Are some over thinking SPARC? TAF (Or whatever it is)?

truehawksfan · Apr 29, 2016

I recently posted a link from a comment made by JS. He basically said, the gold standard is to bring a physical brand of play. He and PC wanted to build a team that played like Pittsburgh or Baltimore. And, that's what brought Seattle a Super Bowl Champion.

Recently, the FO and coaching staff got too cute and we, as fans, followed with SPARC, split times, who's Seahawky ... making athletic ability the priority, not toughness or grit -- which by the way got the city a championship.

They signed two OLinemen and this placed went crazy. Why? Because they were not SPARC-Y enough. The team signed Clemons and BB and everyone thinks they are camp fodder. They are here to bring a physical type of ball....and I see Clemons take on a role similar to Lawyer Milloy -- when he tutored BamBam. Clemons will definitely help Clark and Marsh. As for BB, well, I see him kicking Larry Fitzgerald's ass when he lines up in the slot....and any big WR who thinks they'll run free just by lining up in the slot.

Now, the Hawks select two big bodied, physical players with their first two draft selections. Sorry no athletic guys like OT Spriggs. And they added a TE who can actually block.

Cable was hired because he built tough, physical, lines that will kick your ass. Robert Gallery and Paul McQuistan were not SPARC-Y, nor were James Carpenter or Breno - both starters on the SB winning team.

This offseason, this draft year is a sign the FO and coaches are going back to the type of players and play that won a SB. Sorry, no more Money Ball. No more SPARC-Y Ball. No Spread Offense Ball. This is going to be good 'ol physical Football.

And, I like being the bullies.....again.

dopeboy206 · Apr 29, 2016

truehawksfan":2s1sd60a said:
Cable was hired because he built tough, physical, lines that will kick your ass. Robert Gallery and Paul McQuistan were not SPARC-Y, nor were James Carpenter or Breno - both starters on the SB winning team.

Those guys u mentioned are nothing to write home about lol. Gallery was a bust and if James Carpenter is the best of the bunch u mentioned than we fans have a right to be worried. Wasn't Moffit a "so called" Tom Cable kind of guy also and a player he really wanted? And you didn't mention Justin Britt who has no business starting on any NFL team or even be in the NFL for that matter. The guy plays with no heart. lol. If these OL we just drafted don't pan out Cable has got to go.

NYCoug · Apr 30, 2016

truehawksfan":ly0805bl said:
I recently posted a link from a comment made by JS. He basically said, the gold standard is to bring a physical brand of play. He and PC wanted to build a team that played like Pittsburgh or Baltimore. And, that's what brought Seattle a Super Bowl Champion.

Recently, the FO and coaching staff got too cute and we, as fans, followed with SPARC, split times, who's Seahawky ... making athletic ability the priority, not toughness or grit -- which by the way got the city a championship.

They signed two OLinemen and this placed went crazy. Why? Because they were not SPARC-Y enough. The team signed Clemons and BB and everyone thinks they are camp fodder. They are here to bring a physical type of ball....and I see Clemons take on a role similar to Lawyer Milloy -- when he tutored BamBam. Clemons will definitely help Clark and Marsh. As for BB, well, I see him kicking Larry Fitzgerald's ass when he lines up in the slot....and any big WR who thinks they'll run free just by lining up in the slot.

Now, the Hawks select two big bodied, physical players with their first two draft selections. Sorry no athletic guys like OT Spriggs. And they added a TE who can actually block.

Cable was hired because he built tough, physical, lines that will kick your ass. Robert Gallery and Paul McQuistan were not SPARC-Y, nor were James Carpenter or Breno - both starters on the SB winning team.

This offseason, this draft year is a sign the FO and coaches are going back to the type of players and play that won a SB. Sorry, no more Money Ball. No more SPARC-Y Ball. No Spread Offense Ball. This is going to be good 'ol physical Football.

And, I like being the bullies.....again.

Bingo! This right here, all of this! I was worried that the team was being consumed with Sparq and all these other whacky permutations that were taking away the human element from football. And as you mention, that's what won us our first and only championship.

