Not sure this is outside of your area of interest Joe, but what happened to Geno and Pete? I don’t have the energy to pay attention to what’s going on in Vegas in addition to my Seahawks fandom, but I’m curious.
Seems like GS+PC have been a huge letdown—iirc before the season people assumed Pete’s talent for culture-building would at least get the team out of the gutter. Geno seems to be playing at a much much worse level than last year as well. What happened? Was Pete a bad coach for way longer than we thought? Was Geno just as good as his supporting cast?
"Last season against Stafford in Week 9’s critical loss to the Rams, Woolen had an interception but also was blamed for 2 missed tackles (season-high) and cited as the closest defenders on both of Stafford’s touchdown passes (season-high), including the game-winner in overtime." Forgot all about that miserable Woolen performance but now I remember it so clearly. Thanks for bringing this up SJ... Can we not enjoy the decisive victory for a few days before raising the anxiety level? haha
Winning is fun, I must admit. It's even more fun when you win with style points. And the style points have been present for a few games now. Keep 'em coming Seahawks.
If EJ is ready, he's the one guy I'd like to have back for the Rams, just cuz he'd have an extra chip on his shoulder playing them. But if he's not ready, we're in good hands.
A turnover-free game for this team, in my opinion, has an extremely strong correlation with win probability. I'll take a zero-turnover win by any margin, because I believe that's far more likely than any type of win if you turn the ball over multiple times. On Sunday, the turnovers and short field that attended them, were the only thing that gave then a glimmer of hope.
Sorry SJ, but I can’t agree with the 2nd part of your heading. As I’ve been commenting in your last post’s discussions, the entire game is important. No matter how much you’re leading. Players need to play full games and teams can’t afford to be blasé about their lead. Bad habits can and will creep in if we keep dropping off in the 2nd half. In a close, crucial game, this will see us lose more times than not. And players’ bodies won’t be used to running a whole game out. This could be dangerous for injury if they’re not a full match fit when they need to play a full match.
It’s like the old training saying: Train like you play. This works because it doesn’t allow bad habits to creep in and keeps your body match fit. The best of the best are always those that train the most and with deliberate intensity. And they don’t become the best if they’re not resilient (match hardened). That’s not coincidence.
It’s great that back-ups get the experience. But that can be had via rotations throughout games. Not all at once just coz the lead is comfortable.
Ok, you can't agree with SSJ, I'll stick up for him and not agree with you. Your points would usually be good. However, this is a very physical sport. To win the super bowl you have to play 20/21 games at least, and that is if you don't need the pre-season reps. That is a lot of wear and tear on bodies. Any rest/breaks you can give the starters you should do it. We started having injures from the beginning of the season and then we had a bye and somehow that created a bunch more. If you are far enough ahead, let the backups play and get as much experience as possible. You never know when they are going to have to step in. This is not just the Seahawks, look at all the injuries in the rest of the league. Rest players when you can, reduce the wear and tear they go through. If you read the weekly injury reports, frequently players are excused from practices so they can rest. If rest is so important that they can miss a practice, then resting them during the game would seem to be ok. BTW, this is a player-by-player issue. There are some players who need the reps, and in the snap counts you see they don't get the rest others do But I think resting is important for those older veterans. Of which we have a few.
All valid points. I’m not against resting. I am against bad habits. I’m also against not playing out games fully. I get it’s a physical sport - which is my point. The body needs to be conditioned to it for success. Not playing to the sports requirements is failing to condition the body to cope with it. This may be contributing to the injuries that you mention.
I get that there must be a balance which can be difficult to manage. But contributing to reducing production just because you’re leading is not good practice and lends itself to bad habits and possibly future injury to those that are affected by not conditioning their bodies to run out a full game when it will eventually be required.
I have some experience at the top level of Australian Football with injury management and playing such a tough, physical sport and I have witnessed what I’m talking about. And I agree with you that it is also at an individual level. Thus may comment on the best of the best. Usually the best are the ones that put in the work.
While I agree that the best are the ones who put in the work, I think that requiring your best players to continue playing when clearly unnecessary is foolish in the NFL. Every single one of those players is one hit away from a minimum of a small nagging injury to a maximum of a career ending injury. When the game is well in hand (or out of hand for that matter) the team's best players should not be on the field. It is an absolute tragedy to see injuries like the Commander's QB in the game they had no chance to win, and if it is someone with a legitimate chance at the hall of fame, it is even worse.
