Would the best Hawk players be as good on another team

[kpak76]

No. The Seahawks players are all just average NFL players. It's Pete Carroll's magical system that makes them elite.

Are you serious with this?? If so please put down the "juice" and get better.

There are MANY MANY MANY players that would do well in ANY ANY ANY system. PC while an excellent coach does not make everyone all pros on his teams because of his system. The players are all pro players playing in a system that takes advantage of their strengths. Go back to whatever team forum you came from to troll this board.

 

[Seanhawk]

No. The Seahawks players are all just average NFL players. It's Pete Carroll's magical system that makes them elite.

Are you serious with this?? If so please put down the "juice" and get better.

There are MANY MANY MANY players that would do well in ANY ANY ANY system. PC while an excellent coach does not make everyone all pros on his teams because of his system. The players are all pro players playing in a system that takes advantage of their strengths. Go back to whatever team forum you came from to troll this board.

I think if anyone should be called names, it's you. The use of the word magical in his post makes it obvious he was being sarcastic.

 

[Anthony!]

Of course some would be as good, some better.

ML was already pretty good
Et would be as good any place
Rw would be better as he would get to throw more
Sherman as good
Harvin as good
etc

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Of course some would be as good, some better.

ML was already pretty good
Et would be as good any place
Rw would be better as he would get to throw more
Sherman as good
Harvin as good
etc

But haven't guys like Sherman and Lynch played to their potential because Pete has let them be themselves?

I don't think either of these players would be half the player they are if they weren't in this environment where they're allowed to be brash, loud and unique.

Lynch was not the runner he is now wallowing in Buffalo. He was good, but he wasn't 1,500 yards + 12 TD's good. Sherman would have been benched after his first practice fight or outbreak to the media.

 

[Spleenhawk2.0]

Very interesting question - and though we really will not know the answer for sure, you certainly can assume that a number of the marquee players would do well in other systems. But I think generally, as Pete has mentioned time and time again, the Seahawks look for players with unique talent/ability, and seek to maximize that uniqueness. Not sure players would get the same opportunities in other systems.

One thing that always intrigued me about Pete Carroll's USC teams.....his program was arguably the most dominant of the era, yet there were VERY FEW players who transitioned into pro-bowl/all-pro caliber players in the NFL. With all of there dominant play in the USC secondary, I believe that Troy Palamalu is the only Trojan DB selected in the first round, and the only one to see consistent success on the pro level. There are a few success stories - Ryan Kalil, Clay Mathews, Tyron Smith, Brian Cushing, Mike Patterson, and Reggie Bush (plus a few others like Lofa Tatupu who had their careers cut short by injuries). But you look at the history of USC drafts during the 2000's, what stands out to me more are the number of first and second round "busts", or players who never seemed to reach the potential of their draft position. Mark Sanchez, Sedrick Ellis, Keith Rivers, Sam Baker, Lawrence Jackson, Chilo Rachal, Fred Thomas (had a couple of good years), Terrell Thomas (also had a couple of good years), Dwayne Jarrett, Matt Leinhart, Steve Smith, Mike Williams, Taylor Mays, Deuce Lutui, LenDale White, Shaun Cody, Kenechi Udeze, Jacob Rogers, Keary Colbert, and Fili Moala - all first or second round picks, and none lived up to their draft position. I think that the USC system had a way to make really good players look great, and average players look potentially better than they actually were.

I look at the Seahawks as constructed similarly. You have some core talent that would transcend any team or program. But you have some players that may not fit into other schemes or team systems. This is obviously somewhat true for any team - but I think it is much more a reality for the Seahawks. As we have seen, we do things differently. We are able to get the most out of the talent we acquire. We employ more former UDFA's than any other team in the NFL, yet we also have the most talented and deepest rosters? That fact alone screams that the Seahawks have a system in place that brings the best out of our players. I think we will see the results of this as the regular season approaches, and former Seahawks start getting cut from their new teams.

But we shall see over time - and what an awesome position to be in!

 

[chris98251]

Taking a few players off the top of my head.

Russell Wilson, he would have been drafted as a back up not a starter and given the chance to win the position, most coaches would have made the height factor a breaker just like Flutie.