I absolutely love this draft so far because it's re-established what this whole thing was built on. Toughness, heart, grit, all of those things that CAN'T be measured by a formula.

Also, I really love this draft because it's re-established the unpredictable nature of Pete and John Schneider and our staff. There were seriously people who thought they had these dudes figured out! And for a second there, I was worried that us simpleton's had figured them out with so many people mocking Ifedi to us in Round 1 and it coming to fruition

Luckily, these guys are still staying way ahead of the curve. You can't measure the "bully" in a prospect, but you can see it through scouting and that's what these guys have done this year.

Kudos to our fearless leaders, who the blogosphere will no doubt be upset with because they made them look bad. Can't wait for the final encore today!

Largent80 · Apr 30, 2016

Back to basics.....KICK SOME ASS!!!!!!!!!

McGruff · Apr 30, 2016

While there are some recognizable outliers this year, let's not fool ourselves.

Germaine Ifedi is a Sparq star.

CJ Prosser is a Sparq star. He's also a guy with one year at the position.

Nick Vannett's score is incormplete, but he had an elite short shuttle and great 3 cone. He's an athlete. His own coach said he was weak coming in and is a late bloomer whose best is still ahead of him.

Those guys are classic Seahawks picks. Now to the Outliers.

Rees Obhiamo is coming off injuries and sk I'd mark him as incomplete on Sparq. Even so, I'd be willing to bet he the least athletic linemen we've had since Bowie, but when healthy I'd put him In the Carpenter and Moffit camp.

Reed is tough to gauge since we don't have a profile for 1 tech. Mebane was here forever and was a rock. A picture of health and consistency for so long that he is the standard. And if that is the case, Reed actually measures MORE atheltic than Mebane. By quite a bit in fact.

I don't think we can throw Sparq out the window just yet.

NYCoug · Apr 30, 2016

Not out the window, of course. However, it seems that they've struck a more balanced approach. Balance, after all, is one of the keys to life.

Throwing Sparq out the window would be foolish because a lot of good can come from it's inclusion to the process. It can't, and shouldn't, be the be all and end all when it comes to the Draft. I'm diggin' the more balanced approach.

Seahawkwalt1967 · Apr 30, 2016

McGruff":21r63n68 said:
While there are some recognizable outliers this year, let's not fool ourselves.

Germaine Ifedi is a Sparq star.

CJ Prosser is a Sparq star. He's also a guy with one year at the position.

Nick Vannett's score is incormplete, but he had an elite short shuttle and great 3 cone. He's an athlete. His own coach said he was weak coming in and is a late bloomer whose best is still ahead of him.

Those guys are classic Seahawks picks. Now to the Outliers.

Rees Obhiamo is coming off injuries and sk I'd mark him as incomplete on Sparq. Even so, I'd be willing to bet he the least athletic linemen we've had since Bowie, but when healthy I'd put him In the Carpenter and Moffit camp.

Reed is tough to gauge since we don't have a profile for 1 tech. Mebane was here forever and was a rock. A picture of health and consistency for so long that he is the standard. And if that is the case, Reed actually measures MORE atheltic than Mebane. By quite a bit in fact.

I don't think we can throw Sparq out the window just yet.

+1

bjornanderson21 · Apr 30, 2016

truehawksfan":3erj03wm said:
I recently posted a link from a comment made by JS. He basically said, the gold standard is to bring a physical brand of play. He and PC wanted to build a team that played like Pittsburgh or Baltimore. And, that's what brought Seattle a Super Bowl Champion.

Recently, the FO and coaching staff got too cute and we, as fans, followed with SPARC, split times, who's Seahawky ... making athletic ability the priority, not toughness or grit -- which by the way got the city a championship.

They signed two OLinemen and this placed went crazy. Why? Because they were not SPARC-Y enough. The team signed Clemons and BB and everyone thinks they are camp fodder. They are here to bring a physical type of ball....and I see Clemons take on a role similar to Lawyer Milloy -- when he tutored BamBam. Clemons will definitely help Clark and Marsh. As for BB, well, I see him kicking Larry Fitzgerald's ass when he lines up in the slot....and any big WR who thinks they'll run free just by lining up in the slot.

