Alternative Theories to "Darell Bevell Is An Idiot"

When it comes to football, there's usually more than one interpretation for almost everything. On Sunday against Arizona, Seahawks fans saw offensive struggles that are being popularly chalked up to poor planning. Offensive coordinator Darell Bevell is getting a lot of flak for this (and a generous sprinkling of insults), but that's pretty easy. Good game plans can look bad when executed poorly. Whether Bevell cooked up an inadequate game plan is difficult to tell, because the lurking factor is Seattle's roughshod execution in every facet of the offense except the running game.

The general belief is that Seattle didn't do enough to counteract Arizona's pass rush, that Bevell failed to utilize common pressure-neutralizing plays like screens, slants, outlets, and more emphasis on the tight end. The conclusion is that Bevell was just clueless, despite the fact that we've seen such features from him before.

The unspoken assumption that you might not have realized you're carrying: that all of Seattle's offensive players can handle those plays. That a bunch of rookies and new signings were perfectly trained, healthy, in sync, and ready to execute every facet of Seattle's playbook, just waiting on the sidelines for the call, while an oblivious Bevell merrily skipped along waving a gameplan that made the game as hard on Wilson and the interior line as possible.

Week 1 Reaction: No Apocalypse Now

Someone at Fieldgulls said it best:

Week 1 Commandment #1:

Neither shalt thou get over-excited over a win or overly disappointed by a loss. Week 1 is the most anomaly filled day in all of sports. (King James emphasis mine, because I can.)

Today is a comedown day for Seahawks fans. I had almost forgotten just how nasty and vitriolic we football fans can be after a loss. And I'd forgotten it because the 12th Man just wasn't very nasty last year. Not like this. My memory of 2011 was of muted, resigned, relatively tranquil reactions when the Seahawks lost, not the sarcastic poo-flinging that we're seeing right now.

Why the difference? My fellow bloggers have already nailed it - expectations. Your therapist will tell you that your emotions are dependent mostly on your goals. In 2011, people stopped hoping as soon as Tarvaris Jackson signed. Hence, muted reactions. It was a development season, a punted year.

This year, Russell Wilson's preseason polish had folks thinking they could see the light at the end of the rebuild tunnel. He faced a talented starting Kansas City defense that did not play the degree of sandlot football that some claim, and showed far more veteran polish that the typical preseason-disaster-in-waiting who just stares from the pocket like a rock and sidearms to wide-open guys. There was some real promise there. So the Arizona game was supposed to be the beginning of the get-well process - I myself mistakenly dubbed it "Week 5 of the preseason".

Here's what happened - Seattle started the season against a tougher defense than Kansas City, assured itself a heavy dose of blitzing by starting a rookie QB(!!!!!) against a well-respected NFL defensive coordinator, struggled in its very first game(!!!!!) on the road(!!!!!), and was still a Braylon Edwards drop(!!!!!) from winning.

Yes, that's what happened. Go back and look at the score. It was 20-16, not 120-16. You wouldn't know that from the current meltdown. The exclamation marks indicate things that aren't supposed to shock you.

Some will go "a loss is still a loss". Well, no, it's not. Not for this fan. I barely care about this season. I've never seen 2012 as a contention year, haven't since Pete Carroll arrived. Maybe I'll be surprised, but my expectations were limited from the outset. That puts me in the minority, but there it is. Championships take time to build. Pass rushes and star quarterbacks are the biggest examples of this, and we only just got those (maybe). And I'm not part of the camp that believes that teams can win Super Bowls with running and defense against a league dominated by Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, and Drew Brees. In my opinion, this team's Super Bowl window absolutely does not open until 2013 at the very earliest.

For me, the stakes on Sunday were still developmental. I wanted to see Russell Wilson play like a rookie Peyton Manning instead of a rookie David Greene (there's a difference); he did. He threw several winning touchdowns that got dropped, bought at least two first downs with his feet that I remember, and never once folded or lost composure. His ball placement was erratic but (FAINT PRAISE ALERT) remains a world improved from Tarvaris Jackson. Yeah, he "played like a rookie", but that current popular phrase could mean a million different things. Wilson looked nowhere near as primitive as that blunt instrument that's starting in Miami.

