HawkShack.com

I was surprised to see that we were 'only' 7 for 12 on 3rd down, but several of those still resulted in 3 points.

Nevertheless, our success on 3rd down was a huge factor, especially in the first half. It kept drives alive, put points on the board, and kept Denver's offense off the field. We gave a lot of credit to our defense for our win and for the season in general, and rightfully so, but we need to tip our hat to this offense. They were outstanding last Sunday.

I posted elsewhere that a key drive, for me, was after Denver inexplicably punted nearly mid way through the 3rd qt, still down 29-0. We only got one 1st down on the following drive (I think a 3rd dn conversion), but burned 3:30 more off an already precious clock for the Broncos.

We just...were Firing on all cylinders, really, There wasn't a team in the entire NFL that coulda beat us on Sunday - except ourselves - and we didn't turn the ball over, either.

Nearly everybody in the media has been eating crow since, and the rest of us are lovin' it.

Didn't you guys hear?
Wilson isn't playing well, he's just a game manager anyway, he sucks on third downs, he can't stay in the pocket and make plays.

What you didn't hear that?



Wilson is pure, undiluted, awesome sauce. I wouldn't trade him for another QB in the league. Our offense was outstanding in that game. They took away Lynch (we all knew they would have to TRY at least, I'd been saying all along they would have to sell out to stop Beastmode), so Wilson and the offensive line (zero sacks, no real pressure at all to speak of), and those pedestrian appetizers, stepped up BIG TIME and made plays. Wilson was spinning it, the receivers were breaking poor tackling (told ya!!) and the offense which was overlooked, was as much a reason we won as that defense.

Somehow the term "game manager" is taken as some sort of uncomplimentary term one applies to a quarterback that has his limitations, like Alex Smith. But in this situation, Russell's "game management" was what was required, and he gave us exactly what was asked of him. He was playing with a lead and with the best defense in at least a decade, so why take chances? I thought his play was excellent. I only pass I saw that he missed badly on was the one intended for Miller, and none were close to being picked off. Except for the penalties, the offense's performance was nearly as perfect as the defense IMO.

Why is it that every time Turbin has a big run it gets called back on a holding call? We led the league in penalties and that's the area I'd love to see a big improvement in next season. Less penalties, Harvin & healthy O-line and our offense elevates towards our defensive level in 14'.

Year 1. Break rookie records.
Year 2. Win Super Bowl.
Year 3.

"Why not you Russ?"

The media can kiss our Seahawk ass.

Great point about third down conversion. I have watched the game five times now and each time I do I come away more impressed with the O performance than the last.

Another impression of the game after watching it a few times. At first, I thought Denver was just awful and woefully unprepared. I gave more credit to their awful performance to them. But now I am seeing it differently. The Hawks simply dominated an otherwise pretty good team in all aspects.

RiverDog wrote:Somehow the term "game manager" is taken as some sort of uncomplimentary term one applies to a quarterback that has his limitations

Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Brady are considered the fantastic four qbs in the league, none of whom is considered a "game manager". These guys are the yardsticks by which all other qbs are measured. I don't care if Russell produces the gaudy stats of this group, I only care that the Seahawks win with Wilson at the helm.

Dilfer was considered the first game manager to win a superbowl and he too had an outstanding defense to team with. I do believe that Russell could carry a greater load if it was needed but this team needs mistake avoidance from its qb more than it needs a higher risk/return relationship. A team with a lesser defensive would however need more production from its qb. Wilson is a perfect fit for the current Seahawks and I think he could stretch his role if future versions of the Seahawks necessitate it.

PasadenaHawk wrote: I have watched the game five times now and each time I do I come away more impressed.

I look forward to years of re-watching this game. I can't imagine not being re-impressed with the overall performance however many times I watch it. Ten years from now it will seem all the more impressive.

Stat's be damned, every QB must 'manage' the game.
But lets get one thing straight, RW is no Trent Dilfer, Phil Simms type of game manager.
Game winner is a better fit.

Seahawker wrote:
Year 1. Break rookie records.
Year 2. Win Super Bowl.
Year 3.

