We're hoping for a few more weeks of insufferabllity!!
I'll link to that video. It's awesome.…

Anyway, luck of the draw (like a lot of luck down the stretch, regarding other team's implosions) favors Seattle this wee - with Green Bay coming in I predict a second straight Super Bowl berth for Seattle. If it were Dallas, I'd be a lot more skeptical on that point. (Where are the conspiracy theorists regarding the "football move" call? The ones insisting Dallas paid off the refs last week?)
* week
34-17? You must've seen a field goal nobody else did.
Another dominating performance by the best team in (the history of?) the NFL. Russell's stats on third down were other-worldly: 8-for-8 for 199 yards and 3 TDs? That's almost ridiculous as the game played by Kam Chancellor.

Aaron Rodgers is gonna get crushed on Sunday. The Packers are as done as Peyton Manning's career. Seahawks 30, Packers 13.

Go Hawks!
Go Pack Go! Fuck the Hawks. Aaron Rogers is a fucking wizard and is going to run the Xbox colored motherfuckers into the sea.
@6, I can only hope, I can only hope.
DOUG!! Best team in history? Are you drunk or stoned? Or possibly both. And anyone who would prefer Russel Wilson over the MVP is clinically insane and delusional.
Gotta say, these posts are aptly named.
Did anyone see Aaron Rodgers tearing it up despite not being able to plant or move his one leg? That is some crazy talent right there.

Two things: The hopping the line technique has been around for a while, and typically is not used due to the possibility of penalty if it is not executed right. We are seeing it more and more these days though. I imagine a rule will be forthcoming to make it illegal, since the original rule to do away with the tactic was that you could not use a player to launch yourself up. But guys these days are a lot more spry.

Second, you need to read about how NFL contracts work if you are going to comment so assuredly on them. The outlook is not as good as you suggest, especially considering Wil$on is going to want his 20 million a year, and the QB market is garbage this year, more or less forcing Seattle to give him whatever he wants. Big DB contracts that were handed out are now escalating. For example Sherman's cap hit in 2014 was a paltry $3.6 million. In 2015 that becomes $12 million. Serious business. Certainly not abnormal though, but Seattle has been benefitting from dirt cheap QB play for a while now, and the general talent on the team will go down when he starts to get paid.
@2: If anyone knows Luck, it's a Broncos fan.

Andrew > Peyton.
i was really rooting for denver last night. i thought it would be awesome if they got back to the superbowl with the hawks, and then got the exact same beatdown they did last year. alas, it wasn't to be.

nice job #11. great burn.
I would have preferred going up against Rodgers with Unger and Richardson.

Norwood and Lockett better step it up.
@10 I agree they'll probably make the leap illegal pretty soon. It's really cool but really dangerous and NFL already is too dangerous.

But on to the salary cap. This where you clearly don't pay that much attention to the new era Seahawks. They churn through players like no ome's business. If fact only have of the starting players from 2012 are on this squad. Essentially the team is built around defense (no duh, right?), defense contracts tend to be pretty undervalued. And due to the way they use Wilson they really don't need to spend money on WRs (the most overvalued postion in football).

They'll be able to retain most of the team for 2015 while giving Wilson that monster contract. If you're really waiting for their downfall, it won't be due to salary cap issues. It'll be finding Lynch's replacement in 2016. RBs are his caliber are rare, I know you're a sucker for traditional stats but look into his weighted stats and the dude is truly above and beyond.

What you're seeing is Moneyball NFL addition. If you are interested in further reading about how clever they are with their pay roll and taking advantage of the market inefficiencies produced by the current CBA, I highly recommend checking out David Hsu. Neat stuff.
@ 11, you would be better than a guy playing with a torn quad. Lady luck has been kind to your boys. When will it run out?

Hail Peyton! Greatest QB of all time.
@14: That looks like standard roster churn to me, and I have no idea where you have this idea that defensive players are somehow undervalued. Pass rushers, corners, and safeties command just as much money as offensive players. QB is kind of a different beast entirely.

