More Wilson Contract stuff

[Anthony]

And if we had a mid ranked Defense last year or 2013 we would have been hard pressed to win in the playoffs if we even made it.
This IS a Defensive oriented team. That's a fact. It's what Pete said he would build when he first got here and he's done it.

I would wager (if I were a betting person) that if our Defense faltered, our Offense would not be able to pick up the slack enough to get us into the playoffs.
On the other side of the coin, our Defense can and has proven to be able to hold our opponents to the point where the Offense doesn't have to be prolific for us to win.

And out offense has proven when needed it can be prolific despite the limited talent. Just because you are defensive orientated does not mean the offense is along for the ride, Or cannot carry the team when needed. To think that is being short sighted and as has been your way down playing how important the offense and Wilson is to this team. If our defense was indeed mid ranked you can bet the offense would have been opened up a lot more to compensate. In 2013 a mid defense would give up 23 points, we avg scoring 26. Now I know it is not that simple obviously if we are giving up that many points our offense may not get as many chances, but of course our offense would not be being run the same anyway. So basically you have nothing.

[Anthony]

We have an average at best Offensive Line, we have had an average at best WR corps (Graham may change that), and we've had Wilson and Lynch on the Offensive side.
On the Defensive side, we have possibly the best Secondary in the league, a very good Defensive Line, and underrated Linebackers - maybe one of the best groups in the NFL but overshadowed by the Secondary.

The Stats don't tell the whole story (as usual), so why do we win? Our Defense, that's why.
There's no way our Offense can consistently win shootouts, but our Defense can consistently hold the best Offenses to minimal points which puts the Offense in a position to score just enough to win any game.

I would rather see a much more balanced team, but it's a formula that's been proven to work until the Defense hits a bad stretch. Then the Offense is exposed by its limitations.

great but again you do not know that at all. I know you want this to be true, and need it to be true but it is not. If it were than any QB would do, but we know that is not true either. The offense is just as important to this team as the defense. So give it a break to be honest your whole stance is pretty ridiculous.

[NorthHawk]

great but again you do not know that at all. I know you want this to be true, and need it to be true but it is not. If it were than any QB would do, but we know that is not true either. The offense is just as important to this team as the defense. So give it a break to be honest your whole stance is pretty ridiculous.

What isn't true?
The Offensive Line is average?
The WR corps have been average?
Our Defense is the best in the league the last 2 years?

Like I said before Wilson is probably the best QB for our system, but there isn't much surrounding talent on Offense other than Lynch and this year Graham.

[Anthony]

great but again you do not know that at all. I know you want this to be true, and need it to be true but it is not. If it were than any QB would do, but we know that is not true either. The offense is just as important to this team as the defense. So give it a break to be honest your whole stance is pretty ridiculous.

What isn't true?
The Offensive Line is average?
The WR corps have been average?
Our Defense is the best in the league the last 2 years?

Like I said before Wilson is probably the best QB for our system, but there isn't much surrounding talent on Offense other than Lynch and this year Graham.

And again none of that says the offense is just along for the ride or cannot as it has carry this team. The reality is the defense has not carried this team all season in any season. They have had their hiccups and luckily when they have Wilson and the offense has come through. So again to say the offense is along for the ride is wrong. you wan to say we are a defensive team that is fine, but that still doe snot change the facts without the offense we do not win, and as you have pointed out Wilson is a huge part of that and has shown the ability to carry the team. If our defense was not so good, they would have no choice but to let Wilson do his thing and almost every time they have the offense led by him has done great.

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry North you are just wrong in regards to that offense, as wrong as Anthony's insisting Wilson is the only reason Seattle's wins or comparing Seattle's defense from four years ago to this one as "the same". You can claim Seattle scores because of the defense if they were a top scoring O but didn't move the ball, but that isn't close to true. Anemic, along for the ride offenses, do not move the ball better than all but three teams in the NFL no matter how you spin it. That offense moves the ball, scores, changes field position, it does everything you want an offense to do ( scores, gains yards, chews clock and doesn't turn the ball over)

http://www.nfl.com/stats/team

You are talking about an offense that was MORE successful moving the ball than Green Bay, Indy, Dallas to name a few, that you are insisting is "average" and along for the ride. So unless you are willing to say the same about the 28 teams ranked bellow Seattle ( many of which are nothing of the sort) then your claim to the contrary makes zero sense. What makes Seattle unique is the ability for the offense, defense or ST to pick up the other when necessary, not just this or that.