And no, I'm not convinced that Matt Flynn would have done any better. Despite his reputation for handling blitzes well in Green Bay, Flynn looked slow with his reads and downright sack-prone in a full game's worth of preseason snaps. It's not hard to provide a reason why - adjustment to much worse receivers on a differently-called offense. My guess: Flynn would have been destroyed behind that O-line.

I wanted to see our running game pick up from 2011 without missing a beat; it did. I wanted to see our defense blanket Larry Fitzgerald and stymie our QB into sacks; it did, when instructed to. I wanted to see our pass rush tearing out the interior of Arizona's line and burying John Skelton in three hundred pounds of sweaty man.

Okay, so that last part blew chunks. That's really what worried me most. While everyone else was salivating and over-prognosticating Wilson's rookie season, I was excited about our defense growing into the ability to bring OTHER quarterbacks down to Wilson's level. I really hoped that this year's pass rush would find its way.

That clearly hasn't happened yet. No surprise - Game 1. Irvin is getting no better results than a lighter Lawrence Jackson, and actually reminds me of said now-Lion in his reliance on an ineffective bullrush. Chris Clemons was not his usual self against an Arizona tackle situation that had deteriorated to Kyle Williams territory, although much of that was down to better pass scheming on Arizona's part. Alan Branch still isn't showing me the promise he apparently showed everyone else last season, and Jason Jones isn't yet an improvement.

But it's only Week 1. I get the distinct feeling that despite our hopes, Pete Carroll was still treating Week 1 as a preseason game. There was a bit of an experimental feel to it, given the narrow play-calling and tendencies (either that, or Darell Bevell really is an oaf). I don't agree with the experimental approach, but Pete has always shown an element of "growing into the season" in Seattle. No doubt there are elements of this going on, whether we like it or not.

We have a few players waiting in the wings, yet to emerge. John Moffitt will hopefully be back soon, and behind him, James Carpenter. Golden Tate will also return, to the delight of those who think another two-catches-a-game WR will change things. If the Jones experiment doesn't work out, we have another promising project in Jaye Howard. Doug Baldwin has yet to return to full strength.

As far as Wilson, I'm going to take great comfort in the fact that he was one dropped pass from winning. Pete Carroll has never been ignorant of the risk of starting a rookie. Is he willing to trade a few losses for the sake of more quickly building the experience of the QB with more upside? Are fans willing to watch this?

Besides, let's be honest: if Braylon Edwards makes that TD catch, the tone around here would be much different and we all know it. It'd be about how Wilson "did enough to win an ugly game", and you wouldn't see nearly the intensity of the criticism. The ultimate setter of tone, the emotional filter through which we critique, is always whether we win or lose. There'd be the few isolated worriers and naysayers, but they'd get drowned out.

This reaction isn't about where the team is. It's about where we are. This is about losing. We don't like to lose. We shouldn't. But progress is happening, folks. It may not come on our schedule, but it is coming.

Russell Wilson: A Safe Choice for Seattle

So...who's NOT happy to have the competition over at last? Put your hand down, you in the back. You weren't enjoying this either.

The mantle has just been handed to Russell Wilson. Pete Carroll has named QB Russell Wilson, a third-round rookie out of Wisconsin, as the Seahawks' starting quarterback for 2012. He will open Seattle's 2012 campaign against Arizona, a team in such disarray that they might as well be Week 5 of the preseason.

This is interesting...it's being said in some corners that Pete Carroll had "no choice" but to start Wilson after his impressive preseason start against Kansas City. That's a cynical view of the situation and feels like an extension of the popular doubt that's followed the whole competition. Allow me to phrase this another way: Russell Wilson forced the issue like a true starter should. He made a statement, made himself stand out. As Mike Sando put it (in one of the strongest opinions I've ever seen from him), picking Wilson was the only logical way to end a true competition, because he went with the guy who won the competition. Did you want it any other way?

Get it through your head, America: When Pete Carroll says "earn everything", it's not rah-rah.

Why Seattle's QB Competition is Really, Truly, Honestly, Completely Open

This is a long one. Bring a lunch.

What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall of Pete Carroll's cranial cavity. I know, ewww, but it'd be nice to get some clarity amidst our bias and preconception. We've all got the quarterback candidates pigeonholed pretty well for ourselves by now. Tarvaris Jackson represents strength, toughness, experience, and incumbency. Matt Flynn represents the poise, mental acuity, technical skill, and the "Rodgers Factor" of developing over time. And Russell Wilson represents the Lollipop Guild, the Lollipop Guild, the Lollipop Guild. It's not surprising to see the fan base divided so sharply into camps depending on what they value.