There is really no debate to be had here, as I am simply stating the numbers and what they mean for the team, and any team. Seattle does not have a bad cap situation, but they also do not have unlimited money, as the post seems to suggest. When you have to go from paying one player half a million a year to twenty million a year (roughly 1/6th of what the cap will likely be then), other players will have to be cut or released to make way for cheaper replacements. NFL forces "moneyball" on everyone, that is what the salary cap is. Seattle is doing what every team does financially, the difference is talent evaluation and development/coaching.

I am not waiting for anyone's "downfall," I am not sure how to respond to that.

I have no idea what that offense will look like if Lynch leaves. Wilson gets a lot of attention, but without the constant threat of Lynch, those option plays and play action bootlegs no longer work. Lynch is the engine and without a runner like Lynch, the offense is going to suffer greatly. No one on their current roster can come close to the effect Lynch has.

@15: except he got booed by his hometown fans for not running 5 defense-free yards for a 1st down with the game on the line.

I think he should retire now, with dignity intact.
@14: Oh, and Lynch is the reason they can do well with below average recievers, not Wilson. If anything, Wilson needs better recievers so he does not have hold onto the ball forever waiting for someone to gain seperation. This is why he is scrambling all the time.
Sad fact about Peyton is that he just becomes a different player in December. Always has been the case. But I think people are forgetting what he looked like in his prime. The guy never made a mistake. He was a machine. He did everything perfectly, it was pretty incredible to behold. Remember that when he was leading the Colts to the postseason every year, he had no running game, no special teams, and a defense that was up and down from year to year (though when they were on, they were impressive.

He has also been playing injured for the last month or so, and suffered what for most people is a career ender a few years ago, so decline is expected.
@Theodore, I'm not gonna waste my time explaining this to you. You seem to be the kinda guy that relies on national sports media sports narratives and traditional stats for evaluation. I'd imagine you probably think Jack Morris is a Hall of Famer.

Which is fine, sports are entertainment and people can enjoy it anyway they want but based on your evaluation methods I'd stay away from betting.

But I will say you claiming you don't wish for 'Cheat Carroll' to fail is as silly as SeatlleBlues denying his homophobia.
And another thing: Why doesn't Scot McCloughan ever get any credit for building this team?

Here is a link for Seahawks fans so they can learn who Scot McCloughan is:…
@20: Explain what to me? Tell me what you do not want to explain to me, because you are being so vague it makes me think you do not want to actually respond, just pretend that responding is somehow beneath you.

What "national sports media narrative" are you referring to?
Fuck the Seahawks, fuck football and fuck you for giving them both more coverage.
@21: Gee, thanks for the education.

What makes you think McCloughan gets no credit for helping to build the team? Because Joe Buck and ESPN don't talk about him? The (mostly inaccurate) storylines you've repeated about the Seahawks all season long have just be regurgitated from the national media, so don't pretend to know what people in Seattle are talking about.

Go Hawks!
Worst Seattle traffic metaphor ever. Seattleites don't merge. They drive stupidly slow to the end of the merge lane without their signal on and then passive-aggressively gaze hate-daggers at people who won't let them in while they're stopped.
@25: What storylines? Tell me what false storylines I have "regurgitated."

As to your first question, because the Seattle media does not mention his name, and only bring up Carroll and Schneider when talking about how the team was built, including this very post. Also, no Seahawks fan I have ever spoken to knows who he is. Joe Buck sucks and everything ESPN says is wrong/clickbait.

Also, nut up, its a little trash talk, you know, that thing you do all the time here until someone gives it back and your panties wad up?
Pete says Unger is OK for Sunday!
Peyton's play on Sunday was exactly as delicious as a Papa Murphy's pizza
@19: Peyton Manning's Colts teams had no running game? You should look up a guy named Edgerrin James and see what he did between 1999 and 2005.

...oh, I'll just educate you: 9226 rushing yards and 64 rushing TDs in 7 seasons. Dude was a Hall of Fame semifinalist this year.

