Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Throwback Poll: Was Shaun Alexander Soft?

The Original Seattle Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute for Seahawks Talk, News, Rumors, Trades, and Analytics. LANGUAGE: PG-13

Well?

Yes
43
52%
No
40
48%
 
Total votes : 83

Throwback Poll: Was Shaun Alexander Soft?
Mon Nov 30, 2020 12:39 am
  • ?
    Sac
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13099
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:51 pm
    Location: With a White Girl


  • I say no. His career was shortened due to injuries, but that's true for most RBs. Shaun's playstyle relied on vision, quickness and instincts instead of being physical. Running through people may be what the Hawks want out of their first down backs these days, but avoiding people in the first place is pretty good too.

    This is what Holmgren had to say about it in late 2007, well after Shaun's decline:
    Mike Holmgren wrote:Would I like him to hit the hole, on occasion, a little quicker and get it up in there? I've said that from day one and he knows it for the last however many years he has been here. But at the same time his style has produced some wonderful things. He goes around (the end) and scores a touchdown and I'm happy so you have to be careful with that. He has great instincts. There are times -- I've told him so I'm not saying anything to you that I haven't told him -- and he's told me (what he was thinking at the time) and he agrees with me that this is why I did this. We talk about that all the time. When the running game isn't going though there's a lot to pick at. Now it's our job to get it going so we can back people off just a little bit on that."
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4373
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 10:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • Define "soft"... ?


    Was he soft compared to Marshawn Lynch... ? WHO IS NOT SOFT ON OFFENSE COMPARED TO Marshawn Lynch? Chris Carson, Thomas Rawls (for a VERY small period of time)?

    Other than Chris Carson, and Thomas Rawls every single one of our offensive skill position players were soft comparatively to Marshawn Lynch... You could argue Doug Baldwin, and Golden Tate, maybe even Sidney Rice (he took a beating) all those guys gave it their all every day.

    Hell even Ricardo Lockette wasn't soft that boy flew down field to disintegrate grown professional athletes...

    EDIT: I gotta add Russell Wilson if we are gonna be fair... he's tough as hell.. hasn't missed a single start... can't argue it.

    But no... Shaun Alexander was not soft... we almost won a Super Bowl on his back and we got robbed vs the Stealers... that was so blatant man I will never live in peace with those referees...


    Shaun Alexander was MVP in 2005... LaDainian Tomlinson was MVP in 2006... Adrian Peterson was MVP in 2012... other than that 16 of the last 19 MVPs were QBs... so Shaun Alexander was good in my opinion.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Press_NFL_Most_Valuable_Player_Award
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 678
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • Yes he was soft, Lynch, Doornink, Watters, John L Williams, Curt Warner, all much more physical, Shaun was so soft he would not pass block and had to be taken out of the line up. None of the others were, so that makes him a one dimensional back as well since he was rarely in a game for a passing situation.

    It was why as a 1st rounder he could not take the position from Ricky Watters also, he was soft and continually in Holmgren's dog house.

    Holmgren drafted him hoping for Watters 2.0 or a Roger Craig 2.0. He got a Franco Harris clone, run out of bounds and go down. The reason Rocky Blier was so popular was because he got the tough yards and was physical as well. Franco was on a multiple Super Bowl teams and had a long career granted. But nobody talks about him in regards to all-time greats either really unless your in Pittsburgh, still I think they more fondly think of Bettis.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 34505
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Charmin Soft! Great vision and great OL but he never ran out of a tackle.
    getnasty
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4977
    Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:22 pm


  • The dude had 5 straight years with 300+ carries and you say he never ran through a tackle...I have a hard time calling any NFL player soft let alone a RB. SA took a pounding for 11+ years of his life and produced at record levels. Definitely NOT soft.
    Flyingsquad23
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 522
    Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:47 pm


  • I'd think it foolhardy for him to attempt to be hard-nosed when his style worked excellently in the first place. I wouldn't call him soft so much as a runner who relied (and thrived) on his strongest assets - his vision and sense of timing. That's not soft, it's smart.
    Maelstrom787
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4185
    Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:38 pm
    Location: Delaware


  • He was smart. Chris Carson needs to let up once in a while to preserve himself.

    Bo Jackson had so much muscle that it ripped his ball right out of it's socket. Bones can only take so much before muscle take over and causes damage. Ever see those horrible weight lifting accidents?
    ivotuk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 20822
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • Flyingsquad23 wrote:The dude had 5 straight years with 300+ carries and you say he never ran through a tackle...I have a hard time calling any NFL player soft let alone a RB. SA took a pounding for 11+ years of his life and produced at record levels. Definitely NOT soft.



    This....NO guy (or gal) that makes it to the NFL is soft.
    TreeRon
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1397
    Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:48 pm


  • He was so soft he only played in 16 games a year for 6 seasons, averaging 1400 yards and 17 rushing TDs for those 6 seasons.