Richard Sherman, too slow, not a natural Corner, needs work.

Kam Chancellor, To slow, not good in coverage, more of a LB then a safety.

Lynch, attitude issues a bad fit as a team player. Can be a average back.

Thats before we got them, the chances of them being impact players were small going anywhere else.



Taking Wilson, you would need to have him in a system that would allow him to improvise and create.

Kam would need the over the top and decent CB play to be the head hunter in the middle.

Lynch, he needs to be himself, trying to fit him in a box didn't work in Buffalo, he wants to feel wanted and respected, unique man that requires some maintenance.

Sherm is good, but again he needs that no fear over the top coverage to give him the opportunity to do what he does best, if thats not there quick fast guys may have a weakness to exploit.

 

[Anthony!]

Of course some would be as good, some better.

ML was already pretty good
Et would be as good any place
Rw would be better as he would get to throw more
Sherman as good
Harvin as good
etc

But haven't guys like Sherman and Lynch played to their potential because Pete has let them be themselves?

I don't think either of these players would be half the player they are if they weren't in this environment where they're allowed to be brash, loud and unique.

Lynch was not the runner he is now wallowing in Buffalo. He was good, but he wasn't 1,500 yards + 12 TD's good. Sherman would have been benched after his first practice fight or outbreak to the media.

Well for one ML has only been a 1500 yard back once in his 4 years here and has had 12 tds twice. So lets get to out of here. There are 2 issues at play opportunity and performance, Would they have gotten the opportunity they got here, for some yes for some no, However now that they have could they perform like they are now for other teams, yes. For instance based on how they are now, there is little doubt some team would take ET and make him a starting Safety and he would perform well, same for Sherman, Kam, ML, Rw.

 

[Anthony!]

Taking a few players off the top of my head.

Russell Wilson, he would have been drafted as a back up not a starter and given the chance to win the position, most coaches would have made the height factor a breaker just like Flutie.

Richard Sherman, too slow, not a natural Corner, needs work.

Kam Chancellor, To slow, not good in coverage, more of a LB then a safety.

Lynch, attitude issues a bad fit as a team player. Can be a average back.

Thats before we got them, the chances of them being impact players were small going anywhere else.



Taking Wilson, you would need to have him in a system that would allow him to improvise and create.

Kam would need the over the top and decent CB play to be the head hunter in the middle.

Lynch, he needs to be himself, trying to fit him in a box didn't work in Buffalo, he wants to feel wanted and respected, unique man that requires some maintenance.

Sherm is good, but again he needs that no fear over the top coverage to give him the opportunity to do what he does best, if thats not there quick fast guys may have a weakness to exploit.

So basically none of them are any good but in our system there for no one should get upset when they are ranked low. I do not by it at all. There is a difference between opportunity and performance, They might not have gotten the opportunity, but now that they have and people can see what they can do, they6 would perform well on any team.

You assessment of Rw being an example of not a good assessment, Rw improvises because he has to either WR cannot get open or o-line plays bad, He has said her prefers staying in the pocket and in the SB you saw what he can do when he has a pocket, he performed great and would with any team that has a decent o-line. This is an example of giving our player far less credit then they deserve.

 

[chris98251]

Taking a few players off the top of my head.

Russell Wilson, he would have been drafted as a back up not a starter and given the chance to win the position, most coaches would have made the height factor a breaker just like Flutie.

Richard Sherman, too slow, not a natural Corner, needs work.

Kam Chancellor, To slow, not good in coverage, more of a LB then a safety.

Lynch, attitude issues a bad fit as a team player. Can be a average back.

Thats before we got them, the chances of them being impact players were small going anywhere else.



Taking Wilson, you would need to have him in a system that would allow him to improvise and create.

Kam would need the over the top and decent CB play to be the head hunter in the middle.

Lynch, he needs to be himself, trying to fit him in a box didn't work in Buffalo, he wants to feel wanted and respected, unique man that requires some maintenance.

Sherm is good, but again he needs that no fear over the top coverage to give him the opportunity to do what he does best, if thats not there quick fast guys may have a weakness to exploit.