Further, take a look at Okada and Thomas. Those two players only needed a little playing time for their skills to improve drastically and make everyone recognize that they were difference makers. Back-ups need a chance to play, and you cannot rotate them in to most positions during a competitive game without risking the outcome unnecessarily.
Finally, it is considered bad form to just keep piling the points on another team by calling aggressive plays that seek to magnify the score differential unnecessarily (you may not be advocating this but it seems to be part of, "playing out games fully." It would be ridiculous to be throwing bombs with minutes left in the fourth quarter when up by 3 or 4 scores, and there are more than a few NFL players who would think that playing dirty against a team that did so would be justifiable - just look at the number of fights that are caused by frustration in blow-out victories. There is a point when the dead horse should no longer be beaten...
There’s a few things here that I disagree with, and a few I agree with. However, this discussion is difficult to have in the limits of writing. So, as a short response, I will just point out the following:
- I never suggested that ‘throwing bombs’ was a good thing or necessary;
- your argument re. Thomas and Okada confirms my point that ‘they needed a little playing time’. Emphasis on ‘little’ which could be had by a managed rotation of playing time;
- a player playing (it’s his job) is never foolish; and
- every player is one hit away…..at any given time during a game or training (it’s the risk of playing the game). I argue it is more risky treating a player with kid gloves and not being conditioned to take those hits with resilience.
It’s always a tragedy when someone gets hurt. But if we fully embraced the precautionary principle, we wouldn’t have contact sports.
Another great newsletter and not just because I was mentioned in it.
SSJ, did Adams get hurt in the last game and if so, how seriously? Will we have to face him? Looking forward to all the LA insights you can spill this week.
Something I noticed on the game book. At the beginning they tell you the starters. Then there is a section that says substitutions. Below that there is a section that says did not play. Last week and this week, the did not play section was empty. Only a minor rest for the starters but I think that is great for morale that the backups get to call mom and dad and say "Hey, watch the last five minutes when I got in the game!"
Kinda sad actually to watch the demise of a couple of my ex-heroes: Pete Carroll and Russell Wilson. Every game that passes, the more they look like the distant past and in fact the more it appears they weren't the prime movers in Seattle's golden era. How could they have been so good, and now so bad? Or, were they never really as good as their record shows -- was that Marshawn and the other guys (as Sherm always implies).
Really disheartening to watch this unfolding, they deserve better. At least in my heart they do, eternally grateful.
Pete could have gone out on top but elected to risk his stellar standing by staying too long. Russell on the other hand stays because he refuses to see how much his decline has been out of pure egomania!
Maybe the silver lining to having a shorter career as a running back is that nobody expected much out of Marshawn Lynch after he got injured in 2015. And we never did see the same Beast Mode even though he came back and played for the Raiders and the Seahawks. Lynch was able to stop being good at 28 because, well, that felt like plenty old enough for a running back already!
I feel for PC’s pain, but not for Russ. He can go to hell for his backhanded insult of Seahawks fans when he got to Denver. He deserves what he’s getting and to wither away into obscurity and anonymity.
He also insulted his OL while still on the team, moping while watching the Super Bowl from the box seats.
One of the Joe's here recently posted a highlights video of that 23-0 pasting of the Giants (5 int's off of Eli Manning!). I had forgotten how frantic Seattle's offense was with Russ -- running around literally like a chicken with his head cut off but making fantastic throws off-platform and with the walls caving in on him -- other than when Marshawn was just CRUSHING defenses. "Frenetic" was the word that came to me watching Russ, compared to the offense I'm watching now with Kubiak and Darnold calmly back there picking teams apart. Russ's OL wasn't as good as Darnold's is now (or, was he responsible for some of that??), but man am I glad those days are gone -- miracle plays all over the place (and constant situations requiring miracle plays). I was so busy defending him vs Luck and Kaep (remember those days??) that I wasn't objectively noticing how dependent we were on those (unsustainable as it turns out) Russ miracles.
I miss the Russ Super Bowls. I moved here in 2015 after the Super Bowl. So I don’t have any affinity for Russ winning the Super Bowl for us. I wasn’t even a Seahawk fan before 2015. I lived in Ballard my first 6 months in Seattle, and my neighbor was an old retired fisherman and Seahawk fan. I became a fan hanging around with him. So I have a more negative feeling toward Russ than most fans, since a good deal of the positives I missed entirely. Without those positives to offset the negatives in his later years here, I was glad to see him go. I saw his salary and salary demands as an albatross around the neck of the team.