    The soft tittle is all based on that era of the Seahawks. The team was perceived as soft so all the players were thought of as soft. If Alexander played for Pete he would get all the "tough guy" buzz words.
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2814
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:54 am


  • He was a different style of back than what you're supposedly comparing him to. Why is that such a problem? His distinct style created its own wear on his ankles and knees....

    The only possible argument for him being "soft' is he didn't come back from injuries some thought he should .... but every RB in team history had their careers end with injuries, even the unassailable Marshawn.

    So , I implore you, stop looking at Shaun through the Marshawn lens. Marshawn was a completely unique dude and incredible to watch .... but just based on pure talent and production, SA had a 4 - 5 year stretch that was beyond anything we've ever seen nor will ever see again.

    MVPs --- Shaun Alexander 1, Rest of Seahawks History: 0.
    Hawkstorian
    * NET Staff *
     
    Posts: 4376
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:19 pm
    Location: Spokane


  • Yeah, i dont think its really fair to compare anyone to beast mode, just because of how freakishly physical AND healthy he was. And maybe im misremembering it, but i coulda swore some of the whole "soft" label was given to Alexander due to the difference in how he ran in the redzone vs out of it and how some people felt like he should have run that hard all the time. Personally, i think his injuries cut short what probably would have been a 100% hall of fame career and he wouldnt have ended up with the soft label the way he has.
    Lawke
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 36
    Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:47 pm


  • Yes.

    Alexander wouldn’t have been the same without Jones and Hutch.

    This guy is not a physical create your own hole and punish defenders as Watters was.

    We were spoiled with Lynch.
    TheLegendOfBoom
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 1738
    Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 7:12 pm
    Location: Westcoastin’


  • chris98251 wrote:Yes he was soft, Lynch, Doornink, Watters, John L Williams, Curt Warner, all much more physical, Shaun was so soft he would not pass block and had to be taken out of the line up. None of the others were, so that makes him a one dimensional back as well since he was rarely in a game for a passing situation.

    It was why as a 1st rounder he could not take the position from Ricky Watters also, he was soft and continually in Holmgren's dog house.

    Holmgren drafted him hoping for Watters 2.0 or a Roger Craig 2.0. He got a Franco Harris clone, run out of bounds and go down. The reason Rocky Blier was so popular was because he got the tough yards and was physical as well. Franco was on a multiple Super Bowl teams and had a long career granted. But nobody talks about him in regards to all-time greats either really unless your in Pittsburgh, still I think they more fondly think of Bettis.


    No SA wasn’t soft. However after he injured his foot he didn’t have the same acceleration and speed he had prior to that. That combined with his OL getting weaker contributed to his struggles post injury.

    Curt Warner’s running style is very close to SA’s style. Curt was great but no way would I say he was a physical back. He was a magnificent cut back runner and he made people miss. Curt also ran behind a very good line. Steve August, Ron Essink, Reggie McKenzie, and Blair Bush.
    Last edited by hawkfan68 on Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7933
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Smooth and talented runner with great vision who also had the benefit of running through gigantic holes opened by one of the best left sides in NFL history (Jones/Hutch). Not to say he wasn't great, but compared to the running style of Marshawn/Carson, he ran soft.
    DangerousDoug
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 202
    Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:53 pm


  • No. Nobody who steps on a pro football field is soft.

    People tend to underestimate what exactly is happening on an NFL; but, be fortunate enough to get close to a sideline for some live action and you'll realize how silly of a thought it is to think any of them are soft.
    KinesProf
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 247
    Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:05 am


  • Flyingsquad23 wrote:The dude had 5 straight years with 300+ carries and you say he never ran through a tackle...I have a hard time calling any NFL player soft let alone a RB. SA took a pounding for 11+ years of his life and produced at record levels. Definitely NOT soft.


    AND all that being said, he was the biggest BI!CH in the NFL in the last 20 years
    OrangeGravy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 508
    Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:47 pm


  • OrangeGravy wrote:
    Flyingsquad23 wrote:The dude had 5 straight years with 300+ carries and you say he never ran through a tackle...I have a hard time calling any NFL player soft let alone a RB. SA took a pounding for 11+ years of his life and produced at record levels. Definitely NOT soft.


    AND all that being said, he was the biggest BI!CH in the NFL in the last 20 years


    And your credentials? Your addition to the thread is applauded...you are pathetic
    Flyingsquad23
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 522
    Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:47 pm


  • I don't think he was soft. Just because he avoids contact, it doesn't make him soft to me. I think that's smart. As for his reputation of running out of bounds, I don't know where that comes from. I don't seem to remember him running out of bounds prematurely.
    TypeSly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1054
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:54 pm


  • TypeSly wrote:I don't know where that comes from. I don't seem to remember him running out of bounds prematurely.


    Actually I do remember many times where he did just that. I used to say "Ah man, don't Chris Warren it!!!" LOL... For the record, I loved Warren but he also had the habit of running out of bounds to avoid contact at times. They were both very similar that way. However, I do NOT think of Shaun as "Soft". He was a fantastic running back with probably the best vision I have seen in my lifetime. I do not fault a man who by no fault of his own (injuries) started to adjust his game to preserve himself.

