Class, Competition, and the Change That Might Not Be: Part 1

So, we've signed a starting quarterback with two starts under his belt who doesn't fit Pete's "mobile point guard" profile all that well, and NOW it's a good offseason?

Okay.

It's nice when your thoughts organize themselves into convenient categories. My reaction to Seattle's signing of Matt Flynn is threefold. In brief: He's far from a bust-in-waiting. Still, it's a little surprising...and a little revealing...how much excitement has been generated in Seattle by a 7th-round QB who has flashed success in very limited starting experience in the NFL's most efficient offense. Harsh way to put it? Sure. But not untrue, and not irrelevant.

I'll elaborate on Flynn later. First I want to talk about how his arrival affects our incumbent quarterback, Tarvaris Jackson.

I'm the last person to suggest that our QB situation last year was ideal. I know exactly what we have in Tarvaris Jackson: a "bridge QB" with glaring holes in his game who will probably never survive in the playoffs. And towards the end of the year as Jackson experienced a solid stretch as a "game manager", a lot of folks seemed content with that and gave Jackson credit for what he had accomplished. It's a rebuild, we said. We'll get there.

Then free agency came around, and the scent of new possibilities seemed to trigger all kinds of panting amongst the fan base.

Is Matt Flynn An Upgrade?

The short answer is, it all depends on what you want out of a QB.

That was my attempt at being mysterious.  I am all about the longer answer anyway, so here goes.

There is some buzz right now that Seattle is interested in Mr. Matt Flynn.  Why wouldn't they be?  To a front office committed to turning over every rock, and committed to always getting more picks, the idea of getting a free agent QB from Green Bay who upgrades the team has to be attractive.  This is one rock that definitely will be turned over.

First off, Flynn should be free to sign as a free agent.  The Packers have free agents to retain this year who could absorb the franchise tag, primarily Finley. The new CBA supposedly has some rules to prevent teams from tagging players they don't actually intend to retain, a la Matt Cassel, and the Packers, while not against the cap, are not way below it either.  That doesn't mean that Ted Thompson won't test those rules. If Finley is signed during the team's exclusive negotiating window, it would leave Flynn free for that.

Flynn will be a hot commodity.  His last performance is still echoing around the league; when you set a team record for touchdown passes in a game, there will be echoes.  A closer examination of his passing in that game shows that three of those passes for touchdowns were pretty much all YAC, but the passes that set them up were decent.  Watch every pass in that game and it is hard to think of all 480 yards as having been earned the hard way, as Detroit's secondary looked almost disinterested in tackling or covering, but it was accomplished in wind and light snow, which is a scouting consideration.  Potentially, Seattle could play critical future playoff games in places like Green Bay, Chicago, and New York, and a quarterback who doesn't shrivel in the winter is important.

Flynn is a fit Seattle's offense in most respects.  He fits the bill as a point guard quarterback.  Athletic enough and mobile enough, Flynn did an above average job against Detroit of identifying and then exploiting match ups.  He is not a laser armed surgeon, and expecting him to dissect a defense by fitting the ball into tight spaces 30 yards down field would be a disaster, but Seattle's offense does not do that much anyway.  In fact, in watching Flynn against Detroit, a lot of the playcalls were eerily similar to Seattle OC Darell Bevell's - everything just looked better.  Maybe because his targets are better players. 

Here are some of the things Flynn does better than Tarvaris Jackson:

Indiana Carroll and the Quarterback Crusade

For a while, the Seahawks' 2011 campaign was just one long draft discussion. Who are we getting at QB next year - that's all we cared about. Then the running game and defense suddenly emerged and started making a regular season out of it. That was fun, and hugely heartening. 2011 proved more informative and promising than we had expected.

But now, with the 49ers loss, we're swinging back into the holding pattern despite having a little football still left to play. And with that reversion, some shelved concerns are coming back with a vengeance.

A lot of us don't trust Pete Carroll to get our future quarterback right. I confess I don't.

And this despite Pete Carroll and GM John Schneider having done what most of us would have considered impossible: not only dump an entire roster whose financial footprint made it nigh undumpable, but replace most of that roster with talented high-ceiling starters - within two offseasons.

Wait...lockout...one and a half offseasons!

The rational sliver of my mind says, "What more do these guys need to prove to you?" They've validated themselves at virtually every position, spectacularly in some cases (Kam Chancellor! Doug Baldwin! ZOMG RICHARD SHERMAN!!!!!!!1!11). But when it comes to the cornerstone of quarterback, we're tetchy. Anxiously rehashing the debates. Wringing out the talking points without mercy. Flooding Rob Staton with page hits. All the signs of someone who needs a lot more reassurance.

