Official Seahawks vs Bears POST Game Thread

[Anthony]

looks to me that we are talking about the same thing just one side doesn't want to admit that RW is human and the other points out all flaws team wide while not forgetting to leave out the main man on the team. I totally agree that wilson holds the ball FAR TOO LONG, A LOT! Now I admit I can't see down field all the time but at times I can and I see a WR open and find myself yellng at the TV to throw the Fing ball, just throw the Fing ball. Just like Graham telling RW to just throw it, it will get to him (maybe not in those word as he said it kind of strange). Sometimes in this league you just have to make a throw into a tight window.

I have no problem saying when Wilson messes up and have done so many times, but again y9ou can say you saw someone open, but were they open before or after Wilson looked at them in his progression, were they running the right play? if its 3rd and 20 and they are open 3 yards after the LOS that does not help us much. AS to the just throw it for one PC has drilled it in to him not to take chances so take that up with PC, also lets say he did and then its Int you would then why did he throw it, I mean 2 of the NFCCG game ints were on Kearse and people still blame Wilson. My point once again is you really do not know, so why complain. There is a reason I do not complain about much of any player other than the oline and that is as a whole, not individually. So again you may want him to just fling it but his HC does not. So why complain about it, and if you do complain about the HC not the QB he can only do what his HC let shim do, there is a reason we move the ball so well in the last 2 minutes, hurry up or no huddle its because Wilson calls the plays not Bevell and then he can do more. However other than that he is subject to Bevells calls and PC lack of wanting TOs and playing it conservative.

[savvyman]

It was a dig at me, he was agreeing with Bane, because unlike them, I refuse to give Wilson a pass on him refusing to make a quick decision and release the ball. The line certainly has its piece of the blame pie, but I will not bury my head in the sand about Wilson holding the ball too long resulting in sacks. It happens to every QB not just Wilson, it is NOT a slight in Wilson to be honest about his play, some can't or won't do it, because its "the" position in their minds, and franchise QB's are infallible.

Anthony has been pulling that same stuff out for the last three games, and the better part of a year and a half. The lines play has not been great, and at no point in three games have I claimed it has, BUT I also can realistically look at a play and decipher whether a QB has enough time to deliver a football, or if the QB needs to climb the pocket ( something Wilson did NOT do against the Bears when he was sacked two of the four times) or drop out the back door, when he leaves a clean pocket and runs into a sack ( as he did in St Louis) or simply has held the ball too long. The expectation that a line is supposed to provide 6-7 seconds for a QB to deliver a ball at the NFL level is silly, NO line does that, none, whether it be Dallas or NE or GB or Seattle. Hell, just last week GB's line performed FAR worse than Seattles did against the Bears, and yet they were lauded. Why? Well because Rodgers moved effectively, delivered the ball and HELPED them protect him by doing so.

I'm not overly concerned about it. Some people NEED a scapegoat, and if it makes them feel better to insist the line is rubbish more power to them, I'm far more concerned with other aspects of the offense currently, and want to see improvement in decision making, timing, play calling, and aggressiveness ( as well as tempo). The line doesn't "forget" how to play from week to week, and there has been DRASTIC improvement from the first half to the second ( as pointed out by 3 points scored by the offense in the first half, for three STRAIGHT games) I'm interested in figuring out why THAT is, far more, than piling on the line, just so I can point at a group and say " that's the reason, and the whole reason" especially considering that is the SAME line that has played the second halves of those games. They didn't simply turn a switch on at half time, and all of a sudden know what to do, that thought process is silly. Seattle's had issues scoring in the first half for YEARS, and it certainly has NOT been the same players. The tendencies of this offense in the first half are so predictable any somewhat knowledgeable fan could hold Seattle to under ten points in the first half with a mediocre NFL defense, with ZERO coaching or playing experience, and that folks is NOT the lines fault.

Nice Insightful Post. I rarely see this level of insight in the so called professional press news sites.