    The 2005 NFL MVP will always have a special place in my heart. Fun to watch, fun to root for.
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14769
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


  • KinesProf wrote:No. Nobody who steps on a pro football field is soft.

    People tend to underestimate what exactly is happening on an NFL; but, be fortunate enough to get close to a sideline for some live action and you'll realize how silly of a thought it is to think any of them are soft.


    Not even CJ Prosise? :mrgreen:
    TypeSly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1054
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:54 pm


  • TypeSly wrote:I don't think he was soft. Just because he avoids contact, it doesn't make him soft to me. I think that's smart. As for his reputation of running out of bounds, I don't know where that comes from. I don't seem to remember him running out of bounds prematurely.


    I remember him running out of bounds "prematurely" (AKA to avoid getting blasted when he wasn't going to get anymore yards anyway) sometimes in 2006-2007, but this was only once carrying a massive load for this team for 5 straight years started taking it's toll on his body.

    I hate this topic because I just can't understand the amount of disrespect, bordering on hatred, so many Seahawks fans seem to have for Alexander. 300+ carries a year for 5 straight seasons, while putting up prolific numbers, the man was an absolute warrior for this team. OF COURSE his body started breaking down after carrying a load like that. Just disgusting to me how he's treated by many around here. Makes me feel like this fan base doesn't deserve elite, MVP caliber players since we don't appreciate them anyway.
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3677
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:38 pm


  • TypeSly wrote:
    KinesProf wrote:No. Nobody who steps on a pro football field is soft.

    People tend to underestimate what exactly is happening on an NFL; but, be fortunate enough to get close to a sideline for some live action and you'll realize how silly of a thought it is to think any of them are soft.


    Not even CJ Prosise? :mrgreen:


    Absolutely not. Fragile, yes.

    But civilians tend to underestimate exactly what it takes to step on the field, court, ice etc at the highest level. Think of the best, toughest, most badass athlete you personally knew growing up, then realize that that guy isn't close to who these professionals are.
    KinesProf
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 247
    Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:05 am


  • Chapow wrote:I hate this topic because I just can't understand the amount of disrespect, bordering on hatred, so many Seahawks fans seem to have for Alexander. 300+ carries a year for 5 straight seasons, while putting up prolific numbers, the man was an absolute warrior for this team. OF COURSE his body started breaking down after carrying a load like that. Just disgusting to me how he's treated by many around here. Makes me feel like this fan base doesn't deserve elite, MVP caliber players since we don't appreciate them anyway.


    I feel ya brother. I've never understood the vitriol about the man. Excellent player, even better human. It's quite frankly one of the greatest mysteries to me when it comes to former players for us.
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 14769
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


  • ivotuk wrote:He was smart. Chris Carson needs to let up once in a while to preserve himself.

    Bo Jackson had so much muscle that it ripped his ball right out of it's socket. Bones can only take so much before muscle take over and causes damage. Ever see those horrible weight lifting accidents?


    Yeah I totally agree I'm worried Chris Carson runs a bit too hard for what his body can handle... I've thought he was really hurt many times (based on replays of him getting destroyed at the end of plays)... I think he just downplays the amount of pain he's really in. But I heard an ESPN Seattle radio interview recently (right before he missed a few games) he said he can barely walk up the stairs after a game, when he drives home he just sits in the car for a while he's so sore... I don't think he's joking.

    That's why Marshawn Lynch was so special he played so hard but the way he's built he's just some kind of freak to put it nicely, he took so much punishment and yet was playing almost every game for nearly his whole career...

    Conclusion:

    We should be careful with Carson, he's one of the best RBs in the league but we shouldn't use him too much if we can win while letting him rest imo... I'd rather he's healthy in the playoffs then maybe even having a better seed... not sure about that but it's interesting.

    Sometimes just 1 injury can knock you out of the playoffs. For example I think when Cliff Avril got injured (3rd quarter) in the Superbowl vs Patriots that may have cost us the game... we also lost Jeremy Lane (1st quarter...) but I think Cliff Avril being out was very bad for us.

    https://www.sbnation.com/2015/2/1/79612 ... er-bowl-49

    I know it's a coin flip you can get hurt on any play... but if I was on this staff I'd probably try to limit Carson's reps as much as possible unless it's a season ending loss scenario.
    Tokadub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 678
    Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:42 am


  • hawkfan68 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Yes he was soft, Lynch, Doornink, Watters, John L Williams, Curt Warner, all much more physical, Shaun was so soft he would not pass block and had to be taken out of the line up. None of the others were, so that makes him a one dimensional back as well since he was rarely in a game for a passing situation.

    It was why as a 1st rounder he could not take the position from Ricky Watters also, he was soft and continually in Holmgren's dog house.

    Holmgren drafted him hoping for Watters 2.0 or a Roger Craig 2.0. He got a Franco Harris clone, run out of bounds and go down. The reason Rocky Blier was so popular was because he got the tough yards and was physical as well. Franco was on a multiple Super Bowl teams and had a long career granted. But nobody talks about him in regards to all-time greats either really unless your in Pittsburgh, still I think they more fondly think of Bettis.