So basically none of them are any good but in our system there for no one should get upset when they are ranked low. I do not by it at all. There is a difference between opportunity and performance, They might not have gotten the opportunity, but now that they have and people can see what they can do, they6 would perform well on any team.

You assessment of Rw being an example of not a good assessment, Rw improvises because he has to either WR cannot get open or o-line plays bad, He has said her prefers staying in the pocket and in the SB you saw what he can do when he has a pocket, he performed great and would with any team that has a decent o-line. This is an example of giving our player far less credit then they deserve.

I'm basing it on old school coaching, Ditka benched Flutie for improvising and not staying in the pocket, thats after he won.

How open would Coughlin be to this type of QB, or Dungy, or Arians. It's about what is expected and the vision the staff has about what they expect.

Sherman is a student of the game but his talking and his hips considered stiff and not great CB speed (Burst) would again not make him optimal in many systems that use a 2 deep coverage and pure zone.

Kam would be asked to play linebacker in most systems, although as a SS I think he would be fine.

Lynch already was in another system and had a coach that demoted him not due to talent but due to not being able to either understand him or a personality issue.

As I stated many players that are great in one system or on one team fade from great play after a trade or signing somewhere else. Look at Revis from NY to Tampa as an example.

How great was Randy Moss after Minnesota ? Maybe there are many others that never achieve the success levels they had when they made a name for themselves. Thats what I am stating.

It's not discrediting our own players, I find it insulting actually that someone can't look and see that just because you have success in one situation that you could fail to live up to those standards in another one with different systems, expectations, and value of a person's abilities.

Extrapolating that I don't think our players are good or that they can't be successful somewhere else is completely irrational and closed minded, written in either haste or for sake of argument, I said that they need the right situation to continue to be successful, not just any place or any team. Pete is a genius at finding a strength and building a team of strengths complimenting other players strength to overcome a hole in a players game.

 

[sc85sis]

Very interesting question - and though we really will not know the answer for sure, you certainly can assume that a number of the marquee players would do well in other systems. But I think generally, as Pete has mentioned time and time again, the Seahawks look for players with unique talent/ability, and seek to maximize that uniqueness. Not sure players would get the same opportunities in other systems.

One thing that always intrigued me about Pete Carroll's USC teams.....his program was arguably the most dominant of the era, yet there were VERY FEW players who transitioned into pro-bowl/all-pro caliber players in the NFL. With all of there dominant play in the USC secondary, I believe that Troy Palamalu is the only Trojan DB selected in the first round, and the only one to see consistent success on the pro level. There are a few success stories - Ryan Kalil, Clay Mathews, Tyron Smith, Brian Cushing, Mike Patterson, and Reggie Bush (plus a few others like Lofa Tatupu who had their careers cut short by injuries). But you look at the history of USC drafts during the 2000's, what stands out to me more are the number of first and second round "busts", or players who never seemed to reach the potential of their draft position. Mark Sanchez, Sedrick Ellis, Keith Rivers, Sam Baker, Lawrence Jackson, Chilo Rachal, Fred Thomas (had a couple of good years), Terrell Thomas (also had a couple of good years), Dwayne Jarrett, Matt Leinhart, Steve Smith, Mike Williams, Taylor Mays, Deuce Lutui, LenDale White, Shaun Cody, Kenechi Udeze, Jacob Rogers, Keary Colbert, and Fili Moala - all first or second round picks, and none lived up to their draft position. I think that the USC system had a way to make really good players look great, and average players look potentially better than they actually were.

I look at the Seahawks as constructed similarly. You have some core talent that would transcend any team or program. But you have some players that may not fit into other schemes or team systems. This is obviously somewhat true for any team - but I think it is much more a reality for the Seahawks. As we have seen, we do things differently. We are able to get the most out of the talent we acquire. We employ more former UDFA's than any other team in the NFL, yet we also have the most talented and deepest rosters? That fact alone screams that the Seahawks have a system in place that brings the best out of our players. I think we will see the results of this as the regular season approaches, and former Seahawks start getting cut from their new teams.

But we shall see over time - and what an awesome position to be in!