[Anthony]

Sorry North you are just wrong in regards to that offense, as wrong as Anthony's insisting Wilson is the only reason Seattle's wins or comparing Seattle's defense from four years ago to this one as "the same". You can claim Seattle scores because of the defense if they were a top scoring O but didn't move the ball, but that isn't close to true. Anemic, along for the ride offenses, do not move the ball better than all but three teams in the NFL no matter how you spin it. That offense moves the ball, scores, changes field position, it does everything you want an offense to do ( scores, gains yards, chews clock and doesn't turn the ball over)

http://www.nfl.com/stats/team

All good FYI I never said Wilson was the only reason we win, just a huge reason we win.

[HumanCockroach]

Not interested. Teams win SBs, not QBs.QBs absolutely matter, but they are still just a cog, not the whole Damn watch.

[burrrton]

And out offense has proven when needed it can be prolific despite the limited talent.

I'm jumping in mid-conversation here, but this should be repeated.

We're a team that wins with defense (on balance), but that's not because our offense is limited and/or otherwise shtty- it's because we have a *spectacular* defense.

Think about it- even with our defense manhandling the other team's O, our offense *still* ranks in the top 10 of the league. You know good and well if they had to pour it on every game, they'd rank much higher.

[Anthony]

Not interested. Teams win SBs, not QBs.QBs absolutely matter, but they are still just a cog, not the whole Damn watch.

Of course you are not, it does not fit into what you are saying. However once again yes teams win but teams need great players, no team wins without some great players. NONE and RW is a great player and essential to our success.

[RiverDog]

Sorry Riv not buying it. I think people are just working themselves up. In response to your points:

1. I don't recall this being a problem for the Ravens when they didn't extend Joe Flacco. The Colts don't seem to think this is a problem with Andrew Luck. What special circumstances are involved that would make it so much of a distraction with Russell Wilson?

2. I would be upset if they franchised Wagner. That's too much of the cap in one year for a middle linebacker. So I don't find this compelling whatsoever.

3. The price may go up but the rest is complete BS. Their lack of being able to find an agreeable number doesn't mean anything for other Free Agents. All they care about is what they are able to get. The FO has shown great ability to negotiate with their star players and they don't spend big in Free Agency in the first place because they value compensatory picks so much.

Lastly... none of these fans expressed any of these same worries when Hass was allowed to play out his contract and they almost had to franchise him. It would be completely unprecedented for a QB who plays at the level of RW in the prime of his career to hit the open market. It's never going to happen. People are just wringing their hands because they want to wring their hands about something.

Good point about the FT for Wagner, and after looking at our roster, there isn't anyone else on our roster with their contract coming up in the next couple of years that's close to deserving the FT.

But I disagree with your assessment of the distraction aspect. Joe Flacco isn't Russell Wilson. He's never been widely considered as one of the top 5 QB's in the league, his career prior to his SB run/contract year was checkered at best, and a lot of their fan base was advocating for them to move on from him prior to his contract year/SB run. Not so with Russell Wilson. And as far as Indy goes, if they're not getting nervous about not resigning Andrew Luck, then bad on them. If I were a Colt's fan, I'd be furious that they're not pursuing an extension this season.

[jshawaii22]

So, does this mean that it is official? The Seahawk F/O has been low balling R.W. ??? Does Pete really believe T-jack could have done just as good as Russell??? Is Pete smoking crack?

If They hadn't of wasted the money they gave to Pussy Harvin and Cyndi Rice they would have had the money to pay Wilson!