Now, the Hawks select two big bodied, physical players with their first two draft selections. Sorry no athletic guys like OT Spriggs. And they added a TE who can actually block.

Cable was hired because he built tough, physical, lines that will kick your ass. Robert Gallery and Paul McQuistan were not SPARC-Y, nor were James Carpenter or Breno - both starters on the SB winning team.

This offseason, this draft year is a sign the FO and coaches are going back to the type of players and play that won a SB. Sorry, no more Money Ball. No more SPARC-Y Ball. No Spread Offense Ball. This is going to be good 'ol physical Football.

And, I like being the bullies.....again.

I don't necessarily agree with the premise, but i hate hate hate all this SPARQ crap. It has not been a good indicator of NFL success.

It takes a certain minimim athletic ability to make it in the NFL, but it also takes a certain toughness and level of football ability to make it in the NFL too.

I 100% feel that the Hawks adjusted their criteria too far to the athletic side and have said for a while how much I hate SPARQ.

Being an "athletic freak" (a term that gets used waaaaaaaaaaay too much on this board) just makes them a super athletic bust if they can't actually play football.

I can see SPARQ being useful for DE and LB where the players are expected to have some serious muscle mass while still having speed. Their ability to move that mass quickly is important.

But offensive line? Their most basic fundamental trait is their ability to do the OPPOSITE of what SPARQ is all about. Offensive linemen NEED TO BE ABLE TO DROP ANCHOR.

The Hawks have been fooling themselves for years on OL and that's a big reason why our offensive line has been so bad/mediocre.

They have been so focused on the player's ability to block at the 2nd level that they didn't even care if he could block at the LOS.

That was extremely flawed thinking and I hope the Hawks are realizing their mistakes.

McGruff · Apr 30, 2016

bjornanderson21":1r870v3d said:
But offensive line? Their most basic fundamental trait is their ability to do the OPPOSITE of what SPARQ is all about. Offensive linemen NEED TO BE ABLE TO DROP ANCHOR.

I think that's a really limited definition of what an offensive linemen does in today's NFL. Really limited. In fact, if that is what you shoot for, you will have a line that will get killed.

Hasselbeck · Apr 30, 2016

bjornanderson21":3jaavn2j said:
They have been so focused on the player's ability to block at the 2nd level that they didn't even care if he could block at the LOS.

I agree with your opinion that relying too much on SPARQ is a bad idea. That pure athleticism doesn't translate to becoming a good player at this level. If that were the case we'd be drafting college track and field stars.. so I get what you're saying there.

However, I disagree with the above quote. I don't think it was necessarily them focusing on 2nd level blocking, but rather Tom Cable believes (and rightfully so for the most part) that most OL come into the NFL now so poorly coached and prepped for a pro-style offense that you're almost better off just grabbing cheap athletic alternatives and coach them up to become capable linemen. Also - when you have a roster filled with stars at QB, TE, DE, CB, S, LB, etc. That's expensive to keep in tact, so you have to cut cost somewhere. For Seattle.. that somewhere has been the OL.

I have always felt that we need to find a happy medium between the two ideas though. Cheap athletic alternatives to play on our OL are good in theory, but some of the best OL in this teams history were FAR from superior athletes. Robbie Tobeck for example was a guy that just got s*it done. Chris Gray was a swiss army knife and would never be confused for a SPARQ star yet he was a pretty decent option at guard. The Breno's, The Carp's, etc. None of these guys were overwhelmingly awesome athletes, but they were lunchpail guys on that line.

I don't mind taking some shots in the late rounds at a SPARQ superstar, but I also would like to see us more open to a Ryan Kelly type center. A Nick Martin type guard and so forth.

cover-2 · Apr 30, 2016

bjornanderson21":3lsyt7wm said:
truehawksfan":3lsyt7wm said:

I recently posted a link from a comment made by JS. He basically said, the gold standard is to bring a physical brand of play. He and PC wanted to build a team that played like Pittsburgh or Baltimore. And, that's what brought Seattle a Super Bowl Champion.

Recently, the FO and coaching staff got too cute and we, as fans, followed with SPARC, split times, who's Seahawky ... making athletic ability the priority, not toughness or grit -- which by the way got the city a championship.