[HumanCockroach]

Thanks Savy, and if that's how you see it Anthony fine, I really don't care, other than, I see a long standing pattern, and all of them from the coaches down hold blame, and Wilson is part of the offense. At this point, I've seen lines people consider EXCELLENT give as many or more sacks than this line this season, I've watched multiple QBs get injured, because no line can do what is expected within this group by the majority. I don't absolve those guys, and have never once claimed they played well, I'm just not the type to place ALL of the blame on one unit. It would be like blaming a receiver that has dropped a couple passes for a throw that hits the ground 15 feet in front of him.

[RiverDog]

Decent?

Whatever. Downplay it all you want but no matter the strength of the opposition shutouts don't come easy in the NFL, and more than that, we forced them to punt on every single possession! 35 years, that's how long since the last time that happened. There have been worse teams more injured than the Bears were last night play on the road at teams with a whole lot better record than we had in the last 35 years.

We're inches away from where we need to be to get back to the Super Bowl. And this 2 game hole you're looking so hard at is nothing more than the two games we were always most likely to lose this year.

This was a great win, relax and let yourself enjoy it.

Scoring one offensive touchdown against the defense that has given up more points than any other team in the league for 2+ years? Decent is the best adjective I can come up with.

But be that as it may. Party like it's 1999 if that's your bag, but I'll wait a bit longer. If we're 3-2 coming out of Cincy, then I'll think about joining you.

[c_hawkbob]

Scoring one offensive touchdown against the defense that has given up more points than any other team in the league for 2+ years? Decent is the best adjective I can come up with.

But be that as it may. Party like it's 1999 if that's your bag, but I'll wait a bit longer. If we're 3-2 coming out of Cincy, then I'll think about joining you.

That's like complaining that your team only got one home run while pitching a no hitter.

I agree that we need to finish drives, but our offense at least played well enough to get us in position to kick all those FG's, that's still plenty of doubles and singles.

Go ahead and sweat the lack of perfection on an offense while you fail to even notice perfection on defense if that's your bag, This was a rare defensive gem, I'm gonna bask in its sparkle for a day or two.

[obiken]

I learned a long time ago in here there is no negative to any win. You cant argue with success.

[Hawktown]

Just letting the ball go (like Jimmy told RW to do) seemed to work out pretty well this game once RW actually did let it go in to tight spots. I realize there is a higher % chance to throw an INT but taking a sack for a loss of yards can be pretty bad at the same time. RW needs to take a LITTLE more risk, IMO. PC also needs to be less conservative. We can't keep playing in slow mo in the first half or keep playing the game so tight. I think we need to come out swinging, score, and then MAYBE let up a bit. Not wait until it is crunch time to open it up. It is getting tiring watching the first half of Hawk football to say the least. Keeping the game so close in score is a bad idea to me.

[NorthHawk]

It's a little strange to me that Pete demands conservative play on Offense regarding ball security, yet he often gambles on 4th down or near the goal line.

Be that as it may, HC is right - it's a problem with the Offense and everyone has some share of the blame. The play calling has been less than stellar as pointed out, Wilson often hangs onto the ball too long, but the old saying that the Engine of the Offense is the Offensive Line is accurate. Therefore lack of production can be largely attributed to our OL that cannot consistently control the LoS. How many times do we miss on short yardage 3rd or 4th down run plays? And we are supposedly a run first Offense. I can't remember the last time we actually imposed our will along the OL and regularly pushed people around in a game.

Pass protection has been average at best and occasionally a nightmare so far this year. Sweezy has missed blocks (and I mean almost completely whiffed) each game, Britt and Nowack have been bull rushed effectively each game this year, Gilliam has a steep learning curve, and may be good in time, but he's struggling mightily at times right now. Then we add Bevell calling a play where Graham has the responsibility to block by himself a DE that has been consistently providing pressure to that point in the game. Let Graham run pass patterns and keep his blocking to chipping on DE's and just getting in the way of defenders chasing the ball carrier.

Some are pointing out how well we did in the 2nd half. How much of that was an emotional letdown of the Bears from the TD return? I think that return took any wind out of the Bears that remained.
The ST played well and set up a FG early (the Offense couldn't move the ball from around the 20) and the Offense started to get some push in the 2nd half and they did some good things. How much was that us and how much was that the Bears not playing well we will never know.