Sorry, but I have to say this. 200+ comments and that has to be the _______________ comment so far. Yeah, a couple of years or more ago the FO blew some money on Rice and Percy, trying to improve the team and that's the reason we don't want to make RW the highest paid QB in the NFL. Yikes!
Yes, we could give in to the Baseball Agent's First Big Contract of 120m+, and most or all guaranteed with a lot of front loaded $$$. Maybe that works in baseball (see A-Rod).
That gives us a two year window and then it blows up. However, if we do it the FO way, (yes, the Green Bay of Ted Thomson & the New England way) we have this going for a decade. Take your pick. The key is the convince RW that the greed of the agent is not justified. Hopefully, some of the players who have stepped up the plate and given a little to keep the team long term will talk to Russell and put some pressure on him. I will guarantee one thing. Whatever the offer the team has made is NOT A LOW BALL OFFER. It's probably just at #5 best, which is where he is. Rodgers, Brady, Drew, Ben...

The Seahawks FO is negotiating to save the 'team' right now. Crappy teams sign players for anything they can. The good teams negotiate to make sure it damn well works within the salary cap and protecting the future. That just isn't the case right now as far as Russell's agent see's it.

(As for the ________________, I can't say the words I want to say, because we're all fans of the Hawks and all have the best interests of the team in mind when we make those comments but, no I don't think Pete or JS are on crack... I personally think it's Russell's agent who's on Crack. .

If it was Bus Cook, I believe this would be done by now. You're blaming the wrong side of the coin... Put the pressure on Russell.

[c_hawkbob]

beware of doe snot, it's just nasty.

[NorthHawk]

Sorry North you are just wrong in regards to that offense, as wrong as Anthony's insisting Wilson is the only reason Seattle's wins or comparing Seattle's defense from four years ago to this one as "the same". You can claim Seattle scores because of the defense if they were a top scoring O but didn't move the ball, but that isn't close to true. Anemic, along for the ride offenses, do not move the ball better than all but three teams in the NFL no matter how you spin it. That offense moves the ball, scores, changes field position, it does everything you want an offense to do ( scores, gains yards, chews clock and doesn't turn the ball over)

http://www.nfl.com/stats/team

You are talking about an offense that was MORE successful moving the ball than Green Bay, Indy, Dallas to name a few, that you are insisting is "average" and along for the ride. So unless you are willing to say the same about the 28 teams ranked bellow Seattle ( many of which are nothing of the sort) then your claim to the contrary makes zero sense. What makes Seattle unique is the ability for the offense, defense or ST to pick up the other when necessary, not just this or that.

So if our Defense started playing lousy - say middle of the road and we had to put up 30 to 35 points to win, do you really think we could beat:

Packers? Nope we just barely beat them because one of their ST players made a mistake - we were lucky.
Cowboys? Nope they came into here and handed us our lunch.
Detroit? Doubtful as our Offense doesn't match up to their weapons but their Secondary is vulnerable.
Carolina? Probably not as we had a tough time with them even at home.
Arizona? Doubtful as we have trouble with them when our Defense is playing well.
St. Louis? Doubtful as their Defense manhandles us regularly
New England? Maybe this year with their losses on Defense
Buffalo? Not if they had a decent QB, but we would have real trouble scoring 30 points on that Defense
Pittsburgh? Maybe but it depends on how good their Defense is without LeBeau
Cincinnati? Doubtful
Baltimore? Doubtful
Indianapolis? Nope
Denver? Nope
Chiefs? Nope, they proved it last year
Chargers? Nope, same as the Chiefs

Face it, we are a middle of the road Offense because of Wilson and Lynch otherwise we would be a poor Offense. Graham will hopefully change this, but with an average at best OL last year who lost 2 starters, his additional talents might be limited if Russ doesn't have time.

We're a Defensive team first and foremost. Defense determines whether we win or lose, not Offense.

[burrrton]

So if our Defense started playing lousy - say middle of the road and we had to put up 30 to 35 points to win, do you really think we could beat:

North, a "middle of the road" defense only gives up a little over 20pts a game, and it's impossible to say for sure since offenses and defenses don't perform in a vacuum, but if you don't think our offense is capable of scoring mid/high 20s, I don't know what team you've been watching.

Hell, we averaged, what, 25 a game last year with our patented "make no mistakes ever" style.

[HumanCockroach]

Burton sums it up perfectly. Moving and scoring in the Top ten in all important categories an offense can, is NOT average. Seattle would not win a lot of games if the defense magically becomes the dregs if the NFL, but nor does any other team in the league.

