Not being dramatic BUT is this the beginning of the end?

[pittpnthrs]

The end started after Superbowl 49. The last 7 years have been a long drawn out painful death.

This

 

[keasley45]

[/quote]

Do you understand what TOP is and how it can wear down a defense? It's not Madden[/quote]
Do you understand a defenses ability or inability to get off the field intact top as much as the offense? Do you understand what 2 score lead is? Do you understand u should win most of the time when u have a 2 score lead and under a qtr. Do u understand how bad a defense must be to allow a td in well under a minute? I am guessing not.[/quote]

As a team, we went into the game with Mone inactive. That means our best run stopper and huge part of the DL (our key to victory, hands down) was out against the best rb in the league.

And instead of offense and defense functioning as a complimentary set, the defense that was already bending from a first half TOP battle loss, broke by the 3rd qtr. But held well enough to give our team a chance to win in OT. Henry had 36 yards in the first half.

And instead our O decided to play galamour shots all game long.

And that type of disconnect seeds resentment. Russ'comments post game that basically the offense was good, but that they just didn't get the ball enough (backhanded critique of the defense)...the choices in our passing O to go for the splash play or the 'surrender' checkdown... all the BS hoopla this offseason that Russ slung everywhere but himself. And now, this season, with all the 'excuses' gone... if we can't stitch together not just an OK offense but one that is significantly better than last year and maximizes our new playbook and what Russ is 'supposedly' been held back from doing, yeah, we are at a breaking point.

IF THE ABOVE IS THE CASE

You can't throw up a charade, claim you're the victim and the line is holding you back... that your coach is holding you back, that the playbook is old and dated.... when you yourself know what the issue really is.

And if 'the end ' comes to pass, all the criticisms from past players will read a bit clearer. For years, Richard and members of the D claiming russ was coddled and not held to the same level of accountability. That Pete defended him too much.. ADB not even acknowledging Russ as the best QB he'd played with and always kindly abstaining from direct criticism of him... but insinuating that he had room to grow. Much of that direct criticism was explained away by folks who conflated random off comments about Russ's outward character with true criticism and assumed certain players were simply jealous or didn't like him.

We will know before the season is over who was right this whole time. The teammates who were critical, the OCs who maybe weren't as bad as they seemed but were maybe just strapped trying to work around too many 'conditions' dictated by Russ's shortcomings... a coach who was hammered for wanting to run more to take the pressure off of his QB.

We will definitely have the answer by week 17, if not before.

 

[GeekHawk]

Not being dramatic BUT <something dramatic>...

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Death, taxes and a good morning laugh to dot net drama. Love it :irishdrinkers:

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The end started after Superbowl 49. The last 7 years have been a long drawn out painful death.

There are about 29 other franchises, owners, GM's, coaches and roster of players that'd take our "long drawn out painful death" of being one of the most successful franchises in the entire league the past decade.

1 New England Patriots 132-44 75.0%
2 Green Bay Packers 115-59-2 65.9%
3 Pittsburgh Steelers 114-61-1 65.1%
4 Seattle Seahawks 112-63-1 63.9%

Sometimes I feel like most of you guys on here never watched the Seahawks before 2012, because you have zero perspective or appreciation for what's going on......which is the single greatest era of Hawk football in 45 years.

Believe me, when Pete and Russell retire or leave and we're back to just another perennial 8-8 or 7-9 franchise? Then you'll learn what painful death is, no hope at all of being relevant and competitive.

 

[keasley45]

The end started after Superbowl 49. The last 7 years have been a long drawn out painful death.

There are about 29 other franchises, owners, GM's, coaches and roster of players that'd take our "long drawn out painful death" of being one of the most successful franchises in the entire league the past decade.

1 New England Patriots 132-44 75.0%
2 Green Bay Packers 115-59-2 65.9%
3 Pittsburgh Steelers 114-61-1 65.1%
4 Seattle Seahawks 112-63-1 63.9%

Sometimes I feel like most of you guys on here never watched the Seahawks before 2012, because you have zero perspective or appreciation for what's going on......which is the single greatest era of Hawk football in 45 years.

