13 games, of course it can. But it's not insulting to believe they may wind up a 6 win team in the end. The Hawks mortgaged the future for the win another SB now teams the past few years that did NOT pan out. This is the result.

 

[hawknation2018]

Which team declined most this offseason?

KC Joyner, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. Mel Kiper gave them his lowest grade of the draft, and their free-agent additions were arguably the least inspiring in the league. Those might be enough to drop Seattle to the bottom of this list, but how in the world did the Seahawks do so little to upgrade the offensive line, which was arguably the worst in the league last season?

Dan Graziano, national NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. The decline obviously started last season, sooner than most of us expected. But losing Michael Bennett, Richard Sherman, Cliff Avril and Sheldon Richardson in the same offseason (with Kam Chancellor's situation still unresolved) is to see a foundation crumble underneath you. Pete Carroll is not to be underestimated as a puzzle-solver, but does he have enough pieces?

Matt Bowen, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. The "Legion of Boom" used to dictate the flow of the game. Play three-deep coverage, challenge routes and physically control the middle of the field. No free passes there. However, with Sherman now in San Francisco, Chancellor facing an uncertain future and a front-four pass rush that must be retooled, the Seahawks have crucial roles to fill on the defensive side of the ball in a division that features quarterbacks Jared Goff and Jimmy Garoppolo.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2347 ... ency-draft

 

[chris98251]

Which team declined most this offseason?

KC Joyner, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. Mel Kiper gave them his lowest grade of the draft, and their free-agent additions were arguably the least inspiring in the league. Those might be enough to drop Seattle to the bottom of this list, but how in the world did the Seahawks do so little to upgrade the offensive line, which was arguably the worst in the league last season?

Dan Graziano, national NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. The decline obviously started last season, sooner than most of us expected. But losing Michael Bennett, Richard Sherman, Cliff Avril and Sheldon Richardson in the same offseason (with Kam Chancellor's situation still unresolved) is to see a foundation crumble underneath you. Pete Carroll is not to be underestimated as a puzzle-solver, but does he have enough pieces?

Matt Bowen, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. The "Legion of Boom" used to dictate the flow of the game. Play three-deep coverage, challenge routes and physically control the middle of the field. No free passes there. However, with Sherman now in San Francisco, Chancellor facing an uncertain future and a front-four pass rush that must be retooled, the Seahawks have crucial roles to fill on the defensive side of the ball in a division that features quarterbacks Jared Goff and Jimmy Garoppolo.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2347 ... ency-draft

Wow the highlighted portion is suppose to make us shake in our boots? Give me a fricken break. This shot at us should be posted in the locker room with a under caption, the Seahawks are losers, the Experts say so.

 

[SeaChat]

The "Experts" said that the Seahawks sucked the year we won the Super Bowl. One thing I've learned over the years is not to put to much weight on what the "Experts" think. A few years back, they had the Colts and Andrew Luck as hands down Super Bowl Champions, who were supposed to go, undefeated the entire season.

I will bet my lot on what John Schneider and Pete Carroll have to say about their chances this season. I seem to recall Pete saying that he was more excited about this current bunch of players, than he has been about any bunch in his coaching career.

I started out early on in the offseason, feeling pretty bleak about our Seahawks prospects in the 2018, and then came Bennett, Sherman, Willson, Richardson’s, Jimmy, which really left me scratching my head, wondering what the heck Pete and John were thinking.

Then as I watched them start to fill those gaps, and begin to assemble a very promising and exciting bunch of players, in their place. I found myself increasingly becoming more hopeful about our chances in 2018-2019.

I think the lesson that was learned by John and Pete over the last few years, was that even in the NFL you have a graduating class of players, and that there comes a time when a "player is no longer with the program", and is no longer teachable, that you need to put past performance or even potential future performance, out of the picture and not let it cloud your judgments, about what is best for the team. The cold hard fact is that in the NFL, it truly is about business. There is no such thing as there is no such thing as standing still, your either moving forward or falling behind.

I think it was made crystal clear to everyone associated with the Seahawks team, at the end of last year that things needed to change, and change fast, or everyone was going to be looking for new jobs, players, coaches, managers, all the way up the food chain. Everything I’ve seen happen during this offseason has been evidence that they are on a mission, and in my humble opinion, are moving forward in a very big way. I look to see big things for the Seahawks this season.