[HumanCockroach]

Of course you are not, it doe snot fit into what you are saying. However once again yes teams win but teams need great players, no team wins without some great players. NONE and RW is a great player and essential to our success

Who's arguing that he is not? I don't see anyone claiming that in this or any other thread. Most people recognize his importance, the difference is not many are freaking out about unsubstantiated claims of low ball offers, or claiming unfair contract practices, or believing that no matter what you give him whatever he wants at any cost. Wilson is an important PIECE of the puzzle, not the ONLY piece of it. Just as Lynch is, or Sherman is, or Wagner is, or ET is or Kam is, and Seattle is doing it's damndest to keep them all playing, and ALL happy.

[NorthHawk]

So you think we could beat those teams I listed by outscoring them?
Dream on.
We'd be lucky to beat 3 of them in a shootout - if that.

The Defense is the key to this team and determines if we win or lose.
They can put us in the position to win, our Offense cannot, it can only take advantage what the Defense or ST gives them.

Look how bad we looked against the Packers in the NFC Championship.
Our Defense kept us in it and the Offense got lucky.


Look how well we played against the Cowboys.
We were largely inept all game long.

Carolina held us to very few points each of the last 3 games we have played.

Denver almost beat us at home. We couldn't grind out the clock when they got on a roll at the end.
There's no way we could have kept up to them if that roll started earlier, but the Defense did its job.

We always have trouble with the Rams and if they have a good QB in Foles, they might just sweep us this year.

And last year we couldn't even keep up to the Chiefs. The Chiefs, you know the team with a WR corps so bad there were no TD catches by them all year.
The list goes on...

This team of ours has not shown to be good on Offense. Maybe it will all change this year, but to date we've been only average.

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry North, if you are going to use specific games as your example, I could do the same if you would like, focuss only on games where this offense excelled. Should I cite the three 50+ point games and insist that the offense can do that every week, maybe the ATL playoff game, and what they did in a single half. There is the Chicago shootout were the defense did indeed play average, who pulled their butts out of the fire? You insisting a top 10 offense is average at best is like me claiming that the Niners D with Haley, Lott, Sanders an co were an average defense because the offense was better.

[NorthHawk]

Sorry North, if you are going to use specific games as your example, I could do the same if you would like, focuss only on games where this offense excelled. Should I cite the three 50+ point games and insist that the offense can do that every week, maybe the ATL playoff game, and what they did in a single half. There is the Chicago shootout were the defense did indeed play average, who pulled their butts out of the fire? You insisting a top 10 offense is average at best is like me claiming that the Niners D with Haley, Lott, Sanders an co were an average defense because the offense was better.

The Defense had lots of 3 and outs and turnovers in those games as well, those Defenses we were going against were largely playing poorly and our ST were playing lights out.
The Chicago and Atlanta games were the spurts I mentioned - if we were truly good on Offense it wouldn't have been close.
Last year the team started rolling when the Defense got its act together. Just a coincidence?
Certainly the subtraction of Harvin helped but when the Defense started playing like it can we started to win again.
Before that the Offense showed it couldn't carry the team as the Defense has shown the ability to do.

[Anthony]

So if our Defense started playing lousy - say middle of the road and we had to put up 30 to 35 points to win, do you really think we could beat:

Packers? Nope we just barely beat them because one of their ST players made a mistake - we were lucky.
Cowboys? Nope they came into here and handed us our lunch.
Detroit? Doubtful as our Offense doesn't match up to their weapons but their Secondary is vulnerable.
Carolina? Probably not as we had a tough time with them even at home.
Arizona? Doubtful as we have trouble with them when our Defense is playing well.
St. Louis? Doubtful as their Defense manhandles us regularly
New England? Maybe this year with their losses on Defense
Buffalo? Not if they had a decent QB, but we would have real trouble scoring 30 points on that Defense
Pittsburgh? Maybe but it depends on how good their Defense is without LeBeau
Cincinnati? Doubtful
Baltimore? Doubtful
Indianapolis? Nope
Denver? Nope
Chiefs? Nope, they proved it last year
Chargers? Nope, same as the Chiefs

Face it, we are a middle of the road Offense because of Wilson and Lynch otherwise we would be a poor Offense. Graham will hopefully change this, but with an average at best OL last year who lost 2 starters, his additional talents might be limited if Russ doesn't have time.