    No SA wasn’t soft. However after he injured his foot he didn’t have the same acceleration and speed he had prior to that. That combined with his OL getter weaker contributed to his struggles post injury.

    Curt Warner’s running style is very close to SA’s style. Curt was great but no way would I say he was a physical back. He was a magnificent cut back runner and he made people miss. Curt also ran behind a very good line. Steve August, Ron Essink, Reggie McKenzie, and Blair Bush.


    Curt caught the ball, Curt would pass block, Curt would put his shoulder in a run and keep his legs moving, yes he slashed and could cut on a dime but he was a complete back, and that's saying a lot playing for Chuck Knox. Knox would not have let falling down in front of defenders in a fetal position go unchallenged.

    He was in era where pussies were hit hard to knock them out of a game also, he hit back physically also. I watched him play, did you?

    Alexander played well for us and was allowed to play the roll he played, if he was a 3rd round pick he would not have seen the field till he blocked and was more aggressive.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 34505
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Flyingsquad23 wrote:
    OrangeGravy wrote:
    Flyingsquad23 wrote:The dude had 5 straight years with 300+ carries and you say he never ran through a tackle...I have a hard time calling any NFL player soft let alone a RB. SA took a pounding for 11+ years of his life and produced at record levels. Definitely NOT soft.


    AND all that being said, he was the biggest BI!CH in the NFL in the last 20 years


    And your credentials? Your addition to the thread is applauded...you are pathetic


    https://www.seattlepi.com/sports/footba ... 163237.php
    OrangeGravy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 508
    Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:47 pm


  • OrangeGravy wrote:
    Flyingsquad23 wrote:
    OrangeGravy wrote:
    Flyingsquad23 wrote:The dude had 5 straight years with 300+ carries and you say he never ran through a tackle...I have a hard time calling any NFL player soft let alone a RB. SA took a pounding for 11+ years of his life and produced at record levels. Definitely NOT soft.


    AND all that being said, he was the biggest BI!CH in the NFL in the last 20 years


    And your credentials? Your addition to the thread is applauded...you are pathetic


    https://www.seattlepi.com/sports/footba ... 163237.php


    I don't get what that article has to do with him being soft and a b*tch, though. I think anyone would be peeved if they didn't get a chance to get one yard for the rushing title, and being immortalized.
    TypeSly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1054
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:54 pm


  • Holmgren all but said he was soft and unwilling to grind if the hole wasn't there and would try to curb his frustration because of the rushing stats.

    Zorn knew as well:

    “Repeating that ’05 season would have been hard. And he just seemed to either not have the knack, or he seemed to take a view of, ‘Hey, listen, when the hole’s there, I’m going to run through, but if the hole’s not there, you might as well go and call the next play.’

    “Shaun didn’t have a great work ethic in Seattle,” Zorn added. “He didn’t. He said he felt practice was for everybody else.”

    I'd be curious to know the opinion of those who played the position, or o-line in a meaningful capacity in highschool or college.
    keasley45
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 314
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:40 pm
    Location: Cockeysville, Md


  • TypeSly wrote:
    OrangeGravy wrote:
    Flyingsquad23 wrote:
    OrangeGravy wrote:
    AND all that being said, he was the biggest BI!CH in the NFL in the last 20 years


    And your credentials? Your addition to the thread is applauded...you are pathetic


    https://www.seattlepi.com/sports/footba ... 163237.php


    I don't get what that article has to do with him being soft and a b*tch, though. I think anyone would be peeved if they didn't get a chance to get one yard for the rushing title, and being immortalized.


    It was a jerk move by Holmgren at the time. Alexander had every right to be pissed.
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1815
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


  • This place is just amazing.

    The mental gymnastics somebody needs to go through to convince themselves that a player, who never missed a game in his first 6 seasons & carried the ball that many times & gained that many yards & scored that many TD's in the most physically demanding sport in the most physically demanding league & won an MVP award in said league, was "soft" is impressive.

    & by amazing, I mean embarrassing.
    Hockey Guy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 625
    Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2017 9:03 am


  • Whats amazing is that people can't distinguish between 'soft' in the context of durability and 'soft' in the context of being willing to make contact intentionally and forcefully in a contact sport like football. And hey, guess what... IF YOU RARELY GET HIT HARD BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS SLIDING TO THE GROUND AND AVOIDING CONTACT YOU MIGHT BE PRETTY GOOD AT AVOIDING INJURY. But somehow now the fact that he was rarely hurt is a sign of his toughness? By that rule, norm Johnson was the toughest player we ever had.

    There's no 'mental gymastics' required to see that Alexander's running style was one predicated on avoiding contact when possible to the point of sliding down to the ground when it looked like he might take a hit... instead of meeting the tackle and trying to force his will... and not turning out hard yards unless he was in sight of the goal line.