Problem is, Pete may actually mean it when he says he doesn't have any more clarity than we do. I don't think people want to believe that right now. Some are worried about the declining returns of dividing camp snaps, some honestly can't imagine Flynn NOT currently being the best of the bunch so why wait, and some people aren't reading for any words except "Tarvaris Jackson cut". There's an edge of worry that's starting to seep into our opinions the longer this goes on, especially now that T-Jack is still getting significant time with the first team in camp. This stymies some people, since it's popularly assumed that Jackson is the worst QB on the roster.

This is forcing people into a tough quandary: Either Pete's full of it, or he knows something we don't. Most people assume the former, that Pete is just way too enamored with his "competition" mantra, needs to quit grandstanding and just hand the job to Flynn already. Because he won the job the moment he was signed, right? Problem is, this requires rationalization and speculation that's almost on the level of conspiracy theory. Pete's just pushing the QB's, he's trying to bump up Jackson's miniscule trade value, all his comments to the media are to be ignored, etc. And I don't want to go that route. I've learned to trust Pete. Isn't it possible that he's simply got different yardsticks for the competition than we do? And isn't it possible that Flynn might not be all that he was advertised?

It's funny that Flynn is so often compared to Matt Hasselbeck, because I think a hint to better understanding this competition might lie in revisiting Hasselbeck's final seasons in Seattle (Hawkblogger's breakdowns of Matt Flynn and Russell Wilson also demand a read).

17 Sentences on Whether Chris Clemons is Really Underrated

Pro Football Weekly saluted Seattle DE Chris Clemons as the NFL's most underrated player today, continuing a trend of grudging but increasing respect from the national media as they slowly realize that Pete Carroll is NOT, in fact, just signing every USC alumi he can find.

I'm usually one of those annoying posers who dismisses production that doesn't appear to be sustainable, and indeed the Clemons' label as "NFL's most underrated" has a few people cocking their heads. Clemons gets a lot of his sacks on blitzes and on specific but seemingly random third downs (and against the Rams), gets shut down a lot on double teams, and has a rather limited toolbox (quick first step, great closing speed amongst them) that doesn't remind one of a complete DE. He also rarely does anything besides rush the passer, which might lead to inflated results and the question of whether Clemons is a true talent or merely benefiting from Seattle's defensive scheme.

But this is where I keep ending up with that question: who cares? At some point, arguing with results becomes churlish. Clemons has produced 11 sacks for each of the last two seasons since being traded from Philly for peanuts. He's accomplished this as the team's sole dedicated pass rusher. The horrifying gash people predicted in our run defense's left side due to Clemons' middling weight, has never really materialized. Getting double teamed isn't a failure for a DE - it's a success that opens up blitzing lanes and opportunities for the interior rushers. He's either talented enough to overcome his limits and create value, or he's being enabled by the one-on-one matchups the scheme affords him, which isn't necessarily a red alert.

Now, insert another dedicated pass rusher in Bruce Irvin (and some grease for the wheels of Clemons' new contract) and see what happens.

If you want a vote for most OVERRATED player on the Seahawks, I'd have to go with Ricardo Lockette. It says great things about this team that its most overrated player is only a backup WR, but it's mind-boggling the goodwill that Lockette has gotten by catching 2 passes on go routes. Most UDFA fliers could probably do that in two NFL games, and what it says about that WR is not significantly different from nothing. Add that Hawk Blogger has hinted that he's still dropping too many passes to assure a roster spot, and I'm astonished that people are (already) projecting him as an NFL starter. John Schneider must be pretty confident with someone in this group.

Six Possible QB Depth Charts

Recently, a "math" friend and I have been playing with probability questions that go against intuition. Probably the most famous is the Monty Hall Problem, based on the Let's Make a Deal TV show with doors numbered one, two, and three...

Let's say one of the three doors is a winner and the other two are "zonks". You pick a door at random, say door number three. Now the host reveals that one of the unpicked doors, say door number one, is a zonk and he offers you the chance to switch to the remaining door, door number two. Should you switch?