There is some truth to what you say. It's the reason some people say that USC players are just system players, though I think that's a bit of an oversimplification. It's not the system in the sense most people mean, it's the way Pete looks for and then tries to bring out the best in his players. It's how he looks for their unique qualities, etc. He's also way more patient than many coaches to allow a player to develop over time as long as he sees that guy is genuinely making an effort.

Getting back to those USC players, some of them flamed out due to injury/illness. Keith Rivers had a promising start but hasn't seemed the same post broken jaw; Sam Baker has had injury issues (back surgery, etc.); Steve Smith had to have micro-fracture surgery on his knee and was never the same afterward; Kenechi got cancer and nerve damage from the chemo; Terrell Thomas has blown out his knee three times between USC and the Giants. Some of those other guys haven't been what you'd hope but are still playing. At least two left a year too early--Sanchez didn't have enough starting experience but got freaked out after his kneecap injury; Chilo left because his mom needed surgery and the family couldn't afford it unless he went pro. And then there are the guys who just didn't have the right attitude, work ethic etc., and/or have had other issues (weed, DUIs and so on).

Basically it's a combo of a lot of things, but Pete making guys look better is definitely in that mix.

 

[Anthony!]

Taking a few players off the top of my head.

Russell Wilson, he would have been drafted as a back up not a starter and given the chance to win the position, most coaches would have made the height factor a breaker just like Flutie.

Richard Sherman, too slow, not a natural Corner, needs work.

Kam Chancellor, To slow, not good in coverage, more of a LB then a safety.

Lynch, attitude issues a bad fit as a team player. Can be a average back.

Thats before we got them, the chances of them being impact players were small going anywhere else.



Taking Wilson, you would need to have him in a system that would allow him to improvise and create.

Kam would need the over the top and decent CB play to be the head hunter in the middle.

Lynch, he needs to be himself, trying to fit him in a box didn't work in Buffalo, he wants to feel wanted and respected, unique man that requires some maintenance.

Sherm is good, but again he needs that no fear over the top coverage to give him the opportunity to do what he does best, if thats not there quick fast guys may have a weakness to exploit.

So basically none of them are any good but in our system there for no one should get upset when they are ranked low. I do not by it at all. There is a difference between opportunity and performance, They might not have gotten the opportunity, but now that they have and people can see what they can do, they6 would perform well on any team.

You assessment of Rw being an example of not a good assessment, Rw improvises because he has to either WR cannot get open or o-line plays bad, He has said her prefers staying in the pocket and in the SB you saw what he can do when he has a pocket, he performed great and would with any team that has a decent o-line. This is an example of giving our player far less credit then they deserve.

I'm basing it on old school coaching, Ditka benched Flutie for improvising and not staying in the pocket, thats after he won.

How open would Coughlin be to this type of QB, or Dungy, or Arians. It's about what is expected and the vision the staff has about what they expect.

Sherman is a student of the game but his talking and his hips considered stiff and not great CB speed (Burst) would again not make him optimal in many systems that use a 2 deep coverage and pure zone.

Kam would be asked to play linebacker in most systems, although as a SS I think he would be fine.

Lynch already was in another system and had a coach that demoted him not due to talent but due to not being able to either understand him or a personality issue.

As I stated many players that are great in one system or on one team fade from great play after a trade or signing somewhere else. Look at Revis from NY to Tampa as an example.

How great was Randy Moss after Minnesota ? Maybe there are many others that never achieve the success levels they had when they made a name for themselves. Thats what I am stating.

It's not discrediting our own players, I find it insulting actually that someone can't look and see that just because you have success in one situation that you could fail to live up to those standards in another one with different systems, expectations, and value of a person's abilities.

Extrapolating that I don't think our players are good or that they can't be successful somewhere else is completely irrational and closed minded, written in either haste or for sake of argument, I said that they need the right situation to continue to be successful, not just any place or any team. Pete is a genius at finding a strength and building a team of strengths complimenting other players strength to overcome a hole in a players game.

But you see that is the problem there are more new school coaches than old now, and add in the new school QB has shown they can win and do it consistently. If you are talking back in the 70s you might be right but we are in the 2000s and coaches around the league see the value in a Qb who can not only throw from the pocket, but improvise to help the team win, and in the end it is about winning. As to the rest again I disagree, when you have great players coaches finds ways to use them and you are giving way to little credit to our players to think they would not be good anyplace but here. And for most of the players in question they could succeed anyplace, and most coaches will put them in the right position to succeed.