They signed two OLinemen and this placed went crazy. Why? Because they were not SPARC-Y enough. The team signed Clemons and BB and everyone thinks they are camp fodder. They are here to bring a physical type of ball....and I see Clemons take on a role similar to Lawyer Milloy -- when he tutored BamBam. Clemons will definitely help Clark and Marsh. As for BB, well, I see him kicking Larry Fitzgerald's ass when he lines up in the slot....and any big WR who thinks they'll run free just by lining up in the slot.

Now, the Hawks select two big bodied, physical players with their first two draft selections. Sorry no athletic guys like OT Spriggs. And they added a TE who can actually block.

Cable was hired because he built tough, physical, lines that will kick your ass. Robert Gallery and Paul McQuistan were not SPARC-Y, nor were James Carpenter or Breno - both starters on the SB winning team.

This offseason, this draft year is a sign the FO and coaches are going back to the type of players and play that won a SB. Sorry, no more Money Ball. No more SPARC-Y Ball. No Spread Offense Ball. This is going to be good 'ol physical Football.

And, I like being the bullies.....again.

Click to expand...

I don't necessarily agree with the premise, but i hate hate hate all this SPARQ crap. It has not been a good indicator of NFL success.

It takes a certain minimim athletic ability to make it in the NFL, but it also takes a certain toughness and level of football ability to make it in the NFL too.

I 100% feel that the Hawks adjusted their criteria too far to the athletic side and have said for a while how much I hate SPARQ.

Being an "athletic freak" (a term that gets used waaaaaaaaaaay too much on this board) just makes them a super athletic bust if they can't actually play football.

I can see SPARQ being useful for DE and LB where the players are expected to have some serious muscle mass while still having speed. Their ability to move that mass quickly is important.

But offensive line? Their most basic fundamental trait is their ability to do the OPPOSITE of what SPARQ is all about. Offensive linemen NEED TO BE ABLE TO DROP ANCHOR.

The Hawks have been fooling themselves for years on OL and that's a big reason why our offensive line has been so bad/mediocre.

They have been so focused on the player's ability to block at the 2nd level that they didn't even care if he could block at the LOS.

That was extremely flawed thinking and I hope the Hawks are realizing their mistakes.

SPARQ is just a small tool to help with the whole scouting process. Some may value SPARQ scores a little too much, but IMO it needs to be part of the evaluation.

two dog · Apr 30, 2016

It has always been important.

If the cave man is going to get away from the sabre toothed tiger,
he better have a good 10 yard split.

TeamoftheCentury · May 1, 2016

cover-2":1qxt9l3c said:
SPARQ is just a small tool to help with the whole scouting process. Some may value SPARQ scores a little too much, but IMO it needs to be part of the evaluation.

Yeah, the assessment tool isn't a problem for the real evaluators doing the actual work. SPARQ "bullies" on .net, on the other hand, can get a bit obnoxious at times, though. Lol

You all know who you are. If you don't know or are reluctant to admit you have a problem, ask yourself if you felt the Hawks were obligated to draft McGovern? If so, raise your right hand, say your screen name, and admit you're a SPARQ-A-HOLIC. Just keeping it real. :lol: I appreciate those folks, though.

The thing about this is we're privileged to learn about such things these days, but then personal pride to "crack the code" or whatever kicks in and then they're intolerant to posts about players that don't fit their opinion and they "back it up" with numbers - all sauced up on the Sparq-aid. To be fair, I don't think there's ANYONE who looks ONLY at SPARQ. But, it's absolutely true that there are those that see it as a necessary qualifier for prospects the Seahawks would consider. I don't quite see it that way - but, I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater either.

Are some over thinking SPARC? TAF (Or whatever it is)?

truehawksfan

New member

dopeboy206

Active member

NYCoug

New member

Largent80

New member

McGruff

New member

NYCoug

New member

Seahawkwalt1967

Active member

bjornanderson21

New member

McGruff

New member

Hasselbeck

New member

cover-2

New member

two dog

New member

TeamoftheCentury

Well-known member

Similar threads

Latest posts