Go Hawks!
Conspiracy nut alert @23. How's the truther movement going?
@15: If Tom Brady wins his 4th Super Bowl this season, would you concede that he is better than Peyton? What would it take?
@ 33, since it would only be his first clean win, that's a lot to ask.
If the Seahawks get their asses kicked this coming weekend what will be posted on Slog? I mean there's only so much you can post about Bertha and the latest $25.00 per meal restaurant that opens up or closes.

Maybe it's time to talk about Hump 2016 or the Block Party?
@34- AHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA.... OMG people complaining about Belichick's "dirty" football crack me up. Did you see Harbough draw an unsportsmanlike penalty because he was so confused by Belichick's "dirty" (completely legal, inventive) play calling?

The Patriots are Seattle's only real competition this year.

@4 ScottL: Yeah--I remember Saturday's final score being 31-17, but we'll take it!
@ 36, you've apparantly been waiting for an opportunity to spew that forth that it didn't matter if it made any sense in the context of the comment prompting it. A simple observation of fact is hardly a "complaint."
@36: pretty sure Green Bay will be real competition, and the toughest game we've had since the one at KC. That we lost. The D must get to Rodgers early and often.

BTW, Mathieu du Denver: Fox is out! Someone must be blamed!
Will You live Blog the nfc championship game? I hope so. It's fun and something Slog used to do well.
@ 39, honestly he should have been out last year. He was the one that decided they didn't need to practise with simulated crowd noise, among many questionable decisions made in the clutch. He's the George McClellan of football coaches.
@38: Claiming that none of Brady's Super Bowl wins are "clean" is hardly a statement of fact.

Manning had a tough second half of the season, that's probably on the coaches, from what I've read. It sounds like he was passing less because passing as much as he was being asked to do is ludicrous, and the passes he was making weren't markedly worse (this is from an analysis pre-Colts game, which I didn't see, so I can't speak to that). It seems like the Broncos decided that they just needed Manning to Manning, and they'd win a Super Bowl. Turns out you need more than just a good QB and receiving corp on offense.
All that said, it's tough when your team loses.
@ 42, given the facts of Spygate, it's fair yo suspect, if not conclude, that those Super Bowl victories came at least in part by way of cheating. That's no reflection on Brady himself, or any other player, because that's the responsibilty of the coaches. But it tends to even out the Super Bowl victory measuring stick in the endless Brady vs Manning debate.

As far as the Broncos go, our team was built to win, and honestly should have won in 2012 and yes, even last year. Manning isn't blameless, but he didn't make the kind of risk-adverse decisions at pivotal moments that led to things like Baltimore's game tying score two years ago and the early snap that started (and set the tone) for last years Super Bowl whomping. You can't be given a Lambourghini of a team and blame the engine when you're the one steering it into a ditch over and over.
Do you mean risk-averse? What safe call did he make two years ago? Also, early snap in the Super Bowl? Can you link me something about that? It looks like Manning tried to come up to change something and his center snapped the ball, that is either on Manning or the center, but regardless, you weren't winning that game, so I'm not sure that it matters.
Here's the highest hit I found when I googled it...…

The early snap happened right as the crowd noise reached deafening pitch because, hey, people get excited about the Super Boel when it finally starts, and obviously the center thought he heard something. The problem was that they were unprepared for playing it like a road game, and Fox admitted later that they had the option of practicing with canned crowd noise but didn't think they needed it.…
@31: I have no idea what one guy's stat line for less than half of Manning's tenure in Indy has to do with anything, but I do know that only in two of those 14 years was Indy ever in the top half of rushing teams, and in the last four or so years they were bottom ten, and dead last one year.

Cherry picking again DOUG, and I still am waiting to hear about all those false story lines I have been spewing. Why can't you ever back up anything you say?
@46: You've called Russell Wilson a "mediocre passer", claimed that Richard Sherman gets "all the credit" for the success of the defensive secondary, and said that the Hawks lack depth, which is "a failure of the organization".

Stupid comments, none of them accurate.

Go Hawks!
@47: Misquoting, cherry picking, and still not backing up this "national storylines" claim. Pure homer DOUG.

