Bruce Irvin

I believe that Bruce Irvin owes an eternal debt of thanks and gratitude to Russell Wilson and to a slightly lesser extent, Bobby Wagner. Never in the history of this franchise has a former 1st round pick been given so much patience in his development. The guy drafted in the 1st round the year before him has gotten way more scrutiny by we the fans than Irvin. They have both had similar careers in terms of production at their positions. They have each changed positions. The only difference is that James Carpenter doesn't have the luxery of having all-universe players picked after him.

It seems like the perception is that RW is the 1st rounder and Irvin is the 3rd rounder. If RW had not been a part of this draft class, would we all be clamoring to move on from the Irvin mistake? To me BI is an afterthought on this team. I like the potential he brings and certainly don't dislike him.

Is this his make or break year? Or does that even apply to him?

If we're still holding a player's round of selection against him, we're doing it wrong.

oldhawkfan":3kb0jz0l said:

Never in the history of this franchise has a former 1st round pick been given so much patience in his development. The guy drafted in the 1st round the year before him has gotten way more scrutiny by we the fans than Irvin.

Click to expand...

Players like Aaron Curry, Jerramy Stevens, Koren Robinson, Lamar King, and Rick Mirer were all first rounders given a lot of slack and never lived up to their first round rating. I don't agree that you can give easily give Irvin the "never in the history of this franchise label" in what you're saying. Irvin had a decent rookie season and was at least decent at LB (he certainly wasn't a massive weakness); just compare the guy to Curry to put things in perspective.

oldhawkfan":3kb0jz0l said:

The only difference is that James Carpenter doesn't have the luxery of having all-universe players picked after him.

Click to expand...

Wagner and Wilson are the only high-end players drafted after Irvin (although some of those other guys are pretty good). KJ Wright, Richard Sherman, and Byron Maxwell (even Malcom Smith) were all drafted after Carpenter. If you want to compare drafts, they're at least on par (you could certainly make the argument that more impact players were taken after Carpenter than Irvin).

Irvin was great his first year when he was a pass rush specialist. He led all rookies in sacks.

Last year he was learning a new position and had way less opportunities for sacks. He had a couple good games last year but was inconsistent and Smith took off. Irvin saw less and less time because as it came down to crunch time he was not the best fit out there. We didn't have time for a guy to be learning on the job and going through struggles while we're in a playoff run.

So, yeah, last year was kind of a down year for Irvin, but his first year most people thought he was great. Our image of him was tainted by the Atlanta game when he was thrust into the LEO role and expected to single-handedly save our pass rush. Those expectations were unfair and when he failed, people kind of soured on him. Add in last year's experiment and you get threads like this.

Irvin still has a lot of talent and next year I have a feeling we're going to see him return to more of the role that he had his rookie year to take advantage of his strengths.

HawkFan72":3oz8s9ga said:

Irvin was great his first year when he was a pass rush specialist. He led all rookies in sacks.

Last year he was learning a new position and had way less opportunities for sacks. He had a couple good games last year but was inconsistent and Smith took off. Irvin saw less and less time because as it came down to crunch time he was not the best fit out there. We didn't have time for a guy to be learning on the job and going through struggles while we're in a playoff run.

So, yeah, last year was kind of a down year for Irvin, but his first year most people thought he was great. Our image of him was tainted by the Atlanta game when he was thrust into the LEO role and expected to single-handedly save our pass rush. Those expectations were unfair and when he failed, people kind of soured on him. Add in last year's experiment and you get threads like this.

Irvin still has a lot of talent and next year I have a feeling we're going to see him return to more of the role that he had his rookie year to take advantage of his strengths.

Click to expand...

Good post, except for the part about Smith taking Irvin's reps. K.J. Wright took Irvin's reps at SLB in the last two games, while Smith played the WLB position in the last six games after Wright got hurt.

In the Super Bowl, Wright played 50 reps at SLB, while Irvin played just 17.

In the NFCCG, Irvin and Wright split the snap count at SLB with Irvin playing 23 snaps and Wright playing 16.

IN the NFC Division, Wright was still out, so Irvin took every rep at SLB and Smith took every rep at WLB; however, Smith left the field for 22 reps when they went to the nickel formation with either Thurmond or Lane.

Wright plays the pass better than Irvin, but I honestly think Irvin is better against the run. That's why you so them vary game to game in snap count.

Irvin in his first year playing LB is light years better than Aaron Curry after 10 years playing the position. Not worried about Irvin at all.

There's only so many plays to be made, when everyone is a playmaker it gets harder to get numbers. So what exactly is the problem with Bruce? And please tell me how he's hurting the team other than the hyperbole that was made in the original post. He does his job, if he didn't do his job Pete wouldn't play him.

I can feel what the OP is saying though, simply because Irvin hasn't become a dominant player like we'd hoped. You'd generally want a first round pick to be a difference maker, and I see Irvin as a good role player. Having the amount of amazing talent around him should help make him make more plays, not less (IMO).

I'm certainly not saying he's a bust like Curry, but more that you'd hope he turned into that difference maker on defense, either in pass rushing or LEO LB, which he simply isn't.

I think Irvin was a difference maker on defense as a rookie when he was allowed to get after the QB. The coaches seem somewhat overly determined to fit a square peg (Irvin) into a round hole (SLB) because they know they won't be able to keep both Wright and Smith next year and could very easily lose both. With the release of Clemons, there is now a great opportunity for Irvin to split time at LEO and SLB. That would give Irvin an opportunity to both develop more at SLB and do what he does best: rush the passer on third downs.