We're a Defensive team first and foremost. Defense determines whether we win or lose, not Offense.

Dude you are basin gall your assumptions on how we play now, if our defense was bad we would 0play differently on offense we would have to and we have seen what Rw can do when he is let loose. Do not get me wrong we would be a great offense and it would still because of Lynch and Wilson but we should be great. Not to mention you just took away all your team ra ra stuff by saying we are only decent on offense because of 2 players.

[Anthony]

So you think we could beat those teams I listed by outscoring them?
Dream on.
We'd be lucky to beat 3 of them in a shootout - if that.

The Defense is the key to this team and determines if we win or lose.
They can put us in the position to win, our Offense cannot, it can only take advantage what the Defense or ST gives them.

Look how bad we looked against the Packers in the NFC Championship.
Our Defense kept us in it and the Offense got lucky.


Look how well we played against the Cowboys.
We were largely inept all game long.

Carolina held us to very few points each of the last 3 games we have played.

Denver almost beat us at home. We couldn't grind out the clock when they got on a roll at the end.
There's no way we could have kept up to them if that roll started earlier, but the Defense did its job.

We always have trouble with the Rams and if they have a good QB in Foles, they might just sweep us this year.

And last year we couldn't even keep up to the Chiefs. The Chiefs, you know the team with a WR corps so bad there were no TD catches by them all year.
The list goes on...

This team of ours has not shown to be good on Offense. Maybe it will all change this year, but to date we've been only average.

All that is great but you cannot prove any of it and given we have a top 10 defense playing a defensive offensive style I have no doubt if we opened it up we could out score most anyone. I am glad you named those few teams, however again that is with a offensive game plan based on how great our Defense is, now if our defense was not that good that game plan would change and every time it has we have scored and scored a lot. Like I said you can claim all you want about the defense but the fact still is without the offense and Rw we do not win period.

[Anthony]

The Defense had lots of 3 and outs and turnovers in those games as well, those Defenses we were going against were largely playing poorly and our ST were playing lights out.
The Chicago and Atlanta games were the spurts I mentioned - if we were truly good on Offense it wouldn't have been close.
Last year the team started rolling when the Defense got its act together. Just a coincidence?
Certainly the subtraction of Harvin helped but when the Defense started playing like it can we started to win again.
Before that the Offense showed it couldn't carry the team as the Defense has shown the ability to do.

Dude again the problem is you keep ignoring the game plan for the offense. It is always mistake free, get a lead let the D hold it. However when the D faulters the offense most of the time comes through and when the offense is let loose the whole game they score and score big. IF our Defense was poor they would open up the offense more.

[HumanCockroach]

Last year the team started rolling when the Defense got its act together. Just a coincidence?

And yet almost every team you list falls under that SAME parameter. How did the high scoring Dallas offense fair the year before the defense held up its end? Detroit? How about the "relax" Pack, how many SBs Brady, Luck, Ryan win WITHOUT a top tier defense? The answer is ZERO. Figure it out, the one thing about football even a toddler knows is you HAVE to score one more point than the opponent, which means it will be almost impossible to win a championship without a DEFENSE, and that is just as true with ANY team. No matter if you are enamored with passing 70 times a game or not ( which honestly HAS to be the case in this argument as Seattle moved AND SCORED AND had MORE big plays than ANY of the offenses you list, as WELL AS MORE first downs).keep your runner up pass happy teams, claim their proficiency over a team that gains more yards, I'll go ahead and stick with the more successful unit, with multiple SB appearances.

[burrrton]

North, the fact is this: whenever our offense has had to outscore the other team, they've done it (at a clip as good as or better than virtually any other in the NFL anyway).

This doesn't mean it's assured they could do so every week with a non-existent D, but there's simply no reason to think they're a liability on this team, ending up as a top-10 O only because of the defense.

When they've had to score points, they've done so. Until you see a pattern indicating otherwise, that should excuse them from this ridiculous criticism.

Man, the things we have to argue about in the offseason.

[RiverDog]

Man, the things we have to argue about in the offseason.

No kidding.