When Love comes back, I'm not taking Okada out. Bryant might be with new squad next year. Too bad i like him but he is slowish. Emmanwori looked great and kinda meh too imo. I get frustrated watching sloppy ball even if we are up. It's just indicative of who we are. If we keep playing sloppy eventually it will bite us in the arse. Oh and Brady Russell on special teams and Holani don't get enough love for their contributions in this game.
I watched the “Little Rascals” growing up. One of my favorite episodes was Mrs Crabtree, the teacher asking the class questions. “What is 3 and 1?” Answer “oil” “What is 2 and 1?” Answer “shoe polish” “What is Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address” Answer “1621 South Main Street” Sorry for those not old enough to realize how funny this is.
I made a mistake voting on the turnover issue. (Fat fingers) One thing I can predict going forward. If we have 3 turnovers against the RAMS, our chance of winning that game is minuscule. Let’s protect the football!
Only thing I can say to that is that Matthew Stafford has not thrown an interception since Week 3! He is probably going to win MVP at this rate and that's totally fine but 0 interceptions for Stafford in six straight games? Impossible. He's due for turnover regression.
I hope he wins the regular season MVP and then is too worn out to do well in the playoffs. The super bowl is after his birthday and if he won it only Manning and Brady were older when they won. And Brady carried his team to the SB, Manning's team carried him. Pass more Matt, wear out that old arm.
You see, downplaying turnovers are a mistake, despite the Seahawks being able to overcome them several games this year. I think the Rams are the best team we’re likely to play before the playoffs, and we might play the Rams in the playoffs. I know you’re joking ;)
Anyone else notice that it looked like Brissett had a lot of non-called intentional grounding plays during the game?
Longtime reader first time…question asker.
Not sure this is outside of your area of interest Joe, but what happened to Geno and Pete? I don’t have the energy to pay attention to what’s going on in Vegas in addition to my Seahawks fandom, but I’m curious.
Seems like GS+PC have been a huge letdown—iirc before the season people assumed Pete’s talent for culture-building would at least get the team out of the gutter. Geno seems to be playing at a much much worse level than last year as well. What happened? Was Pete a bad coach for way longer than we thought? Was Geno just as good as his supporting cast?
"Last season against Stafford in Week 9’s critical loss to the Rams, Woolen had an interception but also was blamed for 2 missed tackles (season-high) and cited as the closest defenders on both of Stafford’s touchdown passes (season-high), including the game-winner in overtime." Forgot all about that miserable Woolen performance but now I remember it so clearly. Thanks for bringing this up SJ... Can we not enjoy the decisive victory for a few days before raising the anxiety level? haha
Winning is fun, I must admit. It's even more fun when you win with style points. And the style points have been present for a few games now. Keep 'em coming Seahawks.
If EJ is ready, he's the one guy I'd like to have back for the Rams, just cuz he'd have an extra chip on his shoulder playing them. But if he's not ready, we're in good hands.
A turnover-free game for this team, in my opinion, has an extremely strong correlation with win probability. I'll take a zero-turnover win by any margin, because I believe that's far more likely than any type of win if you turn the ball over multiple times. On Sunday, the turnovers and short field that attended them, were the only thing that gave then a glimmer of hope.
We have to stop careless self-sabotage
Sorry SJ, but I can’t agree with the 2nd part of your heading. As I’ve been commenting in your last post’s discussions, the entire game is important. No matter how much you’re leading. Players need to play full games and teams can’t afford to be blasé about their lead. Bad habits can and will creep in if we keep dropping off in the 2nd half. In a close, crucial game, this will see us lose more times than not. And players’ bodies won’t be used to running a whole game out. This could be dangerous for injury if they’re not a full match fit when they need to play a full match.
It’s like the old training saying: Train like you play. This works because it doesn’t allow bad habits to creep in and keeps your body match fit. The best of the best are always those that train the most and with deliberate intensity. And they don’t become the best if they’re not resilient (match hardened). That’s not coincidence.
It’s great that back-ups get the experience. But that can be had via rotations throughout games. Not all at once just coz the lead is comfortable.