 

[chrispy]

I think there are a few players that would be better on other teams.

ET is required to cover a huge section of the field to allow the corners to be more aggressive and allow Kam to work the middle. If Thomas was in a system where he wasn't required to cover such a large area, he'd have more flexibility to use his speed and react to the ball knowing there was help on the sides/corners. I think he'd be better in a different system, at least his stats would be more indicative of his abilities.

I think you could make the argument that Baldwin might be in that category too. Perhaps Mebane too. At least he'd get more appreciation if it weren't for all the LEOs and Ends we have have. I'd also suggest that Zach Miller would have had much better numbers if he weren't here blocking since he left Oakland. Of course Miller's situation isn't a FO issue. It's an injury result. But he's a great TE and has spent a lot of snaps blocking while new regime Jimmy and Gronk have been running up yardage.

To the original question, I think there's a general answer and then specific exceptions. In general, I think this FO gets more out of players. My prediction is, though, that Tate will have bigger numbers in Detroit this year. So a blanket statement is too general.

Another aspect, briefly mentioned above, is that a huge % of Seahawk high contributors would probably not even be in the league without this FOs vision and attitude. So that obviously has an impact on whether they'd be better or worse elsewhere....

 

[Anthony!]

I think there are a few players that would be better on other teams.

ET is required to cover a huge section of the field to allow the corners to be more aggressive and allow Kam to work the middle. If Thomas was in a system where he wasn't required to cover such a large area, he'd have more flexibility to use his speed and react to the ball knowing there was help on the sides/corners. I think he'd be better in a different system, at least his stats would be more indicative of his abilities.

I think you could make the argument that Baldwin might be in that category too. Perhaps Mebane too. At least he'd get more appreciation if it weren't for all the LEOs and Ends we have have. I'd also suggest that Zach Miller would have had much better numbers if he weren't here blocking since he left Oakland. Of course Miller's situation isn't a FO issue. It's an injury result. But he's a great TE and has spent a lot of snaps blocking while new regime Jimmy and Gronk have been running up yardage.

To the original question, I think there's a general answer and then specific exceptions. In general, I think this FO gets more out of players. My prediction is, though, that Tate will have bigger numbers in Detroit this year. So a blanket statement is too general.

Another aspect, briefly mentioned above, is that a huge % of Seahawk high contributors would probably not even be in the league without this FOs vision and attitude. So that obviously has an impact on whether they'd be better or worse elsewhere....

You could argue some might be better on other teams, ADB being one, more targets more catches, RW being another more passing better numbers.

 

[chris98251]

Those are Fantasy football stats arguments, not better player or better team arguments, how many teams with better stats last year won the Super Bowl?

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

I actually feel a lot of our players could succeed elsewhere in any system, off the top of my head:

Wilson
Lynch
Harvin
Baldwin
Miller
Okung
Unger
Luke Willson
Mebane
Bennett
Avril
Williams
Wagner
Wright
Sherman
Thomas
Chancellor
Ryan
Hauscka

But at the same a lot of these guys would never have gotten the opportunity and the coaching support they would of have had here that allowed them to thrive at their own strengths.... kind of the whole what came first the chicken or the egg debate. Take the Legion of Boom, they are the best group in the league not because they all have All-Pro talent individually but because their strengths all compement each other very well in the system. They likely could be just as good in any other system but it doesn't mean their respective 2ndary units will be better if they don't have other players complementing. Football is an ultimate team sport and its the truth.

 

[ZagHawk]

Just curious what everybody thinks here. Would players such as Sherm, Russ, ET, Kam, Beast, etc... be considered as good as they are right now if they had played on another team or in another system? Maybe a better way to put it is how good would they be if they never became Hawks playing under Pete and the rest of the bunch? Are they great players or a product of what has been put in place here? To use one player as an example IMO Sherm would have a tough time being as good as he is right now on most other teams. Obviously it depends on what team and situation they would be put in so give you best opinion/analysis.