I would like to think our OL started playing well more than the Bears Defense crumbling, but I will have to see production early in a game before I am convinced we've started turning the corner.

The Defense looked far more settled. There is still some room for improvement to get to where we were the last 2 years, but we should get close to that level in time.
Special Teams look pretty good with only 1 major mistake against the Rams and Lockett is huge addition. With his speed, I hope they play him more at WR and send him deep more often. It would give some more room for the shorter or underneath routes that early this year we seem to be using a lot more.

[RiverDog]

That's like complaining that your team only got one home run while pitching a no hitter.

I agree that we need to finish drives, but our offense at least played well enough to get us in position to kick all those FG's, that's still plenty of doubles and singles.

Go ahead and sweat the lack of perfection on an offense while you fail to even notice perfection on defense if that's your bag, This was a rare defensive gem, I'm gonna bask in its sparkle for a day or two.

One thing that the past three years has done for me is that it raises the bar on what it takes for me to "sparkle". If you turned the calendar back to 2011, yes, I'd be ecstatic at the possibilities this game represented, and I truly admire you for being so easily smitten that all it takes for you to sparkle is an early season victory over a now 0-3 team minus some of their key players. But over the past three years, I've been conditioned to seeing victories over big time teams in do-or-die situations, like the SNF win over the Niners in December of 2012, the Immaculate Deflection win the following year over the Niners, the rout over the Broncos in SB 48, last year's game in Arizona, the Beast Quake 2 game for first place and HFA, or the overtime win against the Packers in the NFCCG. To me, this was more of an expected outcome, taking care of business win rather than some sort of signature, watershed event, season defining moment you're making it out to be.

[NorthHawk]

I think I'm a little bit jaded by that, too RD.
I expect a lot more from this team considering most of the pieces are still in place.

[mykc14]

One thing that the past three years has done for me is that it raises the bar on what it takes for me to "sparkle". If you turned the calendar back to 2011, yes, I'd be ecstatic at the possibilities this game represented, and I truly admire you for being so easily smitten that all it takes for you to sparkle is an early season victory over a now 0-3 team minus some of their key players. But over the past three years, I've been conditioned to seeing victories over big time teams in do-or-die situations, like the SNF win over the Niners in December of 2012, the Immaculate Deflection win the following year over the Niners, the rout over the Broncos in SB 48, last year's game in Arizona, the Beast Quake 2 game for first place and HFA, or the overtime win against the Packers in the NFCCG. To me, this was more of an expected outcome, taking care of business win rather than some sort of signature, watershed event, season defining moment you're making it out to be.

While it is true you have been conditioned to see big time wins, you have also been conditioned to see us struggle against some pretty weak teams. It's easy to forget those close games against the have-nots but they are there. What I have learned over the past few years is that a win is a win in this league. When you have a team who can put themselves in a position to beat anybody, anywhere the key is to just get the win no matter how ugly. Get to the post season and hopefully get to play a post-season game or two at home. We have looked really bad for stretches in each of the past 3 season and ended each year within 45 seconds of advancing to the NFCCG, a SB victory, and 1 yard from repeating as SB champions. Looking bad for stretches doesn't bother me like it did pre-Carroll.

[c_hawkbob]

Y'all can keep your "high bar" for individual games. IMO "that's just not good enough" just doesn't apply to a 26-0 shutout wherein we forced the opposition to kick the ball back to us every single time they got the ball!

My bar has been raised for full season results, but I fully intend to enjoy the ride to whatever our season destination is. This was an absolute positive, and the first one of the season, wringing your hands after this one is just wack.

... (did I say that right? I'm tryin' to up my street cred and didn't know if it's "wack" or "whack") ...

[Anthony]

wow so if we went 16-0 but every win was by 3 you would be disappointed. So now winning is not enough its how much you win by and how it looks, How jaded some of us have gotten.

[NorthHawk]

I want to see both sides of the ball dominate - or at least show they can for a game.

I think the best test for the first part of the season to see if we have progressed from the first two games will come against the Bengals.
We should win against the Lions, but good teams should be able to win on the road and those with championship aspirations should win against good teams while on the road.

[Anthony]

I want to see both sides of the ball dominate - or at least show they can for a game.