Most people feel that the odds are the same, or even better, sticking with door number three. Bzzt. Wrong answer. The odds when you picked door number three were 1 in 3. That doesn't change when the host reveals that door number one is a zonk. That means that the odds of door number two having the winner is now 2 in 3, given that a closed set of probabilities always add up to 1. So given the choice, always switch!

It doesn't make intuitive sense, but the math proves it out. They even tested it on Myth Busters, and practice matches theory. Hey, if Myth Busters proved it, it has to be true!

So that brings us to the Seahawk's quarterback situation. Who is behind doors number one, two, and three? More importantly, what does the organization do after they announce the starter?

So... there are six possible combinations. Using "F" as shorthand for Flynn, "J" for Jackson, and "W" for Wilson, we have FJW, FWJ, JFW, JWF, WFJ, and WJF. We can guess that FJW is the most likely: Flynn makes the most money and has experience behind the league's best QB, Jackson has the most experience but a limited ceiling, and Wilson doesn't just lack height; he lacks experience too. But the fact of the matter is that we fans have no idea. We haven't seen all three in meeting rooms, on the practice field, or in game situations with this offense. It's virtually even-steven, so I'm not going to put odds on who starts.

The more interesting thing is to look at who ends up in third place. That's what will determine the organizational moves.

Let's say it's FJW or JFW. Wilson is in last place. The (unbiased) odds are 1 in 3. If so, Flynn/Jackson end up as the starter and backup combo. According to Schneider, Wilson was a "must get" in the draft. That leaves Portis as the odd man out. He's either cut or put on the practice squad from which he will likely get snatched up by another team. Wilson is kept on the 53 man roster to keep him from being lost and to develop as a future starter/backup.

So far, Portis has a 1 in 3 chance of not being a Seahawk.

Next, lets assume that Jackson ends up in last place with FWJ or WFJ. If that happens, TJack gets cut. He would have no future. Portis is put on the 53 to protect him, since Portis would have more future upside than dead-end Jackson.

Now we can add a 1 in 3 chance that Jackson is gone.

Finally, we have Flynn tanking with JWF or WJF. This is a tough call. The team must either cut Flynn or lose Portis. With Portis as the #4 and all that guaranteed money to Flynn, I think Portis is gone and Flynn stays on the 53 as we try to improve his game. If Flynn doesn't improve, he could get cut the next year. If Flynn is on the bottom of the totem pole this year, I say there's a 50/50 chance he gets cut the following year.

So, given unbiased odds, I've got a 2 of 3 chance that Portis walks, and a 1 in 3 chance that Jackson is gone this year. We also have something like a 1 in 6 chance that Flynn is cut the following year.

The interesting thing is that I don't have any scenario where Wilson is cut in the near future. He's the only guy with job security. Portis, on the other hand, shouldn't buy a new house in Seattle and might think about a pre-move yard sale. His only chance to stay is if TJack fails.

The thing is, when Carroll announces the starter, he will be mum on who "placed" and who "showed." The way we will figure out the order of the number two and three spots will be based on contract moves from Schneider's office.

If there's a moral to the story, it's this: When you want to be the prize on Let's Make a Deal, don't stand behind door number four. Also, when you have the most experience, don't dare come in third place.

Defending the Bruce Irvin Pick

After coolly trading down to snatch up extra late-round picks (a mid-4th and a mid-6th), the Seattle Seahawks have sent the league into an incredulous tizzy by selecting DE Bruce Irvin out of West Virginia - a guy that, in defiance of the talking-head community, was projected as a Top 15 pick by at least seven teams, according to a PFT source.

Though I haven't done any scouting of the guy myself (although Kip Earlywine has, even if he didn't anticipate first-round interest - but who did?), I've been as able as anyone to pick up on the basic motifs of why people think this is an enormous reach:

1. He's not Melvin Ingram.

2. He's a pure pass rusher, and won't play three downs.

3. He's not Quinton Coples.

4. His production dropped off last year.

5. He's not Courtney Upshaw.

6. He's got off-the-field issues.

If your response is an odd number, please slap yourself in the face with a large trout. Fair discussion involves Irvin on his own merit, not why you didn't get your guy.

The most sensical worry for me is #2. Some have called Bruce Irvin "the best pure pass rusher in the draft", and that title carries both excitement and doubt. The paradigm for the first round is to look for complete players, guys who can rush the passer without sacrificing rush stoutness. Bruce Irvin is not such a three-down player. Pete has already tagged him a Leo. His role is to bring down quarterbacks, plain and simple.