I applaud John and Pete, for making many of the really tough decisions, they have had to make, in order to regain their momentum and standings in their division and in the NFL as a whole. I think we have seen a true return, to the compete for your position philosophy and practice. It seems to me the past couple of seasons that it amounted to not much more than just lip service. That philosophy and practice has worked well for Pete for years and he needs to get back to it and stick to it, if he wants’ to finish out his career in Seattle.

Maybe I’m just a Homer, dreaming of Sunshine and Lollipops, or maybe I'm not. What I am looking for this season is really great things happening in The Emerald City. “I got a Feeling". There are just too many great things that have fallen into place for us in the offseason, for me to imagine anything less than a season that will be remembered as much if not more than any other NFL team in its history. The Magic is back!

Go Seahawks!

 

[Seymour]

Which team declined most this offseason?

KC Joyner, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. Mel Kiper gave them his lowest grade of the draft, and their free-agent additions were arguably the least inspiring in the league. Those might be enough to drop Seattle to the bottom of this list, but how in the world did the Seahawks do so little to upgrade the offensive line, which was arguably the worst in the league last season?

Dan Graziano, national NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. The decline obviously started last season, sooner than most of us expected. But losing Michael Bennett, Richard Sherman, Cliff Avril and Sheldon Richardson in the same offseason (with Kam Chancellor's situation still unresolved) is to see a foundation crumble underneath you. Pete Carroll is not to be underestimated as a puzzle-solver, but does he have enough pieces?

Matt Bowen, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. The "Legion of Boom" used to dictate the flow of the game. Play three-deep coverage, challenge routes and physically control the middle of the field. No free passes there. However, with Sherman now in San Francisco, Chancellor facing an uncertain future and a front-four pass rush that must be retooled, the Seahawks have crucial roles to fill on the defensive side of the ball in a division that features quarterbacks Jared Goff and Jimmy Garoppolo.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2347 ... ency-draft

Wow the highlighted portion is suppose to make us shake in our boots? Give me a fricken break. This shot at us should be posted in the locker room with a under caption, the Seahawks are losers, the Experts say so.

Agree!
Lame to turn Goff and Giraff into world beaters after their short success. How did that turn out for RG knee and Kraep?? :roll:

 

[hawksincebirth]

5-6 wins don’t at me

 

[AROS]

Which team declined most this offseason?

KC Joyner, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. Mel Kiper gave them his lowest grade of the draft

I stopped reading after that statement. As if Kiper's draft assessment means diddly squat to 12's for obvious reasons. :34853_doh:

 

[massari]

It's hard to count them out whenever a healthy Russell Wilson is in there, and now he'll have an actual running game with elite potential.

The defense seems a bit sketchy in some spots though, but that's Carroll's bread and butter. Defense should always remain pretty decent with him and players like Wagner, Wright, Thomas, Clark are in there. Right?

Also no Blair Walsh.

 

[Seymour]

Which team declined most this offseason?

KC Joyner, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. Mel Kiper gave them his lowest grade of the draft

I stopped reading after that statement. As if Kiper's draft assessment means diddly squat to 12's for obvious reasons. :34853_doh:

It means something to me!. It means his moronic anti hawk draft evaluation may be due to blow up in his face again and we well may do better than I expected. I consider that great news!! 8)

 

[massari]

Which team declined most this offseason?

KC Joyner, NFL writer: Seattle Seahawks. Mel Kiper gave them his lowest grade of the draft

I stopped reading after that statement. As if Kiper's draft assessment means diddly squat to 12's for obvious reasons. :34853_doh:

It means something to me!. It means his moronic anti hawk draft evaluation may be due to blow up in his face again and we well may do better than I expected. I consider that great news!! 8)

The guy is a millionaire from doing what he does. I don't think anything is blowing up in his face.

 

[sdog1981]

The "Experts" said that the Seahawks sucked the year we won the Super Bowl.

1000000000000% incorrect. The experts sang the praises of the Seahawks from 2012-2014. 2013 was awesome because every expert had the hawks in the Superbowl and the Seahawks backed up the hype on the field.


2005? I would say yes. During 2005 with every win the experts had a "yeah...but" or "when will the real Seahawks show up?"