I think the best test for the first part of the season to see if we have progressed from the first two games will come against the Bengals.
We should win against the Lions, but good teams should be able to win on the road and those with championship aspirations should win against good teams while on the road.

the problem is PC style of play doe snot allow for a lot of domination. he has said it he wants a lead and then give it to the defense to win it. You have seen enough games by now to know as soon as we get a lead he will pull back the offense, until we loose the lead.

[NorthHawk]

Like against Buffalo a few years ago, or the Broncos in the Super Bowl.
Good teams should be able to deliver beat downs against poorer teams even if some of the starters are rested part way through the game.

[Anthony]

Like against Buffalo a few years ago, or the Broncos in the Super Bowl.
Good teams should be able to deliver beat downs against poorer teams even if some of the starters are rested part way through the game.

2 out of over 48 not a huge sample size and if I remember correctly Lynch had to ask in the SB and Buffalo was about Rw running wild

[HumanCockroach]

wow so if we went 16-0 but every win was by 3 you would be disappointed. So now winning is not enough its how much you win by and how it looks, How jaded some of us have gotten.

Yep, including those that have bemoaned the offensive line play, and plan, despite two straight SB's and 27 regular season wins. Everyone has their "bugaboos" some it's the quality of the opponent, some it's how good the win looked, some it's the offensive line play, some it's the indecisiveness of the QB etc. We ALL do it, which IMHO is absolutely AWESOME because it means the "bar has been set" at an incredibly high, almost unattainable level, because they are simply that good. I have dreamed about an environment where SB's and Lombardi's are the expectation, as opposed to a dream or hope, and here we are. FANTASTIC!

Go Hawks!

[HumanCockroach]

2 out of over 48 not a huge sample size and if I remember correctly Lynch had to ask in the SB and Buffalo was about Rw running wild

Um, I think those were two examples, not the "only" two out of 48. Seattle had three straight 50 burgers in that season alone, and have dismantled a hell of a lot more than just those 4 over the 48. The difference from the typical play the last two years, was simply, they didn't wait a half to try and score, and were not afraid of being aggressive given the opportunity.

[HumanCockroach]

I want to see both sides of the ball dominate - or at least show they can for a game.

I think the best test for the first part of the season to see if we have progressed from the first two games will come against the Bengals.
We should win against the Lions, but good teams should be able to win on the road and those with championship aspirations should win against good teams while on the road.

I wouldn't be looking past an extremely talented ( far more talented on the offensive side especially) and extremely desperate team coming off a 12 win season. Detroit worries me, this week.

[HumanCockroach]

That's like complaining that your team only got one home run while pitching a no hitter.

I agree that we need to finish drives, but our offense at least played well enough to get us in position to kick all those FG's, that's still plenty of doubles and singles.

Go ahead and sweat the lack of perfection on an offense while you fail to even notice perfection on defense if that's your bag, This was a rare defensive gem, I'm gonna bask in its sparkle for a day or two.

That's fair Bob, and I agree to a point, but 16 points ( all the offense contributed, and only if I credit them with Haushka's leg) against a horrid defense on the road, isn't something to feel all warm and fuzzy about, especially since they performed at the same offensive level for all three games ( St.Louis 17 points, GB 17 points and Chicago at home 16 points) I don't care how good that defense is, Seattle can't always rely on defensive, or special team scores ( the SAME formula Arizona used last season, don't remember it working out to well for them, do you?) I am "happy" with the win, but don't adhere to it doesn't matter that the offense once again only played well for 1 of 4 quarters of the game, that will catch up with a team eventually, and if Seattle can't score points, at some point, some team that CAN ( say Detroit or Cincy for instance) is going to run them out of the building. 3 points in the first half is not always going to cut it ( for example two out of the three games this season, they won with only three against the Bears, how many times do we play them again?).

So, yes, being happy about the goose egg is absolutely cool and justified, but so is the concern over the horrible offensive play.