The Ignored Seahawks

What gesture is he really making?

Alright, this is just getting ridiculous.

I've never been a huge fan of FOXSports' Adam Schein, and this week he has joined the chorus of national writers who are incapable of interpreting a Seahawks' win (over the Eagles, in this case) as anything but the opposition throwing the game:

I took the time to do a video rant on Cosmic SCHEIN this week on FOXSports.com to explain why the Eagles shouldn’t fire Reid. And then his team travels cross country and loses to the Seattle Seahawks. Actually, they didn’t lose. They got manhandled for three quarters by a relative bunch of clowns. Forget the 31-14 score. The effort and execution were pathetic all game.

That's the way this cookie always crumbles for the national media. The Seahawks never win, the other team just loses. No Seahawks victory contains any element of the Seahawks doing anything to actually earn or deserve it. It's always the fault of whatever team went into a Seahawks game cocky and came out clocked. To the national media, the Seahawks are an inert, faceless element with no sentient qualities or nameworthy players except their sucky QB, which other teams just seem to trip over because they weren't looking.

I'm usually one to try and put the shoe on the other foot. I try to see all sides and not let my fandom color things, and sometimes it makes others question that fandom. Let's get the perspective out of the way: The Eagles really did play like they didn't want it. They played like the Seahawks did for Charlie Whitehurst. They were missing three crucial starters, five once Mike Williams was done falling on people's heads, and were playing on the road (big-time) after a short week. Vince Young is just not an NFL quarterback, and three of his four interceptions came on awful throws/decisions. Their LB corps sucks in almost every facet. All things being equal, the Eagles really did make enough independent mistakes to lose the game.

If only things were equal to the pundits. Enough is enough.

Marshawn Lynch gives "Dream Team" future nightmares, Seahawks crush Eagles 31-14

Pete on the hot seat?  Don't make me laugh.

Has there been a season with more unexpected things than 2011?  A lot of fans looked at the schedule before the season began and saw games like Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Washington as near certain wins.  The Falcons, Giants, Ravens and Eagles games were near certain losses.  Seattle very nearly completed a comeback against the heavily favored Falcons, but otherwise, six games- that's half the season folks- has gone exactly the opposite of preseason expectation.

And sure, the Eagles came into Seattle the NFL's biggest disappointment sporting a 4-7 record, but they also led the entire NFL in offense for much of the year, and even after losing Vick, they still hover just behind the #2 team, the New England Patriots. That's due in large part to LeSean McCoy.  As my fantasy oriented brother informed me before the game, McCoy has been the best fantasy running back in all of the NFL this year.  McCoy lived up to that repuation and then some, even earning some surprisingly well deserved comparisons to Barry Sanders.  Like Sanders, McCoy is the master into turning a minus four yard broken play into a big gain.

Seattle's run defense is big, mean and nasty.  And really good, obviously.  But its not terribly fast- something both LeSean McCoy and Vince Young capitalized on all night long.  Thankfully, the Seahawks really came to play tonight.  Marshawn Lynch, Tarvaris Jackson, and Seattle's secondary all played the best games of their young Seahawks careers.  If Seattle had played at the same level as they had in any of the previous games (yes, even the Raven's game), I'm not sure it would have been enough tonight.  McCoy was ballin', and though Young threw four picks, I'd actually put more credit on the Seahawks defense for making athletic plays on the ball rather than blame Young for making terrible decisions (except for the Hawthorne pick six).  The Eagles didn't rack up a ton of yards, but they did lead several sustained, efficient drives.  Seattle's ability to kill drives with interceptions proved to be crucial.


Seattle did more than enough when it was on offense, totaling 347 yards of offense despite running the ball twice as many times as they passed.  It didn't start that way though, very nearly beginning with a delay of game on the very first play, something I've never seen before.  Yet it very nearly did, as a bizarre miscommunication with Golden Tate regarding the raising of the 12th man flag caused Seattle to run up to the line mere seconds before time expired.  The rush to snap the ball (with zeros showing) resulted in an illegal shift penalty, a result of not allowing enough time for players to set positions before the snap. 

Tarvaris Jackson has made good progress this year regarding pocket presence and extending plays, but today he did a nasty backslide, taking multiple sacks a decent quarterback wouldn't during the first half.  Despite those hickups, Jackson finished with 13 completions on only 16 attempts for 190 yards:  good for a completion rate of 81% and a YPA of 11.9.  He also added a sensational touchdown pass to Golden Tate and avoided an interception for what feels like the first time in an eternity. 

