What the Raiders Fans are Saying About Aaron Curry

The following isn't an essay on Aaron Curry or the Oakland Raiders' fan base so much as it is on desperate rationalization - the need to believe that mountains of unpleasant news or unfavorable evidence can somehow be turned in your favor by a single unsupported, unsupportable, unfalsifiable hypothesis.

Those big words give way too much credit to the hilarious crap that some Raiders fans are pulling right now. They want to make their new LB acquisition, Aaron Curry, look like a good move and are pulling out all the stops to do it. Most of it involves taking Curry's elite skillz for granted and brandishing all kinds of unrelated criticisms on Seattle's front office, hoping to make them look like just the pack of stooges that would release a burgeoning Hall-of-Famer.

In fairness to Oakland, this phenomenon is not unique to the Bay Area. I remember Seahawks fans rationalizing about Greg Knapp when he came to Seattle for the 2009 season as offensive coordinator. Nobody wanted to believe the simplest implication of his body of work - that Seattle was in for a year of unimaginative, ineffective, laughably bad play-calling - so they set about searching for a reason to believe. Untenable speculation, excuses, dismissals, contradictions of fact, all in an attempt to shed better light on Knapp.

So, before we start making fun of Raiders fans over their Curry-squirming, let's remember that we're not immune to that tendency. We're all sports fans. We all want reason to hope. Some stoic churls like myself excluded, every one of us is looking for the silver lining that might, just might, flash into a glorious clear sky.

Now then, to the good part. Some examples (courtesy of Sadhappy at Seahawks.net) and my rebuttals in Seahawks blue:

"your coaching staff is overvaluing K.J. Wright"
You would need to prove that Curry has outplayed Wright in order to have any kind of respectability behind that.

"Curry is simply not one of 'Carrolls boys'."
Neither was Lofa Tatupu, Lendale White, or Lawrence Jackson, I guess.
"the way he was handled in Seattle by the coaching staff that Curry was thinking too much on the field instead of just playing"
I've seen that excuse floated in Seattle, too. But how hard does a #4 LB have to think to make a basic open-field tackle?

Who Do We Blame for Aaron Curry?

LB Aaron Curry is in the midst of a slow-burn demotion. In a fall from grace that actually evokes my sympathy, Curry is now taking reps with the Seahawks' scout team as fourth-round pick KJ Wright assumes his starting position. Curry has taken a humble attitude in front of the reporters, and despite some angsty Twitter comments that people are reading way too far into, he seems to be taking it in stride.

Dave Boling, in an attempt to put the selection of Curry in perspective, tries to shift the responsibility for the Curry pick away from Curry. Indeed, it wasn't Curry's fault that he went #4, and that needs to be acknowledged. But then Boling turns around and picks the wrong scapegoat: Curry's coaches.

Lockout Hangover: Linebackers

If you're using tackle numbers to evaluate linebackers, you should probably be aware that you're using a useless stat. If a linebacker has high tackle numbers, there might be all kinds of reasons for it, including some that have nothing to do with good performance. Such as:

1. He's a middle linebacker. Did you know that 50% of runs in the NFL are straight up the middle? MLB tackle numbers are higher than every other position by default, simply because that's where offenses run most.

2. His defense might be on the field all the time. Thus having to make more tackles. We already know this to be true of the Seahawks.

3. QB's might not be scared to throw at him. A good coverage LB (which a MLB should be in a Cover 2 like Seattle's) sticks to his zones and discourages passes to his man. Theoretically, a good MLB should have less tackles to make because he's forcing QB's to look elsewhere, hold onto the ball longer, and hopefully get sacked. Good defense shows up in QB pressure.

4. The rest of your team might suck at tackling. Thus forcing him to clean up their messes.


Starters

Chris Spencer, Sean Locklear Finished in Seattle?

A PFW article had this to say today:

Word out of Seattle is that free-agent O-linemen Sean Locklear and Chris Spencer have, in effect, been told to look elsewhere. First-round draft pick James Carpenter, who already has been handed the starting RT role that Locklear filled the majority of last season, apparently has been given Locklear's number (No. 75). Spencer, a former first-round draft pick who has had as many downs as ups as the team's starting center, has been replaced by third-year pro Max Unger, who suffered a season-ending toe injury in Week One last season as the starting right guard.

Nobody's going to miss Locklear. The last relic of Seattle's historic offensive line from 2005 was never the same after his Pro Bowl cohorts disappeared. His last two years have been defined by red-zone penalties and getting wiped out by basic bull rushes.

Spencer is an interesting case. Some will remember his constant injuries and his overblown struggles with line calls and hail the departure of one of Tim Ruskell's first-round "busts". Others will cite his steady improvement in 2007 and see just another hole being opened on the line.

Top Ten Great Mistakes of Tim Ruskell, Part 1

I've been fighting a tough flu over the past week, so the heavy-research articles are on hold for the moment (sorry!). But I did decide to put up a list of what I feel are the ten greatest failings of Tim Ruskell. These are the errors that I feel had the most impact in putting the team behind the curve of its own aging and attrition.

This article will cover #10 through #6 - and you might be surprised to find out that the loss of Steve Hutchinson isn't even in the top 5.

Player Types: The Pete Carroll Dictionary

No, I can't tell you who the Seahawks will be drafting, not specifically. But I can tell you what they will be like. Or, more correctly, I will let Pete tell you exactly what HE is looking for at every position.

All Carroll quotes are direct, and taken from the transcript of a coaching seminar on the 4-3 under defense that he has used for quite some time now.

First, the LEO, or Elephant position defensive end:

"The open side Defensive End has to be one of your best football players. Size does not matter as much. We want an athletic player who can move around."

This appears to be a fungible position to an extent. I am sure that if a truly special player who met this standard AND was both a special pass rusher and excellent run stopper was available, he would be selected early in the draft, but that seems unlikely this season. Key words to remember for the Leo position (stand up defensive end) are "one of your best football players" and " athletic player who can move around."
 

Second, the nose tackle:

The Brandon Mebane Conundrum

Hey, Kip here. You might remember me from Seahawks Draft Blog. I'm really tight on time this year, so I can't contribute terribly often either here or at SDB, but this is a topic I've had on my chest for a few weeks and since Brandon (Adams) asked me to contribute, I figured this would be a good place to start this topic.

When Pete Carroll brought his "Leo" defense to Seattle in 2010, it didn't officially change Seattle from a 4-3 to a 3-4 team, but in some ways, it was a step in that direction. Seattle's previous 4-3 defenses featured two pass rushing defensive ends who could perform reasonably well against the run, a pass rushing defensive tackle (known as the 3 tech), and a single gap run stuffing defensive tackle (known as the 1 tech).

Though technically still a 4-3, the "Leo" concept is a bit more unbalanced. The strong side (usually left) defensive end needs to be death to the run while also collapsing the pocket, but isn't expected to be a consistent pass rusher who generates sacks. The strong side defensive tackle, who manned the 3 tech in the previous defense, becomes a two gap player, something that is generally only found in 3-4 defenses. A two gap player does not shoot a gap, but instead directly engages a lineman and protects the gaps on both sides of him. The 3 tech role still exists, but was moved from the strong side to the weakside. Finally, you have the Leo position off the weak side end, and this is where almost all of the pass rush is generated from.

As with any scheme change, you will have players who benefit and others who suffer.