    Thats who he was and because he had a great line, there were a ton of yards and touchdowns available to him without needing to play a more hard-nosed style.

    And for the folks on this board who insist on creating this binary condition where a back is either Shaun alexander or Earl Campbell... again. Thats whats amazing. Theres a huge range of styles between the two and most don't involve sliding to the ground and avoiding contact and hard yards.

    This is not an opinion shared by justvthose on this board. Homlgren saw it and no doubt it was the root of the disconnect between the two. Zorn saw it while he was here and after he signed him in washingtin... and cut him. And the 31 other teams that could have signed him after he was cut by seattle saw it too. But maybe we are all just crazy.
    keasley45
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 314
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:40 pm
    Location: Cockeysville, Md


  • keasley45 wrote:Whats amazing is that people can't distinguish between 'soft' in the context of durability and 'soft' in the context of being willing to make contact intentionally and forcefully in a contact sport like football. And hey, guess what... IF YOU RARELY GET HIT HARD BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS SLIDING TO THE GROUND AND AVOIDING CONTACT YOU MIGHT BE PRETTY GOOD AT AVOIDING INJURY. But somehow now the fact that he was rarely hurt is a sign of his toughness? By that rule, norm Johnson was the toughest player we ever had.

    There's no 'mental gymastics' required to see that Alexander's running style was one predicated on avoiding contact when possible to the point of sliding down to the ground when it looked like he might take a hit... instead of meeting the tackle and trying to force his will... and not turning out hard yards unless he was in sight of the goal line.

    Thats who he was and because he had a great line, there were a ton of yards and touchdowns available to him without needing to play a more hard-nosed style.

    And for the folks on this board who insist on creating this binary condition where a back is either Shaun alexander or Earl Campbell... again. Thats whats amazing. Theres a huge range of styles between the two and most don't involve sliding to the ground and avoiding contact and hard yards.

    This is not an opinion shared by justvthose on this board. Homlgren saw it and no doubt it was the root of the disconnect between the two. Zorn saw it while he was here and after he signed him in washingtin... and cut him. And the 31 other teams that could have signed him after he was cut by seattle saw it too. But maybe we are all just crazy.


    Where to start with this idiocy?

    So, you've decided to somehow make it seem like Mike Holmgren & Jim Zorn agree with you with absolutely no proof?

    Then you back that up by pretending that Jim Zorn signed him then cut him because he was "soft" to prove a point to everybody & not because his time as a top-tier running back was basically over because that's what happens to running backs. Then you claim everybody in football agrees with you, again with no proof, & declined to sign him because he was "soft" & not for that other reason.

    Now that's what is known as "mental gymnastics", you know, making stuff up to make it seem as if the opinion somebody just wrote is not an opinion put is factual.
    Hockey Guy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 625
    Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2017 9:03 am


  • keasley45 wrote:Whats amazing is that people can't distinguish between 'soft' in the context of durability and 'soft' in the context of being willing to make contact intentionally and forcefully in a contact sport like football. And hey, guess what... IF YOU RARELY GET HIT HARD BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS SLIDING TO THE GROUND AND AVOIDING CONTACT YOU MIGHT BE PRETTY GOOD AT AVOIDING INJURY. But somehow now the fact that he was rarely hurt is a sign of his toughness? By that rule, norm Johnson was the toughest player we ever had.

    There's no 'mental gymastics' required to see that Alexander's running style was one predicated on avoiding contact when possible to the point of sliding down to the ground when it looked like he might take a hit... instead of meeting the tackle and trying to force his will... and not turning out hard yards unless he was in sight of the goal line.

    Thats who he was and because he had a great line, there were a ton of yards and touchdowns available to him without needing to play a more hard-nosed style.

    And for the folks on this board who insist on creating this binary condition where a back is either Shaun alexander or Earl Campbell... again. Thats whats amazing. Theres a huge range of styles between the two and most don't involve sliding to the ground and avoiding contact and hard yards.

    This is not an opinion shared by justvthose on this board. Homlgren saw it and no doubt it was the root of the disconnect between the two. Zorn saw it while he was here and after he signed him in washingtin... and cut him. And the 31 other teams that could have signed him after he was cut by seattle saw it too. But maybe we are all just crazy.


    Gotta love the people that try to re-write history to fit their own false reality.

    Zorn did not cut Alexander because he thought he was soft. He cut him because he had 4 RBs on his roster and the other 3 were getting healthy. This made Alexander expendable. He was cut in order to free up a roster spot for someone to help their defense....which was struggling at the time.
    Nunya
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 212
    Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:20 am


  • Nunya wrote:
    keasley45 wrote:Whats amazing is that people can't distinguish between 'soft' in the context of durability and 'soft' in the context of being willing to make contact intentionally and forcefully in a contact sport like football. And hey, guess what... IF YOU RARELY GET HIT HARD BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS SLIDING TO THE GROUND AND AVOIDING CONTACT YOU MIGHT BE PRETTY GOOD AT AVOIDING INJURY. But somehow now the fact that he was rarely hurt is a sign of his toughness? By that rule, norm Johnson was the toughest player we ever had.