It was only the third time all season that Jackson went without a pick, and only the fourth time all season that he finished with a positive TD/INT ratio.  His game passer rating was 137, more than 40 points higher than his previous Seahawks high.  Rather surprisingly, it was the best passer rating by any Seahawks quarterback going back all the way to the Titans in 2005.  I don't want to make too big a deal out of a performance which only had 16 passes, but writing this post, it occurs to me that Jackson played far better than I thought he did while watching the game.

The storyline of the game was the running backs.  McCoy is having a pro-bowl season, and he's averaging 94 yards per game this season.  Since week nine (Dallas), Lynch has been averaging 118 yards per game.  Not that you would expect Lynch to keep this up forever, but that level of production over a full season would equal 1891 rushing yards and 19 total touchdowns.  That stat line seem familiar to anyone?   I've offered up a full Mea Culpa on Lynch which you can read here, if you haven't already.  Its crystal clear that Lynch isn't the same back he used to be.  A 4th and 5th for Lynch is beginning to look like one of the best trades in franchise history.

Finally, the secondary was incredible today.  Other than a coverage blip by Earl Thomas which helped setup the Eagles first touchdown, they gave Vince Young precious few easy targets, forcing him to dance around and buy time for what felt like forever on many plays.  Chancellor's interception was a thing of beauty.  Browner's first pick was a lucky repeat of his game sealing pick against the Giants, but his fourth quarter pick on a perfectly thrown deep ball was really a sight to behold.  I don't know if Browner could make up for last week's debacle with a single great performance, but I'd say he came pretty darn close tonight.  Its hard to believe he's the same guy who was getting us killed just four days ago.  David Hawthorne isn't part of the secondary, but he joined the fun with the slowest looking pick six I've seen in a good long while, due in large part to LeSean McCoy only jogging in pursuit, clearly demoralized into apathy by that point.  I'm sure he'll be getting an earful from Andy Reid next Monday.

Seattle is now 5-7.  Which isn't a great record exactly.  The 2009 Seahawks were 5-7 at one point.  But its at least respectable, and with two very winnable games remaining on the schedule, Seattle has a real chance to finish 7-9 or better.  That's a big accomplishment considering that Seattle's schedule is much harder this time around.  Seattle is probably out of the playoff hunt, but this season was never really about the playoffs.  It was about building a foundation for the future, namely the running game and the defense.  That kind of outlook makes a win like tonight's that much more exciting.  Seattle has claimed its third "statement win" of the season, and Jackson's performance tonight showed that Seattle is a very good team when the quarterback position produces its share.

• Brad Nessler and Mike Mayock called a great game.  If Nessler's voice seems familiar, its because he covers a lot of college football games, particularly in the SEC.  Its a very good combo and I look forward to seeing them cover more Seahawks games in the future.

• Marshawn Lynch against the NFC East in 2011:  492 yards rushing on 81 carries.  6.1 yards per carry.  5 total touchdowns.  That's a good way of getting national attention, I'd say.

• I wouldn't fret too much about the Eagles carving up our defense for most of the second half.  Seattle was protecting a big lead, and was playing its corners far off the ball to keep DeSean Jackson and Riley Cooper from burning them deep.  Seattle's corners are big and relatively fast, but they gain a considerable advantage from getting a shove at the line of scrimmage.  Seattle played it safe, but in doing so gave up this considerable advantage which helps corners, especially Brandon Browner, play up to their coverage potential.

• I really appreciate the classy gesture by Pete when he opted to kneel the ball inside the one yard line.  Going for the extra score might make Lynch and the fans happy, but it would be a very bitter ending which would stick in the Eagle's memory for a long time.  Seattle may very well face the Eagles in a pivotal game in the next couple seasons, perhaps even the playoffs.  I'd hate for the Eagles to have that extra chip on their shoulder if that happened.

• You really have to feel for Vince Young.  This game wasn't just a game for him, it was an audition for the rest of the NFL on national television.  Young made a few poor throws, but he was dealing with a very under-rated coverage group in Seattle and did a very impressive job extending plays.  In the end, he wound up with 4 interceptions which doesn't do his performance any justice at all.  After his Heater pick six, Young was visibly fighting back tears as he realized where his NFL career is heading.  After his fourth pick (on a great throw no less), I just felt terrible for the guy.  Here's hoping he works things out down the road. 

• Golden Tate continues his impressive progress at receiver.  He needs to work on his touchdown dance though.