However, if you're calling this a reach because Irvin is a pure pass rusher, you're ignoring recent draft history. Paradigms change and the NFL has become a pass-happy glut of passing passfests, with unprepared QB's going in the top 12 picks and pass rushers gaining more and more value. Jason Pierre-Paul and Aldon Smith, both guys that relied on athleticism and were tagged as pure pass rushers (or sure busts), also went higher than draftniks expected.

Neither team is regretting their picks right now. Their teams schemed them into success, found ways to get them into the backfield. The result has been double-digit sacks and a balancing of power in their respective divisions. A move like Irvin is surprising, but not without recent precedent. As the league shifts toward the pass, expect defensive priorities to shift with it.

Another team that's shown savvy with scheming pass rushers is the Seahawks, who in 2010 traded a more complete defensive end in Darryl Tapp in order to pick up Chris Clemons. The latter has been immensely productive for Seattle over two years despite being the line's only major source of pass rush. He has not compromised the defense by being terrible against the run, nor has he struggled by being somewhat underweight (both red flags against Irvin, who produced in college despite similar size). That speaks to Seattle's scheming on the defensive line.

Now, if Seattle can coax around 20 sacks from a late-20s defensive end without elite speed, what could they coax from a rookie who ran a 4.4 at the Combine?

Pete and John are throwing around some pretty distinguished names in comparison to Irvin. They've talked about his uniqueness, compared his speed to Jevon Kearse, evoked the burst of Von Miller, and announced a desire to deploy Irvin like Clay Matthews. Those are easy things to say from a podium, but they give us a framework and a hint of (surprise, surprise) an evil plan. They also don't have the same definitions for "3-down player" that you or I do, and for good reason. With defense rapidly becoming a mental game of chess against quarterbacks, pre-snap motion and confusing looks are becoming the name of the game. Mike Mayock rightly called our defense an "amoeba", similar to how Rex Ryan twists his defense. Count on Pete to find ways to get Irvin involved in all phases of the defense, including 1st and 2nd down. And with Clemons getting up there in age and likely to leave the lineup sooner rather than later, Irvin will find his playing time.

Irvin also deserves recognition for his upside. For those pointing out his lack of 2011 production, from what I've read, his relatively quiet 2011 has been placed on the shoulders of his coaching and scheming. Like Brandon Mebane or Jason Jones, Irvin was used last year in ways that don't fit his gifts, such as 3-4 defensive end. He hasn't been infused with a wide variety of pass-rush moves, and that's something that can be improved at the pro level. I've seen it argued that his coaches treated him as an instinctive player who would end up thinking too much if his game got too complicated - maybe. I don't know. But I certainly don't see a polished, finished product with only two years of decent football ahead of him, a la Tim Ruskell's picks.

It sounds for all the world like Bruce Irvin perfectly fits Seattle's vision for pass rush, and would very likely be at least a second-rounder if not for the off-the-field red flags. Pete Carroll coveted him for USC, knows him well, and we know he's not dogmatically put off by off-the-field concerns (therefore dealing with motif #6). Also, frankly, I'm relieved to see him NOT wringing his hands over run defense for once - plenty of talent in that area already on this defense. We didn't need our first-round pick to be complete; we needed our defense to be complete. Irvin might do that. The NFL is becoming a specialist's game, and in his singular role, Irvin could excel.

For those who were fine with taking Irvin in a later round - you have to remember that we aren't privy to teams' big boards. Michael Lombardi of the NFL Network has said that Irvin wasn't going to get past San Francisco's first round pick, and they know a thing or two about defense. There was the PFT source saying that at least seven teams were expecting Irvin to go in the Top 15. Teams rate players differently than draftniks - James Carpenter was bound to be taken within three picks of where Seattle got him - and that's a big factor in how teams decide their picks. Seattle got their guy when he was available, and even had the cool-headedness to slip down the board a bit and pile on the late-round picks while waiting.

And once again, in this day and age of football, being able to consistently get to the QB has a tendency to boost your draft stock almost automatically, regardless of what else you can do. This pick has to be viewed through that filter.

Besides...if this front office can coax Pro Bowlers out of 5th rounders and CFL imports, is anyone really THAT worried?