IMO regarding the LOB. As a unit obviously they all contribute to the overall effectiveness. IMO here is how they contribute to the overall effectiveness individually:

ET = 35%, RS = 30%, Kam = 25%, Maxwell = 10%.

I know the Maxwell number seems low, but that's the best way I can breakdown the 100% while keeping in mind ET, RS and Kam are all All-Pro/Probowlers. And ET is hands down the best safety in the game, while RS is at least top 3 depending on what your argument is.

Either way. I think they all would fair very well on other teams, but their overall effectiveness would drop a significant amount without the other units in the LOB.

Maxwell however, may actually do better without the others, just because the others being as strong as they are, and him being seen as the weak link of the LOB by other teams. He gets a lot of "opportunity".

As for Russ and Beast. I actually think our O-Line flat out sucks as a unit. and Russ and Beast would fair so much better on some other teams with good O-Lines. I think Russ and Beast are THE REASON our O-Line gets away being the weak link on the Seahawks team. If Russ was a statue-QB and didn't have his amazing scrambling ability and/or if Beast wasn't a RB who could go BeastMode. I guarantee there would be no SB championship.

 

[LargentFan]

A lot of the difficulty in answering this question is based on revising history. "Would X-player have gotten the opportunity to play in another city?"
What if we change the question a bit to make it a little easier to answer.
Imagine the Seahawks are disbanded and all players instantly become free agents. How would key players do in the open market?

Russell Wilson
Not our best player(close) but undoubtedly our most valuable. A huge bidding war would ensue. A lot of teams would sell their souls to get a player like him. Minnesota(maybe), Tampa, Arizona, New York(Jets), Miami(maybe), Buffalo, Tennessee, Jacksonville, Houston, KC(maybe) and Oakland would all throw their hats into the ring. I cringe to think of Wilson as a Raider...maybe he'd look good with the Jets? Regardless, big money, immediate start. Likely less wins and possibly better stats due to being asked to do more.

Marshawn Lynch
Tough to say here. I could see him getting a two year deal somewhere and doing fine. He'd be scary behind a better offensive line. My guess is that he'd get snatched up by a team that already has a solid roster and needs one more piece. Denver maybe?

Percy Harvin
He'd get a good contract somewhere. Fear of injury might make the money drop a bit, but he'd be fine.

Doug Baldwin
I might get hate for this, but he gets good numbers because he is featured in our offense due to lack of options. He's a solid player, but he'd be the third guy on a LOT of teams. I love him, but his size limits him somewhat. He'd get picked up somewhere, but wouldn't set the world on fire.

Jermaine Kearse
His situation is similar to Baldwin, but he has better size. He'd land somewhere, but would end up being that guy you have on your fantasy team in case your top three guys are on bye or get hurt.

Offensive line
I am sure many of them would land somewhere. It's no secret that our line isn't great. Probably Unger and Okung would start for a handful of teams.

Earl Thomas
I think he is the best player we have on our roster. He'd start in place of any guy at his position on any team in the league. That said, some teams don't have need there, so he wouldn't get picked up by just anyone. Still, he'd be a huge part of the rebuild of some team's crappy defense. Big money deal.

Kam Chancellor
I was shocked to see him rated in the 80s on the top 100 players. That means that either we overrate him as a fanbase, or the rest of the world underrates him. Hard to put down the blue and green goggles and look at him unbiased, so I'm going to pretend it's the rest of the world that is crazy. I think he'd start on most teams. Regardless, he'd land somewhere and get good money.

Richard Sherman
He'd piss off the entire fanbase of a good team by forcing them to start to like him. It's en vogue around the country to hate Sherman, but that would change instantly for the fans of whatever team he goes to. Once they start to pay attention to who he really is, he'd become a fan favorite. I see him going somewhere that already has a good defense and needs help at corner. I could see him landing in San Fran and making us all puke...big money deal wherever he lands.

Linebackers
Our linebackers would all find spots around the league. We have some good players here, but none are going to make teams fall all over themselves.

Defensive Line
Similar to the linebackers, but a little better. We have a few dudes that would get some good money elsewhere.

Special Teams
Haushka and Ryan would find homes. Both are proven commodities.