Believe me, when Pete and Russell retire or leave and we're back to just another perennial 8-8 or 7-9 franchise? Then you'll learn what painful death is, no hope at all of being relevant and competitive.

Been a fan since 81. Very appreciative of the succrss we've had and who's brought it to us. But you'd have to have your head in the sand to not see that there's something amiss in our PNW version of Camelot. Talking about doesn't mean you you're pulling for some apocalyptic end. Just obvious there's something not quite right.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The end started after Superbowl 49. The last 7 years have been a long drawn out painful death.

There are about 29 other franchises, owners, GM's, coaches and roster of players that'd take our "long drawn out painful death" of being one of the most successful franchises in the entire league the past decade.

1 New England Patriots 132-44 75.0%
2 Green Bay Packers 115-59-2 65.9%
3 Pittsburgh Steelers 114-61-1 65.1%
4 Seattle Seahawks 112-63-1 63.9%

Sometimes I feel like most of you guys on here never watched the Seahawks before 2012, because you have zero perspective or appreciation for what's going on......which is the single greatest era of Hawk football in 45 years.

Believe me, when Pete and Russell retire or leave and we're back to just another perennial 8-8 or 7-9 franchise? Then you'll learn what painful death is, no hope at all of being relevant and competitive.

Been a fan since 81. Very appreciative of the succrss we've had and who's brought it to us. But you'd have to have your head in the sand to not see that there's something amiss in our PNW version of Camelot. Talking about doesn't mean you you're pulling for some apocalyptic end. Just obvious there's something not quite right.

Your "not quite right" is the norm in the NFL, even for good franchises.

The problem is you and other fans think anything short of a SB something is "not quite right." When it's just the reality of a parity league that punishes winners and rewards the losers, and now we're back to just being a good team, and not a great one. Doesn't mean we shouldn't want to go to SB's, or make occasional deep playoff runs.

But that is not the norm, for ANY franchise. This IS the norm.

So go ahead, have bigger unrealistic expectations, but IMO your not quite right is a product of expectations, and not what you're seeing on the football field.

 

[keasley45]

The end started after Superbowl 49. The last 7 years have been a long drawn out painful death.

There are about 29 other franchises, owners, GM's, coaches and roster of players that'd take our "long drawn out painful death" of being one of the most successful franchises in the entire league the past decade.

1 New England Patriots 132-44 75.0%
2 Green Bay Packers 115-59-2 65.9%
3 Pittsburgh Steelers 114-61-1 65.1%
4 Seattle Seahawks 112-63-1 63.9%

Sometimes I feel like most of you guys on here never watched the Seahawks before 2012, because you have zero perspective or appreciation for what's going on......which is the single greatest era of Hawk football in 45 years.

Believe me, when Pete and Russell retire or leave and we're back to just another perennial 8-8 or 7-9 franchise? Then you'll learn what painful death is, no hope at all of being relevant and competitive.

Been a fan since 81. Very appreciative of the succrss we've had and who's brought it to us. But you'd have to have your head in the sand to not see that there's something amiss in our PNW version of Camelot. Talking about doesn't mean you you're pulling for some apocalyptic end. Just obvious there's something not quite right.

Your "not quite right" is the norm in the NFL, even for good franchises.

The problem is you and other fans think anything short of a SB something is "not quite right." When it's just the reality of a parity league that punishes winners and rewards the losers, and now we're back to just being a good team, and not a great one. Doesn't mean we shouldn't want to go to SB's, or make occasional deep playoff runs.

But that is not the norm, for ANY franchise. This IS the norm.

So go ahead, have bigger unrealistic expectations, but IMO your not quite right is a product of expectations, and not what you're seeing on the football field.

My saying things arent quite right have nothing to do with whether or not we win superbowls. Zero, It has to do with the obvious disconnect between what it seems we should be capable of even attempting vs what we're showing on the field.