"Why not you Russ?"

The media can kiss our Seahawk ass.

This made me smile, thanks for that!

Seahawker wrote:Stat's be damned, every QB must 'manage' the game.
But lets get one thing straight, RW is no Trent Dilfer, Phil Simms type of game manager.
Game winner is a better fit.

Here's an interesting thought (well it's my thought so it's interesting to me anyway ), remember how earlier in our season Russell Wilson was running all over the place, and throwing the ball more, and the fans and media bobbleheads alike were just SO enamored with him, then later in the season, he seemed to almost go into a shell. I'm sure we can all hear Jaws say, "I've just finished up 63 straight hours of film study, and Russell Wilson is missing open looks." right?

Well what if I told you that based on two things, 1. what Pete Carroll himself said repeatedly about it, and 2. the fact that earlier in the season we had three offensive line injuries, that Russell's apparent, end of the season decline was BY DESIGN!!

Think about it. What's Pete's biggest concern? The football. It's all about the football. Never turn over the ball.
Earlier in the season, Russell was running around making all kinds of plays with his feet and throwing more, taking more chances, because...wait for it...HE HAD TO! He had no freaking protection, and therefore couldn't run the offense that Pete wanted him to.
We were able to start running the offense the way Pete wants, until later in the year when the offensive line had all returned to something closer to full strength.
You know what kind of offense Pete REALLY wants?
You saw it fully on display in the Superbowl!
In that game he actually missed a wide open Golden Tate who might have even scored, BUT he was running hard to his left, and while he MIGHT have been able to make that jump throw he's done before on the move, it was RISKY. So he didn't make that throw, even though it MIGHT have worked...because it also MIGHT have been picked off. Earlier in the year, he probably would have attempted that throw, to Pete's chagrin. He might have connected on it too, and all the fans would have been SO excited, and Pete would have been stewing about the risk he took with the ball.

Point is, when the fans were the most excited about his play earlier in the year, Pete was the LEAST excited about it, Pete prefers what he was doing at the END of the year! he has said so multiple times, and yet for some reason, no one seems to believe him.
Not sure why, Pete always tells you exactly what he's thinking, and people convince themselves that it's just coach-speak, or just him trying to be deceptive. They think that right up to when what Pete had been saying all along is once again proven to be the case.

I have to agree that Pete definitely wants his offense run this way. What was so great about Sunday is that the conservative offense was more than Denver's D could handle anyway. It seems the media talked a lot about Champ Bailey and his first super bowl appearance and how he's one of the best corners in the league, except that was only true five years ago. I was thinking we have to be able to take advantage of a older, slow corner, and, sure enough, Baldwin got behind him with plenty of room for a big gain. I don't believe for one second that we couldn't have done that more often. We just didn't have to. I think the first half worked out better than Pete dreamed, and I speculate he had no intention of running the score up. The Denver D and O were dominated all first half, and only a stop on the first drive of the third quarter would have possibly saved them. Harvin killed that, and then steady execution by the Seahawks continued to abuse an already exposed, tired, and disheartened Denver team.

Let people think RW is just a game manager. Do it, and he'll pull an Chicago, Atlanta, and New Orleans (Dec. 2) on you. He'll manage to win games more often than not.

We have one of the best rushing attacks in the league and what is hands down the best defense in the league so common sense dictates that our quarterback play conservatively. Even if we had one of the "Big 4" on our roster, it would be advisable for him to play conservatively. Those guys are not immune to turnovers anymore than anyone else when you consider that many of the turnovers assigned to the QB aren't their fault (tipped passes, hits on the QB, receivers running wrong routes, etc.). When you have as good a defense as ours, winning the turnover battle is going to be the key to victory in most close games.