• Today's win was not cheap- Russell Okung left the game late in the 4th quarter with a pectoral injury of all things.  Pete Carroll said the injury "doesn't look good," and with only four games remaining, there is a very real chance that Okung could be on the IR tomorrow.  If that happens, that would mean 3/5 of our line hit IR this year.  In a move which looked stupid at the time and looks even worse in retrospect, the team released Tyler Polumbus a few weeks ago, and he's now a member of the Redskins.  Seattle has no real depth at left tackle, so it should be interesting to see how they handle this situation.

Ten Quick Thoughts on SEA @ DAL

Only in Seattle would we be talking about "trap games" right after a two-game losing streak, but I think the phrase is apt as we approach a road contest in Dallas against the Cowboys. Ten quick observations:

1. "America's Team" is sitting at 3-4 and appears to be struggling, but appearances could be deceiving. Dallas opened the season with some close games against a brutal schedule, never losing by more than four points against the Jets, Lions, or Patriots. Last week they were buried to the tune of 34-7 by a Philly offense much more dynamic and interesting than Seattle's. The closest analogy to the Seahawks on Dallas' schedule is the Rams, whom Dallas dismantled 34-7 themselves.

Seahawks Bye-Week Report Card: The Palmer Ship Has Sailed and Other QB Thoughts

Previously: The Bye-Week Report Card on the Defense

NFL.com, indulging in a small-time shock tactic that's eyebrow-raising just the same, posted an interesting picture yesterday in order to attract clicks to their newest feature article suggesting possible last-minute trades. It was originally a well-known picture of Pete Carroll welcoming Matt Hasselbeck to the sidelines after a presumed touchdown, but the back of the jersey is now (rather obviously) photoshopped to show the number "9" and the name "Palmer".

Had you shown me that a couple weeks ago, I might have gotten excited. Earlier this year, 17 Power was one of a couple of Seattle blogs passing on low-level rumors that the Seahawks were pursuing Palmer in trade. A couple people were insisting that a certain price has been named; others quoted only an intangible interest. Nothing ever materialized, but the interest wasn't disproven either. Palmer, though modestly aged and beset by injuries, is nonetheless a potential short-term franchise quarterback with the skills to produce. He isn't doing anything in his non-retirement in Cincinnati, and the Bengals can only stand to benefit from trading him. It was a needed and potentially exciting prospect for a team struggling at the most important position, and I was hopeful it would happen.

Now...mehh. Not so much.

Further Thoughts on the Giants Victory

The more I think about Sunday's win against the Giants, the more it feels like an illustration of how defense and QB play fit together in this league. The Seahawks' defense didn't win the game for them. The game-sealing interception was a lucky bounce that lies more on Eli Manning's shoulders than any Seattle DB's, another of several bad decisions by a QB that couldn't push his luck forever.

No, in this instance, the Seahawks won because their QB play was able to keep pace with New York's. Shocker this, but the combination of Tarvaris Jackson and Charlie Whitehurst exceeded 300 yards and won the turnover battle. This left the Seahawks hanging around in the fourth quarter, well in position to capitalize on a lucky bounce.

Does this mean the Giants gave the game away? Yes and no. Manning had a horribly inconsistent day, but how many Seahawks teams of late have been able to run away with lucky breaks? Very few. Now we're seeing one. It says a lot about the spirit and tenacity of this team that they were still around mentally and physically when Eli Manning threw that fateful pass too wide of Victor Cruz. The Seahawks were playing sixty minutes of football, making plays when it counted. And they forced a few of their own.


Offense

Some consider the Tarvaris Jackson debate blown wide open again. I was under no impression that he was capable of playing franchise QB in the NFL, but Pete Carroll's system seems set up to maximize Jackson's abilities. Jackson led sustained drives against the Giants defense, rather than just a couple good ones. His newfound point-guarding is opening up the offense and affording them more red-zone opportunities. He's surprised me.

It certainly helps to have the weapons he does. Good QB's elevate bad WR's much more than the other way around, but there is an effect both ways, and the latter effect is near full strength right now. Doug Baldwin is out there doing his thing. He's fluid, instinctive, aware, and has experience with a similar system from Stanford from what I hear. It gives him an "it" factor that Golden Tate just plain lacks. Ben Obomanu and Marshawn Lynch acquitted themselves well in the short passing game, and Lynch showed good things Sunday pounding the rock. It was steady production, not just one long run. It wouldn't surprise me if they're all benefiting from Sidney Rice drawing a bit of coverage downfield.

Charlie Whitehurst made some eyebrow-raising deep throws to keep Seattle in the game late. He also had some bad throws and continues to obsess over his first read. He's not as much of an improv QB as Jackson is, which is both good and bad. If a solid month of starting could do Jackson some good, it might help Whitehurst as well, but it might not. Depends on Carroll's system.