[Anthony]

Um, I think those were two examples, not the "only" two out of 48. Seattle had three straight 50 burgers in that season alone, and have dismantled a hell of a lot more than just those 4 over the 48. The difference from the typical play the last two years, was simply, they didn't wait a half to try and score, and were not afraid of being aggressive given the opportunity.

well that changed, for why talk to your HC and OC

[RiverDog]

Y'all can keep your "high bar" for individual games. IMO "that's just not good enough" just doesn't apply to a 26-0 shutout wherein we forced the opposition to kick the ball back to us every single time they got the ball!

My bar has been raised for full season results, but I fully intend to enjoy the ride to whatever our season destination is. This was an absolute positive, and the first one of the season, wringing your hands after this one is just wack.

... (did I say that right? I'm tryin' to up my street cred and didn't know if it's "wack" or "whack") ...

I think the proper spelling is "whacked".

I'm not "wringing my hands". I'm just not all that impressed. I am neither more or less optimistic about our chances of making it back to the SB by the result of this game than I was before it. We were prohibitive favorites going into this game and did what we were supposed to do, although we waited a half before we started doing it.

And as far as your observation about the shutout and the fact that the Bears punted on every one of their drives, first time that's happened in something like 35 years, I have been listening to Sirius NFL both today and yesterday and not once was that fact or even the game itself come up for discussion during the entire time I was listening. They talked about Aaron Rodgers 5 TD passes, Tom Brady's 400th career TD pass, and the injury to Ben Worthlessburger, along with a whole lot of random stuff, but no Seahawks shutting out the Bears. It's a non story to the rest of the nation and to them it lies back in the classified section with the used cars for sale and the help wanted ads. The only ones even remotely aware of those facts are Seahawks geeks like us.

[Vegaseahawk]

I for one, have noticed that as a whole, the o-line play has slowly improved a little each of the 1st 3 games. The penalties have decreased too. As for the way the offense starts so slowly, I have noticed this trend generally has been happening over the whole PC JS era. It seems that it takes the Seahawks a while to get going. I've also noticed that overall, the season as a whole plays out this way as well, with Seattle performing much better in weeks 9 & beyond. There also has been a kind of crisis situation whether real, or imagined, that has the players to come together as a unit. Last year it was the "locker room division". I wonder whether we are still a young team, since the attributes I mention tend to be those of a younger roster. What's interesting to me is that this discussion is the same one we've been having for a while now. Here is a snip of a Danny O'Neill from last December

This is about having an efficient, functioning offense whose most dangerous play can be summarized as, "Russell Wilson running around in the backfield until the defensive backs tire of covering his receivers." Because as exciting as that play is to watch – and as frequently as it has worked this season – it's dangerous to rely on that to be the difference in a game.

Seattle's offense is never going to score like the Packers have at times this season nor operate as quickly as the Eagles. In an increasingly pass-oriented league, the Seahawks are a throwback, and the fact that they're not prolific makes it even more important that they're more proficient. Over the past four games, there's a distinct danger Seattle is becoming less so.

Then again, the Seahawks suffered two losses in three games last December and had everyone wondering whether their offense was too conservative, and all Seattle did was go and outscore Denver's record-setting offense by 35 points in the Super Bowl.

But after watching Seattle stumble through another first half, there's also the danger that the Seahawks' offense will make this team vulnerable in spite of their defense.

[Hawktawk]

Wow there is as much hand wringing about a 26-0 win as there was about two disgusting losses!!!!!

I think the slow starts are maddening just like everyone else does but they have been happening for a while and the Hawks have still had lots of success. I liken their style to a heavyweight fighter, probing, jabbing, counter punching, rope a dope, then BAM. It might be Lockette, or Bennett, or Sherman, or Beast or Wilson by land or by air but they usually find a way to separate.
I saw signs of life with this offense in the second half of all 3 games really. I like the match up Monday then we will see. Its a tough row to hoe and the two winnable losses already on the books make the margin for error almost zero with who is on the schedule

Ive just lived through the glory days, the golden age of Hawks football so i will give the boys the benefit of the doubt for now.

[RiverDog]

Wow there is as much hand wringing about a 26-0 win as there was about two disgusting losses!!!!!