[Hawktawk]

Wow leave town for a couple days and this train kept rolling. Its a meaningless stupid thread blah blah blah. Thats one view.
But I like the thread because really its a a continuation of the never ending debate about Russell Wilson and how the HC/FO and fan base view him and how much they really value him.
We've heard people say he wouldn't be successful anywhere else without Lynch and this great D. I disagree. Someone said give Brady his D and his weapons and we would see what would happen.

Brady would get killed playing 6 NFC West Games behind Seattle's line throwing to Doug Baldwin Ricardo Lockette Luke Willson etc. So would Manning. RW would do more with their weapons than Brady would with ours(minus Graham).
If its all about the D then why have the last 2 times Seattle ended the season with a loss involved defensive collapses?if its all about Lynch why were the Hawks 7-9 and 7-9 with him 2 years before RW rolled it town?

So when we talk about Wilson's contract everyone basically knows he will get signed.Frankly we will be stunned if he doesn't. Some of us are upset about the hardball tactics employed by JS, thats all. RW deserves way better.I think hes the best and should be payed accordingly.
But I'm over it, I'm becoming more optimistic it will happen soon and I know RW has enough class to work through it.
So Go Hawks!!!!Come on season!!!!

[RiverDog]

Wow leave town for a couple days and this train kept rolling. Its a meaningless stupid thread blah blah blah. Thats one view.
But I like the thread because really its a a continuation of the never ending debate about Russell Wilson and how the HC/FO and fan base view him and how much they really value him.
We've heard people say he wouldn't be successful anywhere else without Lynch and this great D. I disagree. Someone said give Brady his D and his weapons and we would see what would happen.

Brady would get killed playing 6 NFC West Games behind Seattle's line throwing to Doug Baldwin Ricardo Lockette Luke Willson etc. So would Manning. RW would do more with their weapons than Brady would with ours(minus Graham).
If its all about the D then why have the last 2 times Seattle ended the season with a loss involved defensive collapses?if its all about Lynch why were the Hawks 7-9 and 7-9 with him 2 years before RW rolled it town?

So when we talk about Wilson's contract everyone basically knows he will get signed.Frankly we will be stunned if he doesn't. Some of us are upset about the hardball tactics employed by JS, thats all. RW deserves way better.I think hes the best and should be payed accordingly.
But I'm over it, I'm becoming more optimistic it will happen soon and I know RW has enough class to work through it.
So Go Hawks!!!!Come on season!!!!

I agree with most of what you've said. Yes, it is not a 'stupid thread', it's the hottest topic at this point of the offseason. I also agree with you and others that we will eventually sign Russell with the only questions being when and under what terms, and I agree with you as that no other starting quarterback could do what Russell has with our offense. He's the perfect quarterback for this team, and he deserves to be fairly compensated.

But I don't agree with you about JS's "hardball tactics". There's a lot of things to consider in a contract that has the potential to be the largest in the history of the game. There's a lot of things we are not privy to, one being that Russell's agent's long suit is MLB contracts, so he may not be as familiar with the vastly different NFL as other player agents, which could be slowing things down. We need to be patient.

[NorthHawk]

North, the fact is this: whenever our offense has had to outscore the other team, they've done it (at a clip as good as or better than virtually any other in the NFL anyway).

This doesn't mean it's assured they could do so every week with a non-existent D, but there's simply no reason to think they're a liability on this team, ending up as a top-10 O only because of the defense.

When they've had to score points, they've done so. Until you see a pattern indicating otherwise, that should excuse them from this ridiculous criticism.

Man, the things we have to argue about in the offseason.

So how would we do if Lynch didn't break 130 tackles last year or Wilson didn't run for about 850 yards (that total has gone up each year)?
Our WRs aren't great - they're good blockers, but we saw in the last SB how they can be shut down by a good Defense.
Our OL is not good - I would say worse than average. In our Super Bowl year, a stat showed that something like 75% of our sacks were against only 4 defensive rushers. That's 5 guys not able to stop 4 rushers.
We had Unger in the middle who played well when healthy and could be a Pro Bowler - he is gone.