Speaking of which, kudos to Darell Bevell for the gutsy decision to switch to an up-tempo offense. It keeps the defense off-balance and seemed to favor both Jackson and Whitehurst. It has downside, in particular an increased turnover risk and the opposite of a grinding offense (i.e. leaving the other offense with more time instead of less). But it's funny how an offensive coordinators' play-calling looks so much better when the offense is in sync, whereas from behind the plays tend to look dumber.

Also credit the offensive line, particularly the rapidly improving James Carpenter, and the fearlessness of Seattle's sack-laden QB's as well. Jackson did a great job not getting rattled, as did Whitehurst in relief (without a lot of first-team practice).


Defense

The Seattle defense has all the signs of a collection of playmakers being exposed too often by a lack of consistent interior pass rush. The defensive ends are notching pressures and hits, the corners are getting some good jams and defenses, the safeties are flying around, and yet good QB's are still racking up yards, yards, yards with or without much help from the run game. At first glance, this is a paradox, with most people's first instinct to look to the secondary for someone to blame.

Kip pointed out a number of contributing factors to Manning's success on Sunday. Seattle's good offensive play and tenacity, their reliance on an up-tempo offense, and the lack of a run game were all relevant. They forced Manning to keep up the pace and inflated his stats to some degree, as did Leon Washington's kickoff returns against Philip Rivers last year. Manning's own bumbles are also on that list. He was lucky to be in the game as long as he was, with Seattle defenders getting their hands on several footballs. It was a poorly placed throw to Cruz that did him in, although I'm not sure whether he or Cruz is more responsible there.

Another factor is revealed by Victor Cruz' "magical" 68-yard touchdown completion. I've seen a number of attempts to affix blame for this catch-and-run to a Seahawk defensive back, but I don't buy it. Kam Chancellor shouldn't get blamed for merely tipping the ball instead of intercepting it, while Richard Sherman didn't have the reaction time to close. It looks like hard luck on them. But I can think of someone who could have stopped the pass - the defensive line, at the source. Eli Manning had four seconds to literally dance around in the pocket before he released that pass. The more time the QB has in the pocket, the more lucky things he's going to make happen.

And not even lucky things so much as perfectly placed throws. For two weeks now, we've had front-row seats as Seattle defensive backs (this week, Walter Thurmond; last week, Brandon Browner) played excellent coverage, only to get burned by the kind of beautifully placed pinpoint throw that one-on-one sideline coverage just can't really defend against.  It's a matter of inches, and franchise QB's like Manning and Matt Ryan are defined partly by their ability to complete such passes on a regular basis. On Thurmond's play in particular, even the pass rush couldn't help. Manning was flushed out and still made the play, helped by the great hands of Cruz.

Our defense are still giving up some big plays, but they're also showing promise. I can't help but wonder if our secondary's life would be made easier by interior pressure on the QB himself. But even great pass rush can only limit a QB's opportunities. Aaron Rodgers went up against the NFL's very best defense in last year's Super Bowl, and still his accuracy and improvisation prevailed. Pittsburgh needed its offense to seal the deal, and Ben Roethlisberger's turnovers doomed the operation.

Which leads me back to my belief about the power structure of the NFL. Defense isn't enough on its own, and in the last two weeks we've been shown a clinic as to why. Kudos to Browner for keeping his head in the play, but his winning interception return was a crazy ricochet off an inaccurate throw from Manning and was thus a factor of offense, not defense. Ordinarily, Seattle's struggle to produce offensively would have put Seattle 3 touchdowns behind at the time of Browner's pick-six.


Conclusion

But as Kip eloquently put it, good offensive play is an equalizer. On Sunday, Seattle had it. The victory was due in no small part to Seattle's ability to score early. A similar effect is visible in our unlikely wins against San Diego and Chicago last year - the Seahawks put up points, exerting pressure on the opponent to score, and then kept the pressure in place with good field position (let no one ignore Leon Washington's contributions to the win). Usually when the Seahawks lose, it's to a runaway scoring pile-on in the first half. This Sunday, much like our 2005 team (dare I make even tangential comparisons to that?), early points equalized the game and gave our defense greater influence.


Context

I always look at the quality of the defeated opponent to gauge the quality of a win. Are the Giants a bad football team, thus reducing the significance of Seattle's victory? I find that hard to swallow. On one hand, they opened the season by losing to the Redskins and scraping past the awful Cardinals, so that doesn't speak to their stature. Injuries have certainly backed the team up, and their offensive line was surprisingly soft. But this team carries a lot of talent, plays in a tough division, boasts a fearsome pass rush that got to our QB's multiple times, and knows how to win. Even at his worst, Eli Manning is a good quarterback and made a lot of great plays against Seattle in between his bad ones.