    There's no 'mental gymastics' required to see that Alexander's running style was one predicated on avoiding contact when possible to the point of sliding down to the ground when it looked like he might take a hit... instead of meeting the tackle and trying to force his will... and not turning out hard yards unless he was in sight of the goal line.

    Thats who he was and because he had a great line, there were a ton of yards and touchdowns available to him without needing to play a more hard-nosed style.

    And for the folks on this board who insist on creating this binary condition where a back is either Shaun alexander or Earl Campbell... again. Thats whats amazing. Theres a huge range of styles between the two and most don't involve sliding to the ground and avoiding contact and hard yards.

    This is not an opinion shared by justvthose on this board. Homlgren saw it and no doubt it was the root of the disconnect between the two. Zorn saw it while he was here and after he signed him in washingtin... and cut him. And the 31 other teams that could have signed him after he was cut by seattle saw it too. But maybe we are all just crazy.


    Gotta love the people that try to re-write history to fit their own false reality.

    Zorn did not cut Alexander because he thought he was soft. He cut him because he had 4 RBs on his roster and the other 3 were getting healthy. This made Alexander expendable. He was cut in order to free up a roster spot for someone to help their defense....which was struggling at the time.


    the statement about Zorn's feelings on Alexander are straight from his mouth, not conjecture. but i guess in this universe the feeling that Shaun wouldnt hit a hole or practice hard somehow didnt factor into him being cut?? lol. And Ladell Betts beat him out?? Please. They could have brought him back and the thought at the time among the media here in the mid-atlantic was that they would. But they didnt. because why bring back a guy you were taking a flier on in the first place when nobody else wanted him and who has a reputation for not running hard, practicing hard. DC media even talked about him not being teh same kind of back if he didnt have great blocking. And he wasnt. which is why he was let go in DC and Seattle.

    Look. Shaun benefited from a generationally good o-line. He dint run hard, hit the hole hard (unless he was in sight of the goal-line, or actively grind out yards that werent easily there. And he was gifted a ton of yards when all that was required was speed and the ability to make a cut and get upfield. When that gift was no longer there, he was no longer the same back. He'd just signed a fat contract, was now in a position where running was no longer as easy as it once was becauise the line wasnt as good, and his performance declined. His coaches saw it and he was cut. After he was cut, the other teams in the league saw it and let him sit. And when the reskins signed him, they saw the same thing and cut him in favor of Portis and Betts.

    This isnt some revisionist history. Its what happened. Its who he was.
    keasley45
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 314
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 6:40 pm
    Location: Cockeysville, Md


  • @keasly you’ve posted numerous times now about him being cut at the end of his career.....we get it he was done but that fact doesn’t define his career. Just take a trip down memory lane and think about the defensive legends he ran against, an impressive list of HOF destroyers. Yet he had a 5 year run that rivals some of the greats. I’ve listed several times his most impressive accomplishments that in any other city would make him legendary yet here I have to defend him against names like Fenner and Washington....

    Will he get in the Hall, probably not. Does he deserve consideration...in my opinion yes.
    Flyingsquad23
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 522
    Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:47 pm


  • Hockey Guy wrote:This place is just amazing.

    The mental gymnastics somebody needs to go through to convince themselves that a player, who never missed a game in his first 6 seasons & carried the ball that many times & gained that many yards & scored that many TD's in the most physically demanding sport in the most physically demanding league & won an MVP award in said league, was "soft" is impressive.

    & by amazing, I mean embarrassing.



    It doesn't have to be either or, it can be both.

    Alexander was one of the most durable runners in his time BECAUSE he avoided contact and ran out of bounds instead of trying to hammer upfield for a couple more yards.

    The downside of that is people did perceive him to be soft, so people on this thread aren't making that up. That was the knock on Alexander.

    Hell, for as much as I love Carson, he could use a little Alexander in him to know when to fight and hit for extra yards and when to run out of bounds instead of seeking contact. Might have helped avoid some of these injuries.
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 18342
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:10 am


  • Someone's gonna have to pull up this play where SA "slides, to avoid contact". If it's so legendary, there's gotta be a clip of it somewhere.
    TypeSly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1054
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:54 pm


  • Alexander is one of the greatest runners in league history in terms of vision. Dude was great at finding the hole.

    That said, Lynch didn't need a hole, Lynch didn't want a hole. Alexander's style would've been dreadful behind Cable's o-lines. Marshawn might've run for 2,000 behind Walt and Hutch.
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7197
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:44 pm
    Location: In the basement of Reynholm Industries


  • Did he avoid contact sometimes? Maybe, but as a result he was fit and healthy to play 5 consecutive seasons with 300+ carries in each (bar one, where he was just behind at 295), and all 16 games in each.

    For all his "shortened" career, he only has around 250 less career carries than Lynch, who suited up for 11 seasons (not including his 1 game hurrah with us last year).