Wilson, like any young quarterback not named Luck, is a mediocre passer, especially from the pocket, which is why the Seattle coaching staff runs the offense it does. It is about limiting his exposure, and it works well. It highlights his strengths and minimizes his weaknesses, but the weaknesses are still there. I am sure he will improve.

I said Sherman gets too much credit, not all of it, and I said that lack of depth is an institutional failure because you were blaming a drop off in play on injuries, and that is a depth issue. Not like depth is something only Seattle has to deal with, and like all teams, it is a failure of the organization as a whole.

I know you can not handle it when other people do not think your team is perfect (like it is your mommy or something), and that is why people laugh and call you a homer.
We also laugh because he never resonds with anything resembling analysis. "Stupid comments, none of them accurate" is Seattleblues-level discourse. A petulant retort. At least cite some stats - Wilson's passer rating for the regular season is 95.0 - oh wait, sorry, that stat supports TG, not you.
@48: Fine, I'll just link to your quotes...

Why does Sherman get all the credit when…

There is no such thing as luck, and ever…

These false storylines are totally out of the ESPN talking head script.
@49: Here's a stat for you: Russell Wilson has been in the Top 10 in Passer Rating in each of his first three NFL seasons. That is not "mediocre".
@50: Well, thanks for proving my point, I guess. You clearly have no idea what a "story line" is, nor what context is.

I do not even get ESPN at home, and there is no reason to ever go to their website becasue they are wrong about everything.

Don't fret, if you keep trying, you are bound to be right about something someday.
@52: Weird, I thought one of your points was "I said Sherman gets too much credit, not all of it..." and I provided a link to you stating that "Sherman gets all the credit."

You call that "cherry picking" but I don't think you know what that phrase means.

Go Hawks!
If Wilson made the top 10 passer ratings in the NFL with 95.0, that says more about the lack of good passing in the league than it does about how good Wilson is - especially if he thinks he deserves more money than anyone else.
@55: You might want to learn about passer ratings. Russell Wilson's career passer rating is 98.6. If he had the 1500 attempts to qualify for the all-time leader list (which he will next season), he'd be #2 in the history of the NFL, two spots ahead of Peyton Manning.

By no objective measure is Russell Wilson a "mediocre passer". That is a storyline told on a national level that has no basis in reality.
@43- "spygate"? You mean when the Patriots where photographing the opposing sideline capture images that they could have gotten off the official game tape every team gets, thus breaking a minor rule and saving himself some staff time? Clearly such dastardly deeds are the only reason the Brady/Belichick have dominated the NFL for their entire partnership. It doesn't have anything to do with the way they've introduced dozens of novel plays on either side of the ball. It doesn't have anything to do with Tom Brady not even needing a running game. It doesn't have anything to do with years of Belichick assembling talented teams.

Nope, they must be dirty...somehow.
@55: Did you SEE that pass to Kearse? I wasn't sold on Wilson a year ago, but that pass was beautiful. Maybe he could teach Manning how to throw like that, since Manning kept overthrowing those balls.
@ 56, "If he had 1500 attempts..." LMAO! No need to say anything more.

@ 57, I can't even be bothered to read your comment, because I know it won't be worth my while.

@ 58, I've seen mediocre passers toss some real beauties. Tim Tebow actually had some downfield range, for example, and there's his famous OT winner in that Denver-Pittsburgh playoff game from a few years back.
@59: If passer ratings were IQs, you'd be Bubby Brister.
Aw, DOUG., you're cute when you project.
It's not my claim, JF. Try to keep up.
These are lame national media critiques. Any who trots out Wilson is mediocre after a 149.2 passer rater did not watch the game. I like Sherman, but you didn't watch the game if you think he's the key to the Seahawks defense. That was a game to remember for one of his teammates, and Wagner's return turned the season around.

I confess to picking the Cowboys as the upset last weekend. Interesting to see if Seattle is patient or goes wild with safety blitzes and sees if Rodgers and Jordy Nelson can beat them. Hopefully, Pete the gambler is kept away from the sideline. The worst part of the Peyton Manning/Andrew Luck storyline is Jim Irsay taking the credit.
I have. Just to demonstrate that one great pass doesn't make a great quarterback, which is the evidence being presented. If you've made it to the NFL, you ought to be capable of the occasional great toss.
@ 65, one game of 149.2 passing after 16 of 95.0 is more likely to be an outlier than an indicator of greatness. Just saying.
@67: The 8th best career passer rating in the history of the NFL is less than 95.
@67: 16 games of 95 is an indicator of greatness.…
So where are all the experts criticizing Wilson?
@ 68, were those careers 16 total regular season games?