So it's tough to say.

What we do know, like we knew before, is that the Seahawks have a few tricks up their sleeve when it comes to keeping games in hand. Pete Carroll's obsession over turnovers is a big part of that, and who knows how much better our 2010 season could have looked without Matt Hasselbeck's multiple four-turnover fiascos? We've got Leon Washington, we've got a fierce pair of playmaker safeties who seem to come up big every time we succeed, and we've got a great receiver tandem. Should these elements create room for some balance, we have running and short-passing to add to the fire. We have passion and determination from the players that certainly wasn't around when Mora was coach. And, of course, there's the awesome equalizer of the 12th Man crowd at CenturyLink Field.

What does this say about the rest of our season? The rest of our schedule features QB's mostly of the "respectable but highly inconsistent" category, and the only intimidating defense I see on that schedule is Baltimore. The toughest stretch could well be behind us already.

This is wonderfully encouraging stuff. I can't say that I consider the QB situation resolved, but it's a complement to Carroll's coaching and offseason acquisitions that the Seahawks can keep games close enough to where a big play or two will swing fortune our way. That really does seem to be Carroll's mantra, his big answer to the big-time playground of elite quarterbacks and smashmouth defenses. I hope it becomes a pattern. Last year's 3-7 finish of blowout losses still stands as the mean of Seattle's quality in a vacuum, and it will take some consistent performance against good teams to change my mind about that.

But we're certainly on our way.

Ten Quick Thoughts on ARI vs. SEA

1. Tarvaris Jackson has reportedly been getting urged to throw more trustingly, rather than waiting for 15-yard separation from a WR. Arizona's soft pass defense is ripe for a beating, so this game may make Jackson look better. Careful about being sucked in by one game against a bad defense.

2. The same goes for our run defense. The trend from last year - rolling along with inflated stats against bad rushing offenses and favorable game situations - is still there. The 94 yards and 2 TD's Seattle surrendered on 19 first-half Pittsburgh carries is probably a better picture of its true ability. Hate to be the bucket of cold water on that, but what are we more concerned about - its performance against the muck of the NFC West, or its performance against good teams of the kind we would face on the playoffs?

3. Chris Clemons is one to watch today. Cardinals LT Levi Brown had trouble with Clemons' quick first step last year, surrendering sacks even when whatever scrub Arizona was fielding at QB didn't hold onto the ball for the entire quarter. QB Kevin Kolb can neutralize this by getting the ball out quickly, which by all reports he'd been pretty solid at.

4. Have we gotten the obligatory "revenge factor" piece about Alan Branch playing against his former team yet? It'll probably be more like Colin Cole's "revenge" game against Green Bay, where he mentioned the motivation that "revenge" should give him and then went out and got crushed on the field. Alan Branch has been a non-factor on the Seahawks D-line so far but may get some action against Arizona's questionable O-line, like he did last year against Seattle. And then sink back into obscurity next week, which he did last year too. How many snaps did Clinton McDonald get in Pittsburgh?

5. Does anyone really expect Brandon Browner to accomplish anything against Larry Fitzgerald? Larry Fitzgerald? Come on. This won't be like last year, where Walter Thurmond looked good against him because he had Max Hall throwing the football.

6. Patrick Peterson could have his breakout day today.

7. Anyone else nervous about Sidney Rice trying to play through a torn labrum? One solid collision across the middle...

8. Zach Miller (and Seattle's microscopic passing game in general) could have a big day against gimpy Arizona linebackers Joey Porter and Daryl Washington.

9. Official prediction: Seattle scrapes by at home 26-20, prompting hope for Jackson and blowing the debate wide open again.

10. This game is a powder keg for Seattle's fan base. Should we lose, the fans will quickly distill into two extremist groups: the panic-depressive and the secretly relieved "Suck for Luck" crowd. The war will be long and arduous.

State of the Seahawks: The Pete Carroll Wake-Up Call

Today's 24-0 loss to the Steelers was painful, but it may have been the healthiest thing for Seahawks fans to see. It's kind of like the cocky 16-year-old with the new drivers' license, who totals his new car while speeding down farm roads and walks away, but is shaken to learn that he's not indestructible. No lasting harm, but his eyes are opened to the reality of life and how lucky he's been so far. That kind of healthy.