Ok, you can't agree with SSJ, I'll stick up for him and not agree with you. Your points would usually be good. However, this is a very physical sport. To win the super bowl you have to play 20/21 games at least, and that is if you don't need the pre-season reps. That is a lot of wear and tear on bodies. Any rest/breaks you can give the starters you should do it. We started having injures from the beginning of the season and then we had a bye and somehow that created a bunch more. If you are far enough ahead, let the backups play and get as much experience as possible. You never know when they are going to have to step in. This is not just the Seahawks, look at all the injuries in the rest of the league. Rest players when you can, reduce the wear and tear they go through. If you read the weekly injury reports, frequently players are excused from practices so they can rest. If rest is so important that they can miss a practice, then resting them during the game would seem to be ok. BTW, this is a player-by-player issue. There are some players who need the reps, and in the snap counts you see they don't get the rest others do But I think resting is important for those older veterans. Of which we have a few.
End of rant.
I'd like to see a second bye week added.
All valid points. I’m not against resting. I am against bad habits. I’m also against not playing out games fully. I get it’s a physical sport - which is my point. The body needs to be conditioned to it for success. Not playing to the sports requirements is failing to condition the body to cope with it. This may be contributing to the injuries that you mention.
I get that there must be a balance which can be difficult to manage. But contributing to reducing production just because you’re leading is not good practice and lends itself to bad habits and possibly future injury to those that are affected by not conditioning their bodies to run out a full game when it will eventually be required.
I have some experience at the top level of Australian Football with injury management and playing such a tough, physical sport and I have witnessed what I’m talking about. And I agree with you that it is also at an individual level. Thus may comment on the best of the best. Usually the best are the ones that put in the work.
While I agree that the best are the ones who put in the work, I think that requiring your best players to continue playing when clearly unnecessary is foolish in the NFL. Every single one of those players is one hit away from a minimum of a small nagging injury to a maximum of a career ending injury. When the game is well in hand (or out of hand for that matter) the team's best players should not be on the field. It is an absolute tragedy to see injuries like the Commander's QB in the game they had no chance to win, and if it is someone with a legitimate chance at the hall of fame, it is even worse.
Further, take a look at Okada and Thomas. Those two players only needed a little playing time for their skills to improve drastically and make everyone recognize that they were difference makers. Back-ups need a chance to play, and you cannot rotate them in to most positions during a competitive game without risking the outcome unnecessarily.
Finally, it is considered bad form to just keep piling the points on another team by calling aggressive plays that seek to magnify the score differential unnecessarily (you may not be advocating this but it seems to be part of, "playing out games fully." It would be ridiculous to be throwing bombs with minutes left in the fourth quarter when up by 3 or 4 scores, and there are more than a few NFL players who would think that playing dirty against a team that did so would be justifiable - just look at the number of fights that are caused by frustration in blow-out victories. There is a point when the dead horse should no longer be beaten...
There’s a few things here that I disagree with, and a few I agree with. However, this discussion is difficult to have in the limits of writing. So, as a short response, I will just point out the following:
- I never suggested that ‘throwing bombs’ was a good thing or necessary;
- your argument re. Thomas and Okada confirms my point that ‘they needed a little playing time’. Emphasis on ‘little’ which could be had by a managed rotation of playing time;
- a player playing (it’s his job) is never foolish; and
- every player is one hit away…..at any given time during a game or training (it’s the risk of playing the game). I argue it is more risky treating a player with kid gloves and not being conditioned to take those hits with resilience.
It’s always a tragedy when someone gets hurt. But if we fully embraced the precautionary principle, we wouldn’t have contact sports.
I'll take winning by 22. It's easier on my blood pressure.....
I laughed out loud when I read the headline...cracked me up.
Another great newsletter and not just because I was mentioned in it.
SSJ, did Adams get hurt in the last game and if so, how seriously? Will we have to face him? Looking forward to all the LA insights you can spill this week.
Something I noticed on the game book. At the beginning they tell you the starters. Then there is a section that says substitutions. Below that there is a section that says did not play. Last week and this week, the did not play section was empty. Only a minor rest for the starters but I think that is great for morale that the backups get to call mom and dad and say "Hey, watch the last five minutes when I got in the game!"
Thanks! McVay said that Davante Adams probably could have gone back into the game yesterday if it had mattered. I expect he will play.
Not that I would wish a serious injury on anyone but a small one to miss a game would be ok I think.
Kinda sad actually to watch the demise of a couple of my ex-heroes: Pete Carroll and Russell Wilson. Every game that passes, the more they look like the distant past and in fact the more it appears they weren't the prime movers in Seattle's golden era. How could they have been so good, and now so bad? Or, were they never really as good as their record shows -- was that Marshawn and the other guys (as Sherm always implies).