Seattle missed on 5 3rd down conversions. But lets take a closer look at them.
#1 Wilson escapes the rush left and appears to have crossed the line of gain with the ball deep in Denver territory. Remember the first down line just as the goal line extends the world around. He had it by 6 inches. Terrible spot a yard short.
#2 Wilson throws a perfect ball to Kearse which is a TD except for an incredible play by Nate Irvin.And even though it was a FG drive Wilson bailed out Bevell with a Houdini like escape from a doomed throwback play where 5 Broncos had a bead on him and makes a flip towards Willson to save a certain punting situation. He drops a perfect 40 yard ball in to Baldwin the next play to get in scoring position.
#3 Wilson escapes up the middle on 2nd down and is probably going to run for 20 yards or more but Okung gets called for holding making it 2nd and 19. That drive stalled but started on the 8.Only punt of the game.
#4 3rd and 1 Turbin is stopped deep in Denver territory game far out of reach already.
#5 T Jack is in the game absolute garbage time.

So Wilson was actually 7-11 and could have easily been 9-11 or 10-11. The defense was awesome but really so was the offense. All we frigging heard was all about Pot Roast and how the Denver D was stout the last month only giving up 15 PPG and can Russell and our offense keep up and blah blah blah. And really other than the Harvin trickery they stuffed the run game. Our O line was very average honestly. Wilson made it work out magnificently with his arm and feet along with our unheralded receivers who were nearly perfect.
The more I look at the game the more I believe Russell was our real MVP. Not going to quibble:-)

It looks like the Broncos had no respect for the Hawks passing game at all.
They sold out to stop Lynch with the expectation of this stopping the entire Offense.
Pretty poor Defensive plan if that's what they actually did.

Hawktawk wrote:Seattle missed on 5 3rd down conversions. But lets take a closer look at them.
#1 Wilson escapes the rush left and appears to have crossed the line of gain with the ball deep in Denver territory. Remember the first down line just as the goal line extends the world around. He had it by 6 inches. Terrible spot a yard short.
#2 Wilson throws a perfect ball to Kearse which is a TD except for an incredible play by Nate Irvin.And even though it was a FG drive Wilson bailed out Bevell with a Houdini like escape from a doomed throwback play where 5 Broncos had a bead on him and makes a flip towards Willson to save a certain punting situation. He drops a perfect 40 yard ball in to Baldwin the next play to get in scoring position.
#3 Wilson escapes up the middle on 2nd down and is probably going to run for 20 yards or more but Okung gets called for holding making it 2nd and 19. That drive stalled but started on the 8.Only punt of the game.
#4 3rd and 1 Turbin is stopped deep in Denver territory game far out of reach already.
#5 T Jack is in the game absolute garbage time.

So Wilson was actually 7-11 and could have easily been 9-11 or 10-11. The defense was awesome but really so was the offense. All we frigging heard was all about Pot Roast and how the Denver D was stout the last month only giving up 15 PPG and can Russell and our offense keep up and blah blah blah. And really other than the Harvin trickery they stuffed the run game. Our O line was very average honestly. Wilson made it work out magnificently with his arm and feet along with our unheralded receivers who were nearly perfect.
The more I look at the game the more I believe Russell was our real MVP. Not going to quibble:-)

Good points, hawktawk. Your observation helps explain why my impression was that we did better than the 7 out of 12 3rd down conversion stat we were credited for.

Denver, indeed, was using the blueprint established by our previous opponents of selling out to stop the run and take their chances with Russell and our receiving corps. But they didn't bring near the pressure that teams like the Rams did.

I also noticed that Russell was taking deeper drops, too, and that his play action fakes were creating some good passing lanes for him that weren't there in previous games. The deeper drops also had the advantage of giving him more time to react and break the pocket when the protection did break down.

Absolutely RD. Wilson was very effective and decisive from the pocket. And it is also correct that Denver could not get consistent pressure. I just don't think they expected Russell and the receivers to carve them up like that. It was really a super job by our QB and receivers. The save on the throwback might have been the best play RW made all day. Nobody else in the league makes that escape. It was really a pretty foolish chance to take in that situation. Its all good though.

It may have been a foolish chance, but it also blew up the tendency template.
Combined with the End runs of Harvin, the Offense had quite a different play set than usual.
It made the Broncos consider a much more varied possibility of plays when calling the Defense.