Because we need to be reminded of what Pete Carroll's legacy actually is in Seattle. We saw it today: getting shellacked and completely dominated in every phase of the game by healthy contenders. His legacy is not last year's San Diego win, which people think was won by grit and tenacity. It's not the Bears win, which some hailed as the breaking of some vaguely defined "road curse". It's not the Rams win, which fans attribute to Carroll's savvy choice of Charlie Whitehurst. And it's not the playoff win against the Saints, which belongs to Matt Hasselbeck having an improbably good day against an injury-depleted Saints secondary.

So far, Carroll's only real accomplishment in Seattle - when all lucky bounces, useless stats, and misinterpreted contexts are swept aside - is winning a historically weak division by the margin of a pair of lucky Leon Washington kick returns against an awful San Diego special-teams unit and a series of easy dropped passes by Rams receivers who would be #4's on most teams. His legacy is the nine blowout losses that occurred between those tough wins and exposed them as unsustainable exceptions, fatal in any normal division.

That's his legacy so far. Why he's getting so much unquestioning goodwill from this fan base is beyond me.

On Tarvaris Jackson, Part 4

Part 1: Low expectations for Tarvaris Jackson.

Part 2: Why he was still Seattle's optimal choice at QB.

Part 3: Some numbers that hint at Tarvaris Jackson's growth trajectory.


 
Coaches don't just hand their quarterbacks a playbook and set them loose. Handling of a QB by their head coach defines the QB, not entirely, but to a pertinent degree.

We Twelves are aware of this. Notorious are the stories of Mike Holmgren's temper and how it kept Matt Hasselbeck disciplined and accountable on the field. Seneca Wallace usually played with a watered-down playbook and a tight leash held by Holmgren. Read up on almost any successful team, and you'll find that the relationship between coaches and QB's is well-defined.

One of the knocks on Tarvaris Jackson is that he wasn't handled well by his old head coach in Minnesota, Brad Childress, who has a tyrant's reputation and fueled his training camps with bile and profanity. People say his development was hampered by his early pulling in 2008 and the arrival of Brett Favre. Pete Carroll and John Schneider have publicly agreed. Rather colorfully, I might add.

Fair enough. Jackson may have had a poor environment with the Vikings. Whether a better environment will magically improve Jackson's accuracy and field vision, I don't know. But it could happen.

Pete Carroll is used to deliberate QB handling. He and former OC Jeremy Bates were quite open about how they handled Matt Hasselbeck and Charlie Whitehurst. It's about degrees of decision-making freedom and generosity with the playbook.

Seahawks vs. Vikings Pushback: The QB's

Comparing Tarvaris Jackson and Charlie Whitehurst is like comparing circles of hell. You're hosed either way. Seattle's QB competition is not about finding a franchise QB, because barring some sudden development of skill within the next month, the current competition is not likely to magically create a franchise QB. It's about finding a game manager. Pete Carroll knows the limitations of this QB lineup and is merely seeking someone who can steward the Seahawks through 2011 without turning the ball over, keeping games salvageable by a few lucky plays.

(Hopefully, that policy is just a temporary thing while Seattle searches for their QBOTF, and not a long-range strategy.)

I'm not a fan of either QB. To be honest, I'd dismissed Charlie Whitehurst within a week of Seattle signing him. The optimism surrounding him felt strained and unrealistic. I felt no impetus to justify a brand-new front office or the third-rounder spent on Whitehurst, so I went with the simplest explanation: Whitehurst was a third-stringer on San Diego's roster for good reason, and Seattle had overpaid. I met Jackson with similar skepticism: despite Minnesota's treatment of him, it was always quite possible and far more reasonable that Minnesota simply knew what they had - a backup - and treated him accordingly.

Whitehurst is getting a lot of support from folks after his performance against Minnesota. He's getting the Dilfer calls while Jackson is dismissed largely over his stat line. I don't make excuses for QB's, but that's a piss-poor evaluation of Jackson. It's mind-boggling to me that professional news outlets make this kind of shallow judgment. Watch the damn game. Get a clue on how to spot and judge fundamentals of play. I'm not falling over myself to defend anyone, but I saw encouraging things from Jackson Saturday night and feel they need to be enumerated.

8/17 Tidbits: Danny O'Neill Chat

Yesterday's live chat with Danny O'Neill of the Seattle Times provided a few valuable nabobs, as usual. I love the smell of nabobs in the morning!


* CB Kelly Jennings chose the Seahawks over other teams offering multi-year deals. That speaks to his confidence in making this roster. I've tried to give Kelly Jennings a fair shot (and so has this guy), but eurgh. (But Danny makes a good point: wherever he ends up on the depth chart, his presence assures better depth than Nate Ness.)

* Tanking a season for a franchise QB is philosophically counter-productive, not guaranteed to succeed, and historically unnecessary anyway. Trifecta.