    Not soft for me.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3616
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 5:38 pm


  • keasley45 wrote:
    Nunya wrote:
    keasley45 wrote:Whats amazing is that people can't distinguish between 'soft' in the context of durability and 'soft' in the context of being willing to make contact intentionally and forcefully in a contact sport like football. And hey, guess what... IF YOU RARELY GET HIT HARD BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS SLIDING TO THE GROUND AND AVOIDING CONTACT YOU MIGHT BE PRETTY GOOD AT AVOIDING INJURY. But somehow now the fact that he was rarely hurt is a sign of his toughness? By that rule, norm Johnson was the toughest player we ever had.

    There's no 'mental gymastics' required to see that Alexander's running style was one predicated on avoiding contact when possible to the point of sliding down to the ground when it looked like he might take a hit... instead of meeting the tackle and trying to force his will... and not turning out hard yards unless he was in sight of the goal line.

    Thats who he was and because he had a great line, there were a ton of yards and touchdowns available to him without needing to play a more hard-nosed style.

    And for the folks on this board who insist on creating this binary condition where a back is either Shaun alexander or Earl Campbell... again. Thats whats amazing. Theres a huge range of styles between the two and most don't involve sliding to the ground and avoiding contact and hard yards.

    This is not an opinion shared by justvthose on this board. Homlgren saw it and no doubt it was the root of the disconnect between the two. Zorn saw it while he was here and after he signed him in washingtin... and cut him. And the 31 other teams that could have signed him after he was cut by seattle saw it too. But maybe we are all just crazy.


    Gotta love the people that try to re-write history to fit their own false reality.

    Zorn did not cut Alexander because he thought he was soft. He cut him because he had 4 RBs on his roster and the other 3 were getting healthy. This made Alexander expendable. He was cut in order to free up a roster spot for someone to help their defense....which was struggling at the time.


    the statement about Zorn's feelings on Alexander are straight from his mouth, not conjecture. but i guess in this universe the feeling that Shaun wouldnt hit a hole or practice hard somehow didnt factor into him being cut?? lol. And Ladell Betts beat him out?? Please. They could have brought him back and the thought at the time among the media here in the mid-atlantic was that they would. But they didnt. because why bring back a guy you were taking a flier on in the first place when nobody else wanted him and who has a reputation for not running hard, practicing hard. DC media even talked about him not being teh same kind of back if he didnt have great blocking. And he wasnt. which is why he was let go in DC and Seattle.

    Look. Shaun benefited from a generationally good o-line. He dint run hard, hit the hole hard (unless he was in sight of the goal-line, or actively grind out yards that werent easily there. And he was gifted a ton of yards when all that was required was speed and the ability to make a cut and get upfield. When that gift was no longer there, he was no longer the same back. He'd just signed a fat contract, was now in a position where running was no longer as easy as it once was becauise the line wasnt as good, and his performance declined. His coaches saw it and he was cut. After he was cut, the other teams in the league saw it and let him sit. And when the reskins signed him, they saw the same thing and cut him in favor of Portis and Betts.

    This isnt some revisionist history. Its what happened. Its who he was.


    1. Zorn never said SA was soft....either directly or indirectly. However, he did imply that SA was lazy.....which he was late in his career (and maybe some throughout his career). IMO, soft and lazy are 2 different things.
    2. By even bringing up Zorn and his comments, it seems like some people want to define SA's career based on who he was in 2008. SA received a serious wrist injury in week 1 of 2007. This injury not only affected him physically, but mentally as well. His career ended in the first week of 2007 when he became a shadow of his former self.
    3. The only reason the Redskins signed SA to begin with was because of an injury to Betts. Betts was a rising star that was often hurt. When he was healthy, he was a decent RB. Unfortunately, he was seldom healthy and it ended his career. Everybody expected SA to be released once Betts got healthy....and he was.
    Nunya
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 212
    Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:20 am


  • I couldn't stand him. He only ran hard around the goal line. His MVP was like Testaverde's Heisman, a product of the team around him.

    He put up good numbers, but I've always wondered what we would have been like with an Emmitt Smith, Marshal Faulk, or even a Corey Dillion behind that line.
    Own The West
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 450
    Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 8:20 pm


  • I had no idea (before this week) that there was so much hate for Shaun Alexander amongst the Seattle fanbase. So for me, these threads have been rather shocking and enlightening at the same time.

    I guess because I was pretty young around that time, that I didn't delve so much on how he got his yards. I just remember him being my hero, that one of our players was a superstar and a league leader, year in and year out.
    TypeSly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1054
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:54 pm


  • Why was he on the bench most his rookie season?

    Because he was riding on his College accomplishments and thought he didn't have to put in the effort, he could not Challenge Watters even at the late stage of his career because he wouldn't work at his craft and didn't want to block.

    He started off on a bad note here, he had talent, but could have been one of those backs mentioned as top 20 all time.

    They picked him as Watters replacement, for a younger body as well as salary.