I personally think the hawks have the best franchise in the league because they emphasize a human aspect of team building and character building that few, if any other franchises do, and place that value above raw physical measurables. They do that because they believe that if you can get athletes (men) to play to their maximum ability because their contributions are valued and acknowledged, that that can get you a lot further than just marching a group of hyper talented, concensus top draft picks out on the field and scripting the latest and greatest of x's and o's for them to follow.

My 'not quite right' has to do with the dissonance that is obvious between what we said we were going to go out and accomplish in terms of becoming a more effective and aggressive offense (acquiring Waldron, implementing a new scheme - talking about how great it was all offseason), and the literal antithesis of that on the field. Its the equivalent of upgrading your track car from a miata to a 911 and then never shifting out of third gear, or using all the tech that SHOULD make you more competitive.

Even beyond that is just a basic lack of situational awareness and disconnect between offense and defense that saw the O implement ZERO ball / clock control playcalling. ZERO. and situational awareness has been a hallmark of Pete Carroll / RW led teams. And then that the leader of the O seemed to not acknowledge that that was an issue... nor was the decision to use but 1/5 of the toolbox the offense has at its disposal.

And none of that has anything to do with false expectations. Football is a dynamic sport. Ive coached it, played it and have been an NFL fan since i was 5 years old. Its foolish to have any expectations for how a season will end in terms of Wins and Losses. For me, none of that is as important as playing to your ability, whatever that might be when taking injuries, unforseen circumstances, etc into account. Just play sound, smart football.

We arent doing that. The reason why goes beyond basic x's and o's

 

[Sgt. Largent]

My 'not quite right' has to do with the dissonance that is obvious between what we said we were going to go out and accomplish in terms of becoming a more effective and aggressive offense (acquiring Waldron, implementing a new scheme - talking about how great it was all offseason), and the literal antithesis of that on the field. Its the equivalent of upgrading your track car from a miata to a 911 and then never shifting out of third gear, or using all the tech that SHOULD make you more competitive.
s

Right now we're a top 10 offense in terms of yards, points, etc......and that's WITH a new O-coordinator, of which usually takes half a season or more to really hit it's stride.

So while I agree I saw some seriously regression in the 2nd half of the Titan game, I don't think that warrants your OMG HERE WE GO AGAIN the sky is still falling opinion.

In fact even when Schotty was here I rarely blamed the offense for our losses and early playoff exits. IMO it's the defensive side of the ball that's changed for the worst since our SB's, not the offense. The offense under Russell and our skill players has remained a top 5-10 offense. Plenty potent enough to win a SB.

Defense? Nope, not good enough yet.

 

[AubHawk71]

No.

 

[keasley45]

My 'not quite right' has to do with the dissonance that is obvious between what we said we were going to go out and accomplish in terms of becoming a more effective and aggressive offense (acquiring Waldron, implementing a new scheme - talking about how great it was all offseason), and the literal antithesis of that on the field. Its the equivalent of upgrading your track car from a miata to a 911 and then never shifting out of third gear, or using all the tech that SHOULD make you more competitive.
s

Right now we're a top 10 offense in terms of yards, points, etc......and that's WITH a new O-coordinator, of which usually takes half a season or more to really hit it's stride.

So while I agree I saw some seriously regression in the 2nd half of the Titan game, I don't think that warrants your OMG HERE WE GO AGAIN the sky is still falling opinion.

In fact even when Schotty was here I rarely blamed the offense for our losses and early playoff exits. IMO it's the defensive side of the ball that's changed for the worst since our SB's, not the offense. The offense under Russell and our skill players has remained a top 5-10 offense. Plenty potent enough to win a SB.

Defense? Nope, not good enough yet.

I agree with you that the defense has been in a rut for a while. Some of that is forcing a scheme that relies on having a specific profile (both in terms of physicality and intensity) of player at key positions to succeed. We have failed to adapt the scheme to address the fact that we havent had those players for several years.