* Tarvaris Jackson defenders citing his minimal practice time and lack of receivers, can add this to their repertoire: he was facing a pass-rush-happy San Diego team that Seattle had not specifically game-planned for.

* Danny doesn't see John Carlson fetching more than a 6th or 7th-rounder in trade, a return probably be outweighed by his potential one-year production alongside Zach Miller. I agree, though I suspect Schneider is more addicted to draft picks than Danny allows.

* Baffled by the fact that CB Brandon Browner hasn't been noticed by the league. Skepticism suggests there's probably a reason. But after consistent praise from camp watchers whose analysis I respect, I'll reserve judgment.

* Likes S Jeron Johnson, whose roster chances are probably doomed by the newly signed Atari Bigby.

* Suggested Kam Chancellor might blitz more.

* Red Bryant is trying to slim down a bit.

* Four words: Screen passes to Leon. (Two more: Yes, please.)

* Pass protection might be an issue.

* Justin Forsett missed the San Diego game because of neck stiffness. Reassuring.

On Tarvaris Jackson, Part 3

Part 1: Low expectations for Tarvaris Jackson.

Part 2: Why he was still Seattle's optimal choice at QB.


First off: I am posting numbers comparing Tarvaris Jackson against Matt Hasselbeck, not to start more anger or debate about Hasselbeck's decision to go elsewhere, but because many here are very familiar with the progression of his career and the improvement he began to show in year 4 of it.

Tarvaris Jackson and the recently departed Great Bald One have some astounding similarities to their careers. All the following stats are from the first 4 years of Matt's career and the first 5 of Tarvaris'. This is because the number of attempts are roughly similar.

Tarvaris Jackson has had 603 passing attempts for his entire 5 year career. People can get hung up on the number of years he has had in the league, but in reality 603 attempts is a season and a half for many quarterbacks, and barely more than a season for some. Philip Rivers had 541 attempts last season, and Peyton Manning had 679. Point is, Jackson is young in the area of experience, and he shows promise. And a couple of big negatives.

On Tarvaris Jackson, Part 2

Part 1: Low expectations for Tarvaris Jackson.


Funny the difference a year makes. As the 2010 season opened, the national media was hailing Pete Carroll and John Schneider's new Seattle front office. They'd loved our draft, and the dumpster-diving roster strategy and frenetic transactions made for good oddball news, as did second-chance stories like Mike Williams and Lendale White (heh). They were the new kids on the block, and sportswriters everywhere were eating it up.

Now, the recent anointing of Tarvaris Jackson is starting to sap the goodwill.

This is typical, I suppose. The media doesn't like having its collective opinion challenged. As long as you're good for interesting sound bites and not treading on its established mindset, you're fine. But once you touch an issue that already has popular opinion attached to it, that opinion will push back. By declaring Tarvaris Jackson the starter, Pete Carroll has kicked the hornet's nest.

On Tarvaris Jackson, Part 1

Seattle fans are currently engaged in an Internet pissing match over with other fans across the league. We are energetically raving, rightfully so, over the spectacular free agency spree that Pete Carroll and John Schneider have just topped with the stunning theft of TE Zach Miller. Added to WR Sidney Rice, LG Robert Gallery, DT Brandon Mebane, RB Leon Washington back in February, and a variety of other secondary pieces, it's a juicy, well-priced, promising, and young haul that Seattle has reeled in. It's a great time to be part of the 12th Man.

The nation's knowing, snotty response?

"Hmm, who's your quarterback? Oh yeah...Tarvaris Jackson."

Grading Seattle's Free Agency: Offense

Tarvaris Jackson (#7): C+

Signing the former Minnesota backup isn't exactly a coup in and of itself. Despite his tools, starting experience, and spotty handling by Brad Childress, the fact is that Jackson struggled in Minnesota despite being protected by an awesome offense. He's a popular example of how a good team doesn't necessarily elevate a bad QB.

But the signing looks better when you compare it against the other options. Seattle could have overpaid for Kevin Kolb, risked Vince Young, courted the Carroll-misfit Kyle Orton, or become the next victim of Donovan McNabb. Instead, they went for the best combination of value, experience, cost, and system familiarity in Tarvaris Jackson. His 2-year, $8 million contract leaves Seattle free to keep looking without settling for Derek Anderson-type ineptitude in the present. Jackson should be a little better than that.

I am a little surprised that Carroll just up and handed Jackson the starting spot based on system familiarity. But it's not as if Charlie Whitehurst was likely to pick up the new system with such a short time to practice. Call it "lockout fallout". Hee hee.