    Oh and he had hands of stone in the passing game as well, why Mack Strong was Third and long so much, we telegraphed plays when we pulled Shaun due to his refusal to block driving Holmgren nuts.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 34505
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • chris98251 wrote:Why was he on the bench most his rookie season?

    Because he was riding on his College accomplishments and thought he didn't have to put in the effort, he could not Challenge Watters even at the late stage of his career because he wouldn't work at his craft and didn't want to block.

    He started off on a bad note here, he had talent, but could have been one of those backs mentioned as top 20 all time.

    They picked him as Watters replacement, for a younger body as well as salary.

    Oh and he had hands of stone in the passing game as well, why Mack Strong was Third and long so much, we telegraphed plays when we pulled Shaun due to his refusal to block driving Holmgren nuts.


    Shaun is no Alvin Kamara as a receiver out of the backfield but to claim he had hands of stone is a huge stretch. He caught 68% of the passes thrown to him in his overall career. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlexSh00.htm.

    Which is similar to Terrell Davis who caught 66% of his targets through his career. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DaviTe00.htm
    Last edited by hawkfan68 on Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7933
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • This argument is utterly ridiculous

    If we had a RB scoring 28 tds in a year.. no one would be talking about THIS...

    Alexander ran JUST as effectively over the right as he did the left.

    This is an old ass, tired argument... and has only been accomplished very few times; that coming over the years of some VERY VERY VERY good Olines.

    You guys must be gD bored
    balakoth
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 209
    Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:41 pm


  • Softest seahawk ever. Did he produce? Sure. He was a product of an amazing offensive line. he rarely got touched in his MVP year. He had great speed and vision, but was as soft as a down blanket. Anytime a defender got near, he made a business decision to fall over. Especially, the years after the superbowl.
    doughboy63
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 2
    Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:09 am


  • hawkfan68 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Why was he on the bench most his rookie season?

    Because he was riding on his College accomplishments and thought he didn't have to put in the effort, he could not Challenge Watters even at the late stage of his career because he wouldn't work at his craft and didn't want to block.

    He started off on a bad note here, he had talent, but could have been one of those backs mentioned as top 20 all time.

    They picked him as Watters replacement, for a younger body as well as salary.

    Oh and he had hands of stone in the passing game as well, why Mack Strong was Third and long so much, we telegraphed plays when we pulled Shaun due to his refusal to block driving Holmgren nuts.


    Shaun is no Alvin Kamara as a receiver out of the backfield but to claim he had hands of stone is a huge stretch. He caught 68% of the passes thrown to him in his overall career. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlexSh00.htm.

    Which is similar to Terrell Davis who caught 66% of his targets through his career. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DaviTe00.htm



    Yes Matt had to almost underhand toss the ball to him.

    Would not pass block, would not go into the flat because he didn't want to get hit, how many screens do you remember?

    3rd and Long Matt Strong.
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 34505
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • chris98251 wrote:
    hawkfan68 wrote:
    chris98251 wrote:Why was he on the bench most his rookie season?

    Because he was riding on his College accomplishments and thought he didn't have to put in the effort, he could not Challenge Watters even at the late stage of his career because he wouldn't work at his craft and didn't want to block.

    He started off on a bad note here, he had talent, but could have been one of those backs mentioned as top 20 all time.

    They picked him as Watters replacement, for a younger body as well as salary.

    Oh and he had hands of stone in the passing game as well, why Mack Strong was Third and long so much, we telegraphed plays when we pulled Shaun due to his refusal to block driving Holmgren nuts.


    Shaun is no Alvin Kamara as a receiver out of the backfield but to claim he had hands of stone is a huge stretch. He caught 68% of the passes thrown to him in his overall career. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AlexSh00.htm.

    Which is similar to Terrell Davis who caught 66% of his targets through his career. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DaviTe00.htm



    Yes Matt had to almost underhand toss the ball to him.

    Would not pass block, would not go into the flat because he didn't want to get hit, how many screens do you remember?

    3rd and Long Matt Strong.


    Disagree. SA had 59 total receptions in 2002. That was good enough to be #3 on the team behind Koren Robinson and DJack. He had more receptions than Bobby Engram, who ended up with 50 that season. Mack Strong only had 22 receps. SA was not a bad receiver. Holmy isn't the type of coach who would keep calling plays to target SA if he wasn't producing.
    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sea/2002.htm

    Who cares if he wasn't a good blocker, there are plenty of rbs in HOF that couldn't block either.
    hawkfan68
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7933
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • That awesome O-line would have turned a few RB's that were considered mediocre over their careers into Hall Of Famers. Thought it then, and still think it now. Shaun used to fall down to avoid hits instead of fighting for that extra yard. I hated that. Can you imagine Lynch behind that line? OMG! So IMO, he was very good, but the O-line made him great.
    Last edited by BlueThunder on Wed Dec 02, 2020 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    BlueThunder
    *Net Enemy Forum Guy*
     
    Posts: 3937
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:39 am
    Location: Arlington, Washington


Next


It is currently Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:58 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ SEATTLE SEAHAWKS FOOTBALL ]




Information
  • Who is online