But on offense, have to disagree that a raw interpretation of rankings sheds light on net efficiency or success. Last week was a prime example. The Hawks are a football TEAM. they arent the Hawks offense and the Hawks defense. If you have injured players at key positions, or just plain arent good in some aspect, for a period, the TEAM needs to adapt to cover that deficiency. Complimentary football 101. From a team win perspective, Offensive top 10 stats results dont necessarily tell the story nor predict net wins. If you put up 21 points on 3 drives, one of which was 2 minutes and the other two, less than that because you benefited from a short field or an opposing team's busted coverage, and otherwise go three and out over and over again, not because the opposing team is significantly better than you but because you arent playing smart situational football, thats not a winning strategy as an offense or as a team. To say every week that your offense is going to put up 30 points... and that should be enough... when you cant consistently keep your offense on the field, you arent going to win as often as youd think.

Put another way, id wager that you could probably spot quite a few top 10-15s defense in the league 4 tds and if you just put them on the field and challenged them to prevent an opposing top 10 offense from scoring more than that and you gave the offense 40+ minutes of possession on the clock, you'd get a pretty high failure rate. Its not JUST about points or offensive stats. These players are human. Simple attrition.

Seems of late, the idea of playing complimentary football has been replaced by - 'we're putting up points, what's the issue?' When the issue is obvious. We are showing an inability or unwillingness to run an effective offense outside of the big hit plays, and the defense has yet to come together.

And yes, it is week 2. but this story is one that has now carried over from last year.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

We are showing an inability or unwillingness to run an effective offense outside of the big hit plays, and the defense has yet to come together..

Did you watch Russell's presser today? He said he didn't agree with Pete's criticism that he should have checked down more often and taken what the defense was given, and that he was "always going to go for it."

So there's your answer. For all that Russell does well, and that's a LOT. He is obviously not going to change the way he plays QB, no matter the scheme, playbook or coordinator.

He will feast on average to bad defenses, and look bad when we play good to great defenses that know how to defend his style.

Complimentary football? Eh, I don't think that exists within the style of how Russell plays QB.

 

[hoxrox]

We are showing an inability or unwillingness to run an effective offense outside of the big hit plays, and the defense has yet to come together..

Did you watch Russell's presser today? He said he didn't agree with Pete's criticism that he should have checked down more often and taken what the defense was given, and that he was "always going to go for it."

So there's your answer. For all that Russell does well, and that's a LOT. He is obviously not going to change the way he plays QB, no matter the scheme, playbook or coordinator.

He will feast on average to bad defenses, and look bad when we play good to great defenses that know how to defend his style.

Complimentary football? Eh, I don't think that exists within the style of how Russell plays QB.

This then is a huge problem. Coach wants to play complimentary team football. QB wants to be a gunslinger. The disconnect is real.

 

[chris98251]

We are showing an inability or unwillingness to run an effective offense outside of the big hit plays, and the defense has yet to come together..

Did you watch Russell's presser today? He said he didn't agree with Pete's criticism that he should have checked down more often and taken what the defense was given, and that he was "always going to go for it."

So there's your answer. For all that Russell does well, and that's a LOT. He is obviously not going to change the way he plays QB, no matter the scheme, playbook or coordinator.

He will feast on average to bad defenses, and look bad when we play good to great defenses that know how to defend his style.

Complimentary football? Eh, I don't think that exists within the style of how Russell plays QB.

Well what we been guessing is real, DC's also know drop deep center fielders now and play hard on the edges since Wilson won't throw medium or shallow passes over the middle to TE's or anyone else crossing unless there is no other option in the route trees.

 

[OrangeGravy]

We are showing an inability or unwillingness to run an effective offense outside of the big hit plays, and the defense has yet to come together..

Did you watch Russell's presser today? He said he didn't agree with Pete's criticism that he should have checked down more often and taken what the defense was given, and that he was "always going to go for it."

So there's your answer. For all that Russell does well, and that's a LOT. He is obviously not going to change the way he plays QB, no matter the scheme, playbook or coordinator.

He will feast on average to bad defenses, and look bad when we play good to great defenses that know how to defend his style.

Complimentary football? Eh, I don't think that exists within the style of how Russell plays QB.

He really said that? Really?

 

[FattyKnuckle]

Considering the same post has been made after every loss dating back to 2015, it's probably a bit dramatic.

This is the first loss after a spat between QB and the team, so apples to oranges.