I think the slow starts are maddening just like everyone else does but they have been happening for a while and the Hawks have still had lots of success. I liken their style to a heavyweight fighter, probing, jabbing, counter punching, rope a dope, then BAM. It might be Lockette, or Bennett, or Sherman, or Beast or Wilson by land or by air but they usually find a way to separate.
I saw signs of life with this offense in the second half of all 3 games really. I like the match up Monday then we will see. Its a tough row to hoe and the two winnable losses already on the books make the margin for error almost zero with who is on the schedule

Ive just lived through the glory days, the golden age of Hawks football so i will give the boys the benefit of the doubt for now.

Who's wringing their hands? Not me. All I've said is that I'm not all that impressed.

You're right, the Hawks have had a bit of a history of starting off a season looking very pedestrian like we do now and finishing strong at the end of the season when it counts, with the exception being 2013 when we started out 4-0. There's no reason why this could be another one of those slow start, fast finish years.

I like the matchup on Monday, too. It will be interesting to see where Richard Sherman lines up, if they keep him on his familiar offensive right side or if they have him shadow Megatron. The last time we played a team with a similar receiver, ie Dallas last season, Sherman followed Dez Bryant most of the time.

[HumanCockroach]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/ ... cid=espnFB

That approach already appears to have hit the NFL level. From 2009 to 2012, quarterbacks under pressure took an average of 3.45 seconds to release the ball. Since 2013, that number has dropped to 3.35 seconds.

NFL quarterbacks took a beating in the first three weeks of the season, so much so that a long-simmering issue has been elevated into mainstream discussion. Offensive line play has deteriorated in a way that's apparent to both to the expert and novice eye, endangering the league's quarterback star system and threatening the aesthetic appeal of the game

Great article and something I have been pointing out for years.

[NorthHawk]

Apparently there is some talk within NFL circles to modify the CBA so as to get more practice time. It was because of the OL issues and star players being hurt as a result that started some discussions at the management level. I hope it works out that more practice time is provided as it should improve the games we watch.

[burrrton]

Didn't the limitations on practice time come from the NFLPA to (ostensibly) limit the control teams have over the players?

[c_hawkbob]

Didn't the limitations on practice time come from the NFLPA to (ostensibly) limit the control teams have over the players?

Well the CBA is negotiated between the NFL and the NFLPA so yeah, that where the restrictions came from, but my understanding is that player time off and reduced wear and tear on their body's as the reasons behind it.

[NorthHawk]

I inferred from the article that mgmt was considering talking to the NFLPA.
Considering some of the star players like Luck, Brees, and maybe Stafford being hurt early and with P Manning being sacked 6 times in the 2 first games (he only had 14 sacks last year) it seems to have put a focus on the issue.
The NFLPA doesn't want its players hurt either, so maybe there might be some reason for both sides to make some type of amendment that can help with the situation.
It would make for better games early in the year.

[kalibane]

That's fair Bob, and I agree to a point, but 16 points ( all the offense contributed, and only if I credit them with Haushka's leg) against a horrid defense on the road, isn't something to feel all warm and fuzzy about, especially since they performed at the same offensive level for all three games ( St.Louis 17 points, GB 17 points and Chicago at home 16 points) I don't care how good that defense is, Seattle can't always rely on defensive, or special team scores ( the SAME formula Arizona used last season, don't remember it working out to well for them, do you?) I am "happy" with the win, but don't adhere to it doesn't matter that the offense once again only played well for 1 of 4 quarters of the game, that will catch up with a team eventually, and if Seattle can't score points, at some point, some team that CAN ( say Detroit or Cincy for instance) is going to run them out of the building. 3 points in the first half is not always going to cut it ( for example two out of the three games this season, they won with only three against the Bears, how many times do we play them again?).

So, yes, being happy about the goose egg is absolutely cool and justified, but so is the concern over the horrible offensive play.

This is probably the fairest post (in combination with the one listing the things that people take issue with). What no one can dispute is the offense has not been able to move the ball consistently, particularly in the first half.

I wouldn't be quite as concerned if we were able to move the ball and were just having issues punching it in. But we have way too many 3 and outs or 2 series drives that end in punts and leave the defense on the field longer than they should have to be. And the worst part is it's usually us shooting ourselves in the foot rather than the defense making plays.