From right to left.
Britt needs to upgrade his game from last year. I saw some good things, but it will take time.
Sweezy is average but he needs to improve.
Lewis/Jeanpierre need to really up their game.
Bailey couldn't beat out Carpenter last year and is now starting.
Okung is good when healthy - but he's never healthy and who will play LT when he goes on his annual injury break?
If he gets to FA, we may not even re-sign him if another team gives him a better offer like Carpenter got.
TE is a bright spot with the addition of Graham. Maybe he can make up the difference for our OL, but it's a lot to ask of a pass catching TE.

So basically, our Offense has been Wilson and Lynch. Wilson didn't run for that yardage because he likes to, he ran because he had to.
If this is Lynch's last year - or he hits that age/carries wall we are in real trouble on Offense.

We haven't been able to score points when we needed to. We couldn't do it against the Chiefs, Chargers, Cowboys, and got enough points against the Packers because of a lucky break and if it wasn't for our great Defense, it would have been over by half time. That was just last year.
And those defenses aren't supposed to be top defenses.
Against good Defenses we don't do very well. The Panthers consistently shut us down, same with the Rams and 49ers of past years. The Pats also kept us in check in the Super Bowl.
We don't play like a top 10 Offense against good Defenses. However, our Defense plays well against top 10 Offenses and often shuts them down.
That's the difference.

[Anthony]

So how would we do if Lynch didn't break 130 tackles last year or Wilson didn't run for about 850 yards (that total has gone up each year)?
Our WRs aren't great - they're good blockers, but we saw in the last SB how they can be shut down by a good Defense.
Our OL is not good - I would say worse than average. In our Super Bowl year, a stat showed that something like 75% of our sacks were against only 4 defensive rushers. That's 5 guys not able to stop 4 rushers.
We had Unger in the middle who played well when healthy and could be a Pro Bowler - he is gone.

From right to left.
Britt needs to upgrade his game from last year. I saw some good things, but it will take time.
Sweezy is average but he needs to improve.
Lewis/Jeanpierre need to really up their game.
Bailey couldn't beat out Carpenter last year and is now starting.
Okung is good when healthy - but he's never healthy and who will play LT when he goes on his annual injury break?
If he gets to FA, we may not even re-sign him if another team gives him a better offer like Carpenter got.
TE is a bright spot with the addition of Graham. Maybe he can make up the difference for our OL, but it's a lot to ask of a pass catching TE.

So basically, our Offense has been Wilson and Lynch. Wilson didn't run for that yardage because he likes to, he ran because he had to.
If this is Lynch's last year - or he hits that age/carries wall we are in real trouble on Offense.

We haven't been able to score points when we needed to. We couldn't do it against the Chiefs, Chargers, Cowboys, and got enough points against the Packers because of a lucky break and if it wasn't for our great Defense, it would have been over by half time. That was just last year.
And those defenses aren't supposed to be top defenses.
Against good Defenses we don't do very well. The Panthers consistently shut us down, same with the Rams and 49ers of past years. The Pats also kept us in check in the Super Bowl.
We don't play like a top 10 Offense against good Defenses. However, our Defense plays well against top 10 Offenses and often shuts them down.
That's the difference.

How would we do if they did not hold the offense back, how would we do if we had a real #1 wr, how would we do if Bevel could call a good game. All hypotheticals. The facts show the offense when needed are more than capable of carrying this team. The fact that offense really means Lynch and Rw is irrelevant. You keep saying they shut us down but keep leaving out the play calling. When they have stopped their conservative play calling no one has shut us down. The fact is if the defense was not as good as it is, they wold call a much less conservative game and the offense would do great, again that offense really being Rw and lynch to this point. There is a reason we are atop 10 offense, and being a top 10 offense means you can carry a team when needed.

[jshawaii22]

We're something like 26 - 10 over the past two years, with a Lombardi in the previously empty Trophy Case... and now we're going to b**** about Bevel's play calling, too? Our offense is not in the top 10 because the team has concentrated on Defense and missed on almost every top O-Pick in the past 4 years, wasting picks on running backs and WR's that will never be #1's (or even #2's)

Blame the FO, not Bevel. He has to work with what we give him.

js

[burrrton]

So how would we do if Lynch didn't break 130 tackles last year or Wilson didn't run for about 850 yards (that total has gone up each year)?