 

[Mizak]

We are showing an inability or unwillingness to run an effective offense outside of the big hit plays, and the defense has yet to come together..

Did you watch Russell's presser today? He said he didn't agree with Pete's criticism that he should have checked down more often and taken what the defense was given, and that he was "always going to go for it."

So there's your answer. For all that Russell does well, and that's a LOT. He is obviously not going to change the way he plays QB, no matter the scheme, playbook or coordinator.

He will feast on average to bad defenses, and look bad when we play good to great defenses that know how to defend his style.

Complimentary football? Eh, I don't think that exists within the style of how Russell plays QB.

Where’s the source?

 

[OrangeGravy]

We are showing an inability or unwillingness to run an effective offense outside of the big hit plays, and the defense has yet to come together..

Did you watch Russell's presser today? He said he didn't agree with Pete's criticism that he should have checked down more often and taken what the defense was given, and that he was "always going to go for it."

So there's your answer. For all that Russell does well, and that's a LOT. He is obviously not going to change the way he plays QB, no matter the scheme, playbook or coordinator.

He will feast on average to bad defenses, and look bad when we play good to great defenses that know how to defend his style.

Complimentary football? Eh, I don't think that exists within the style of how Russell plays QB.

Where’s the source?

Candotta tweeted the quotes out.

 

[AgentDib]

Here's the full exchange which in my view is being wildly taken out of context by a few folks on twitter. In context I don't see anything surprising about this answer. Russ is always going to be confident about this stuff, that's his basic approach.

Question: During the MNF broadcast with Peyton/Eli for the Packers/Lions, Peyton was talking about how the Lions were in a two high look how Rodgers kind of ran them out of it. How do you deal with that impatience during the game?

Russell: Well I think Indianapolis played a lot of two high, you know, Tennessee Titans played a lot of two high primarily throughout the game and we did really well throwing the ball, we made a lot of plays. Unfortunately the game didn't end the way we want to, but I think the biggest thing is continually to have route concepts that get guys open in those looks, I think that's key. Guys knowing how to feel the zone, anytime you're playing a zone team you've gotta have a feel for how to get open in those zone. It's like basketball or anything else, gotta know how to get to the paint essentially. Our receivers do a really good job of that, our tight ends do too, so we want to use that versatility and use that ability to get those guys open in all circumstances.

Question: Is there a patience required when teams are doing those two high looks against you?

Russ: Yeah I think there's a patience, there's a patience in a sense. But you also have to have the mentality of knowing there's opportunities to get down the field as well. I think that what's also great is that we have great players, obviously Chris Carson can run it, and receivers can get open underneath. We've done a good job of it so far and it's been good, I think we can keep going.

 

[OrangeGravy]

Here's the full exchange which in my view is being wildly taken out of context by a few folks on twitter. In context I don't see anything surprising about this answer. Russ is always going to be confident about this stuff, that's his basic approach.

Question: During the MNF broadcast with Peyton/Eli for the Packers/Lions, Peyton was talking about how the Lions were in a two high look how Rodgers kind of ran them out of it. How do you deal with that impatience during the game?

Russell: Well I think Indianapolis played a lot of two high, you know, Tennessee Titans played a lot of two high primarily throughout the game and we did really well throwing the ball, we made a lot of plays. Unfortunately the game didn't end the way we want to, but I think the biggest thing is continually to have route concepts that get guys open in those looks, I think that's key. Guys knowing how to feel the zone, anytime you're playing a zone team you've gotta have a feel for how to get open in those zone. It's like basketball or anything else, gotta know how to get to the paint essentially. Our receivers do a really good job of that, our tight ends do too, so we want to use that versatility and use that ability to get those guys open in all circumstances.

Question: Is there a patience required when teams are doing those two high looks against you?

Russ: Yeah I think there's a patience, there's a patience in a sense. But you also have to have the mentality of knowing there's opportunities to get down the field as well. I think that what's also great is that we have great players, obviously Chris Carson can run it, and receivers can get open underneath. We've done a good job of it so far and it's been good, I think we can keep going.

Thats a different question all together.