[monkey]

We won TOP, dominated special teams, had a backup RB go over 100 yards on just 16 carries, (an average of over six yards a carry), completed 20 of 30 passes (despite the abysmal first half start) for over 230 yards and a TD with no picks. The offensive line opened up running lanes very well, and despite the sacks, managed to give Wilson a clean pocket, especially in the second half, and plenty of time to throw.
We also did a good job of adjusting to a very smart Bears offensive game plan (featuring three TE's and a serious determination to run the ball, very smart!) and once the run game was stopped, in spite of only having two sacks, we saw nearly constant pressure on Clausen.
We dominated defensively once we adjusted to the Bears plan, and the exact same can be said of the offense, which adjusted at the half, and came out firing in the second half.
Yes, we bogged down in the red zone, but Graham came away with a very nice game and a touchdown, multiple receivers had catches as we spread the ball around, and ran the ball efficiently in spite of relying on a backup.

Technically, we had a very nice offensive game, we just had it all in the second half.
Sure it would be nice to start out hot and just blow every team we face away by 50, but I agree with Bob that whining about this win is a lot like whining that we didn't hit any home runs while our pitcher was throwing a perfect game.

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry Monkey an average of 16.3 isn't good enough in the NFL. 3 points every game in the first half , is downright pathetic, even by the 91' 2-14 Seahawks standard, at some point that has to be addressed, and honestly, that type of success (or lack there of) against a horrendous Bears D, at home, should warrant some sort of concern. People keep pointing out the " second half success" but is someone going to explain to me how anyone can consider 13 or less points in a half (much less the three they have produced in every one of them in the first half) some sort of "clicking on all cylinders " dominant type showing? I honestly don't understand that thought process at all.

[obiken]

right the Offense has to do better next week. With Detroit we'll be fine, but in Cincy they will have to step up.

[RiverDog]

Sorry Monkey an average of 16.3 isn't good enough in the NFL. 3 points every game in the first half , is downright pathetic, even by the 91' 2-14 Seahawks standard, at some point that has to be addressed, and honestly, that type of success (or lack there of) against a horrendous Bears D, at home, should warrant some sort of concern. People keep pointing out the " second half success" but is someone going to explain to me how anyone can consider 13 or less points in a half (much less the three they have produced in every one of them in the first half) some sort of "clicking on all cylinders " dominant type showing? I honestly don't understand that thought process at all.

That's my feeling, too. It's called selective memory, as if the first half didn't happen. We have some major problems that have to be fixed if we are to be serious contenders to go back to the SB. This team, particularly the offense, does not look like the same team we've had over the past 3 years. I'm not saying we can't get back there, but simply acknowledging the task that lay ahead.

[monkey]

No, it's as if the first half stunk, and then we made adjustments...

[NorthHawk]

That's putting a lot on the Defense to hold the opposing Offense until the 2nd half.
It's inevitable that our Defense have a lesser season or two compared to the last 2 years.
A team can't lose players and coaches without some negative impact.
Sure, it's Pete's Defense, but the experience in game planning, fine tuning techniques, knowing which buttons to push for each player to get the maximum out of him are just some of the things that are difficult to replace.

That means the Offense has to pick up any slack - and do it early so as to not get behind in a big way.
Teams are catching up to us so we have to also improve and the single biggest area we can improve is on the Offense.
That can help mitigate the effects of any slide in performance or results on the Defensive side.

[burrrton]

Yeah, you can make an argument that starting slow isn't ideal, but you can't judge the offense based on a quarter's, or a half's, performance.

Playing 'slowly' for quarters 1 and 2 then playing well quarters 3 and 4 isn't 'two successes and two failures'- it's a single success or failure based on the entire game's performance.

[c_hawkbob]

Yeah, you can make an argument that starting slow isn't ideal, but you can't judge the offense based on a quarter's, or a half's, performance.

Playing 'slowly' for quarters 1 and 2 then playing well quarters 3 and 4 isn't 'two successes and two failures'- it's a single success or failure based on the entire game's performance.

Very well put. The object is not to win each quarter or half as they happen, or to balance out your statistics across all 4 quarters, it's to win the game. The game is the only single entity that matters.