Really disheartening to watch this unfolding, they deserve better. At least in my heart they do, eternally grateful.
Pete could have gone out on top but elected to risk his stellar standing by staying too long. Russell on the other hand stays because he refuses to see how much his decline has been out of pure egomania!
Same thing is happening to Belichick lovers. When he didn't have Brady anymore, his system went down the tubes.
Maybe the silver lining to having a shorter career as a running back is that nobody expected much out of Marshawn Lynch after he got injured in 2015. And we never did see the same Beast Mode even though he came back and played for the Raiders and the Seahawks. Lynch was able to stop being good at 28 because, well, that felt like plenty old enough for a running back already!
I feel for PC’s pain, but not for Russ. He can go to hell for his backhanded insult of Seahawks fans when he got to Denver. He deserves what he’s getting and to wither away into obscurity and anonymity.
He also insulted his OL while still on the team, moping while watching the Super Bowl from the box seats.
One of the Joe's here recently posted a highlights video of that 23-0 pasting of the Giants (5 int's off of Eli Manning!). I had forgotten how frantic Seattle's offense was with Russ -- running around literally like a chicken with his head cut off but making fantastic throws off-platform and with the walls caving in on him -- other than when Marshawn was just CRUSHING defenses. "Frenetic" was the word that came to me watching Russ, compared to the offense I'm watching now with Kubiak and Darnold calmly back there picking teams apart. Russ's OL wasn't as good as Darnold's is now (or, was he responsible for some of that??), but man am I glad those days are gone -- miracle plays all over the place (and constant situations requiring miracle plays). I was so busy defending him vs Luck and Kaep (remember those days??) that I wasn't objectively noticing how dependent we were on those (unsustainable as it turns out) Russ miracles.
I miss the Russ Super Bowls. I moved here in 2015 after the Super Bowl. So I don’t have any affinity for Russ winning the Super Bowl for us. I wasn’t even a Seahawk fan before 2015. I lived in Ballard my first 6 months in Seattle, and my neighbor was an old retired fisherman and Seahawk fan. I became a fan hanging around with him. So I have a more negative feeling toward Russ than most fans, since a good deal of the positives I missed entirely. Without those positives to offset the negatives in his later years here, I was glad to see him go. I saw his salary and salary demands as an albatross around the neck of the team.
When Love comes back, I'm not taking Okada out. Bryant might be with new squad next year. Too bad i like him but he is slowish. Emmanwori looked great and kinda meh too imo. I get frustrated watching sloppy ball even if we are up. It's just indicative of who we are. If we keep playing sloppy eventually it will bite us in the arse. Oh and Brady Russell on special teams and Holani don't get enough love for their contributions in this game.
Yeah, hard to take Okada out of the game now. Him and Drake Thomas have made a world of difference.
"My mistake was trying to add 2+1 without a calculator."
Oh, Nice. Can't Touch This ! ... on any other site.
[MC Hammer GIF]
I watched the “Little Rascals” growing up. One of my favorite episodes was Mrs Crabtree, the teacher asking the class questions. “What is 3 and 1?” Answer “oil” “What is 2 and 1?” Answer “shoe polish” “What is Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address” Answer “1621 South Main Street” Sorry for those not old enough to realize how funny this is.
Sorry for those that do? Maybe if I had a good memory I could remember that stuff.
The show was filmed in the 1930s. It was syndicated and reruns played on TV through the 1950, and early 60s.
I made a mistake voting on the turnover issue. (Fat fingers) One thing I can predict going forward. If we have 3 turnovers against the RAMS, our chance of winning that game is minuscule. Let’s protect the football!
Only thing I can say to that is that Matthew Stafford has not thrown an interception since Week 3! He is probably going to win MVP at this rate and that's totally fine but 0 interceptions for Stafford in six straight games? Impossible. He's due for turnover regression.
I hope he wins the regular season MVP and then is too worn out to do well in the playoffs. The super bowl is after his birthday and if he won it only Manning and Brady were older when they won. And Brady carried his team to the SB, Manning's team carried him. Pass more Matt, wear out that old arm.
Sign me up for that game plan! May I add, make it Emmanwori’s 1st, and his 4.3 speed takes it to the house!
... 'lesson we get 4 or more turnovers.
You see, downplaying turnovers are a mistake, despite the Seahawks being able to overcome them several games this year. I think the Rams are the best team we’re likely to play before the playoffs, and we might play the Rams in the playoffs. I know you’re joking ;)
First comment? Begaw!
Begaw!