So the offense would be a liability if its players weren't so good??

Our WRs aren't great - they're good blockers, but we saw in the last SB how they can be shut down by a good Defense.

We scored right at our season average, and were realistically one off-tackle dive from hanging 31 on them.

[edit- we outperformed our season averages in virtually every category, and we outgained the Patriots- did you even look at the stats??]

How was that "shut down"?

Our OL is not good

Agreed.

We haven't been able to score points when we needed to.

*sigh* I'm sorry it doesn't fit your little narrative here, North, but we had a top-10 offense, and have averaged 12 wins a year- that's simply not an offense that "couldn't score points when it needed to".

We could use work on our o-line, and we certainly need to re-sign our skill players, but our offense is solid. There's no getting around that.

[obiken]

Our OL sucks, our Offense was anemic at best at worst non existent. We did nothing in the draft to substantially improve it.

[RiverDog]

Our OL sucks, our Offense was anemic at best at worst non existent. We did nothing in the draft to substantially improve it.

Ah, come on, Obi. Granted, we are defense-orientated and our OL is not going to be confused with The Hogs, but don't forget, our offense, whether you attribute its success to Russell's scrambles, Beast's broken tackles, or a lot of 3 and out's by our D, ranked 9th in total yards. That's right, we ha a top 10 offense, and that doesn't begin to consider that we play in one of the defensively toughest divisions in football.

[burrrton]

our Offense was anemic at best at worst non existent.

Obi, put the beer down or quit posting. It was a top-10 O.

[Anthony]

Our OL sucks, our Offense was anemic at best at worst non existent. We did nothing in the draft to substantially improve it.

Non existent hmm and yet we scored in every game and were never down more than 9 points sure doe snot sound like non existent, to p10 scoring and yardage offense, hmm how could they do that when they did not exist? IN other words sorry NO.

[obiken]

All right Just beer tomorrow no Singapore slings.

[RiverDog]

All right Just beer tomorrow no Singapore slings.

Don't let us drive you to drinking, my friend!

The thing of it is that more than any other team, our offensive production comes off of unscripted plays, such as Beast and his breaking tackles and Russell's improvisation, so it seems like our offense is "just along for the ride" or "non existent" when in reality it's pretty darn effective.

[savvyman]

Not sure where our overall offense ranks in the NFL - I can more easily rank the components of the offense.

Our Rushing game is #1 (or maybe tied with Dallas) - Primary factors for Running Game Success is a better than average blocking Offensive line and the best Running Back in the NFL (along with a QB who is also a threat to run).

Our QB is number one for QB's in the NFL in elusiveness, running the ball and making a big play out of nothing (including situations that would have been sure sacks of most any other QB) - Russell is also one of the most accurate throwers in the NFL.

Our Offensive Line is among the worst at Pass Protection in the NFL.

Our Wide Receivers as a group are among the bottom 25% in the NFL and may be near the very bottom.

So there you have it - Last year the Hawks were the best in Running the Ball and among the worst in Passing the ball .

[Anthony]

Not sure where our overall offense ranks in the NFL - I can more easily rank the components of the offense.

Our Rushing game is #1 (or maybe tied with Dallas) - Primary factors for Running Game Success is a better than average blocking Offensive line and the best Running Back in the NFL (along with a QB who is also a threat to run).

Our QB is number one for QB's in the NFL in elusiveness, running the ball and making a big play out of nothing (including situations that would have been sure sacks of most any other QB) - Russell is also one of the most accurate throwers in the NFL.

Our Offensive Line is among the worst at Pass Protection in the NFL.

Our Wide Receivers as a group are among the bottom 25% in the NFL and may be near the very bottom.

So there you have it - Last year the Hawks were the best in Running the Ball and among the worst in Passing the ball .

Not that simple amongst the worst in attempts and maybe yards but amongst the best in YPA #6, INt, QB rating, and efficiency as proven below.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... /04/page/3


Notice who is #5 and the games his efficiency gets us. Also notice all those higher have better weapons and oline and except for GB are all in the AFC were the defenses are easy.

[obiken]

Thanks River! I think Dallas made a tactical error. They should tagged DM and let DB walk. Their running game was killer now not so much.