Never in the history of what the hell are you talking about

Aaron Rodgers didn't start a game for 3 years after being drafted

themunn":3h9xu1bb said:

Never in the history of what the hell are you talking about

Aaron Rodgers didn't start a game for 3 years after being drafted

Click to expand...

Never in the history has Aaron Rodgers played for the Seahawks.

themunn":20m96yrt said:

Never in the history of what the hell are you talking about

Aaron Rodgers didn't start a game for 3 years after being drafted

Click to expand...

Reading is your friend.

Never in the history of this franchise . Aaron Rodgers does not play for the Seahawks.

Hope to see more of this from Irvin:



Irvin led all NFL rookies with 8.0 sacks and 19 quarterback hits in 2012. The fact that he didn't replicate those stats in 2013 was due to the fact that the coaches moved him to a foreign position and took him off the field on third downs, rather than allow him rush the passer. I think the fans have more patience with the coaches' usage of Irvin than with Irvin himself, since he has already proven he can get after the QB when provided that opportunity.

RockHawk":o9orvijm said:

I can feel what the OP is saying though, simply because Irvin hasn't become a dominant player like we'd hoped. You'd generally want a first round pick to be a difference maker, and I see Irvin as a good role player. Having the amount of amazing talent around him should help make him make more plays, not less (IMO).

I'm certainly not saying he's a bust like Curry, but more that you'd hope he turned into that difference maker on defense, either in pass rushing or LEO LB, which he simply isn't.

Click to expand...

^ this.

fridayfrenzy":2og2cf0l said:

themunn":2og2cf0l said:

Never in the history of what the hell are you talking about

Aaron Rodgers didn't start a game for 3 years after being drafted

Click to expand...

Reading is your friend.

Never in the history of this franchise . Aaron Rodgers does not play for the Seahawks.

Click to expand...

Oh you're right, that makes all the difference. My point is he's been here for 2 years, the best QB in the league sat for 3 years and that worked out well enough in the end, why can't it work for us? We knew Irvin was raw when we drafted him.

How about

James Carpenter
Koren Robinson
Kelly Jennings
Chris Spencer

That's just from the last 15 years

You're talking about a guy who has 2 seasons under his belt, a guy who led all rookies in sacks and then changed to a position he's never played before.
What exactly are you expecting from him.
If anything he's been our best 1st round draft pick not called Earl Thomas since Marcus Trufant. And yeah I'm including Okung in there because Okung has yet to manage a 16 games season in his 4 year career. Who in the 17 remaining first round picks in 2012 has been better? Chandler Jones is the only one that could make a case for it.

No worries Area 51 will justify the pick . :2: :snack:

First, Irvin is progressing and contributing as we need him to.

Second, the idea that a 1st round pick should always be a top tier player is not really supported by the math. The goal in a 1st round pick is to obtain a player that is a starter and has a certain % chance to be above average, as well as a certain % chance to be pro-bowl type (top 10% by position).

There are 32 NFL teams. The average NFL player has a career that lasts 3 years, however some players (the top tier players often) have much longer careers. I imagine the average consistent player has a career of 5-6 years based on that.

Then factor in that you also expect a certain % of your 2nd round, 3rd round, etc. picks to become starters as well as a certain % of them to be above average. The math simply will not let every 1st round pick bear out, and in fact a large % of 1st round picks become solid but not spectacular starters. Does that mean that the large % of 1st picks "fail"?

The Hawks already hit on the lower round picks with ridiculous accuracy, so we really don't "need" a higher level of 1st round picks to hit anyway. What we do need is for our 1st round picks to become solid contributors and added depth, both of which Irvin contributes.

Yes, Irvin is a top 10 pick and yes you expect a greater # of top ten picks to hit well. But it is also true that pass rushing is highly valued and so you tend to pay a premium for it. Which means you cannot reasonably project the same success rate as even a player picked after - since again you are forced to overpay (in draft slots) for production when it comes to a pass rusher. This is why Clowney is likely going to go in the top three of the next draft, even though he should not even be in the top five.

Also, it bears mentioning that since we blitz less than most teams, we do not give the same opportunities to a pass rushing specialist LB. Not playing the end means he won't put up the gaudy #s, it doesn't mean he isn't working out for us.

His stats year 1 looked good on appear but it was pretty obvious he had a lot to learn. Literally disappeared in games and got sacks mainly against bad o lines. Year 2 was a transition year so I will give him a pass but he better show more this year. I absolutely hated the pick when we took him and hope I'm wrong in the long run but think he will not ever be better then average at best.

I didn't realize there were so many Irvin fans on this board. My OP was simply a matter of attempting to state that Bruce Irvin has lower expectations than any other 1st rounder the SEAHAWKS have drafted in the 1st round mainly because of the success of Russell Wilson.

I like Bruce Irvin. I like his potential. IMHO he has less pressure as a 1st rounder to succeed.
BTW, of his 8 sacks as a rookie, 7 of those came in the first 10 games. So over his last 23 games he has recorded 4 sacks.

seabowl":23l0o8yz said:

His stats year 1 looked good on appear but it was pretty obvious he had a lot to learn. Literally disappeared in games and got sacks mainly against bad o lines. Year 2 was a transition year so I will give him a pass but he better show more this year. I absolutely hated the pick when we took him and hope I'm wrong in the long run but think he will not ever be better then average at best.

Click to expand...

As a rookie, Irvin had three game changing two-sack performances: against GB in the Fail Mary game, at Carolina in a tight game, and against the Jets. He also had a sack in the playoffs that took out RGIII.

Hopefully, Irvin gets more opportunities to rush the pass in his third year, since they have the luxury of starting Smith and Wright at OLB.