@ 69, where in that puff piece from the Seahawks official site is the quote that supports your assertion? I couldn't find it.
@70. Ugh. Career, game, season...who cares? 95.0 is a really fucking good passer rating. That's my point. You think it's not. You're wrong.
@71, hey, it's not my fault you don't understand how to compare statistical samples accurately.
Bubby Brister's career passer rating was 72.3, by the way. I might've been being generous @60.

Go Hawks!
Generous in projecting? Huh.

You know that you forgot your Amen on a few of your posts. The Football Gods won't be pleased.
@54: So my "whole year of regurgitating ESPN storylines" is one single non-literal comment responding to a specific post which you decided to take out of context? Great job DOUG, thanks again for proving my point.

@65: I doubt Seattle is going to blitz the safeties much against Rodgers, I imagine they will stay in a single high look much of the night forcing Rodgers to look to the sidelines and underneath stuff. Seattle's defense is great at limiting YAC, and I think that is how they will play it.

Last time they played Green Bay (beat them by 20), they were in cover-1 and cover-3 basically all night, and it obviously worked out very well for them.

If I am Green Bay, I am looking to pound the ball right up the gut with Lacy on spread formations and look for recievers on shallow crossing routes. Seattle is going to force them to dink and dunk. Big DBs like Seattle has typically have trouble getting their hips and feet moving/turned as quickly as smaller guys, and that is how you can create seperation against them. Guys like Welker and Amendola have made a career off of it.
@75: I no longer know what your point is. That Wilson's a mediocre passer? That Richard Sherman gets all the credit for the DBs? That Seahawks organizational failure has led to a lack of depth?

Those were your points (I even provided links!), but you seem to be backing away from them now...just like the national media is.

Go Hawks!
Hey DOUG., you do realize that when TG asked "why does Sherman get all the credit..." it was to Spike's post that gave all the credit to Sherman,, don't you?
@76: I did not come here saying those things, you made a charge and I responded to it, genius. You brought it up. The Sherman issue is addressed by Matt above, I said that lack of depth on any team is an institutional failure, which was a result of people whining about a drop off in Seattle's play where they blamed injuries.

I think right now in Wilson's development he is mediocre purely as a passer because of some issues with his mechanics, and vision, which Seattle's offense minimizes based on how they use him. More to QB than throwing the ball though. He has a very efficient release, and all the tools to improve these things, and still has work to do like all young QBs. This obsession you have with him being perfect and belligerence with anyone suggesting otherwise is bizarre and creepy.

Pay attention.

Anyway, I have grown bored with explaining these things to you over and over, if you want to talk about football, that is fine, but I am done with this.
I think right now in Wilson's development he is mediocre purely as a passer because of some issues with his mechanics, and vision, which Seattle's offense minimizes based on how they use him.

Is that Gruden or Jaworski?
@59- You really need to go look in the mirror and ask yourself "Why am I making an ass of myself by trying to diminish the accomplishments of great football teams and players? Peyton Manning is great and it doesn't take anything away from him to admit that Tom Brady and Russell Wilson are also great. Wilson obviously is a better rusher and Tom Brady has had better coaching and that's why Peyton will never have as many Superbowl wins as those guys (assuming Wilson doesn't get maimed or killed in the next few weeks), but that doesn't mean he isn't an instant Hall-Of-Famer. He really earned that one ring."
@ 80, I diminish nothing. You're projecting your insecurities about the fact that the Pats have won nothing since Spygate all over what I have said. There is nothing between the lines of my writing, so what you find is what you imagine.
As far as looking like an ass, remember your impassioned defense of reddit creeps posting Facebook photos of underage girls? I sure haven't done anything on the scale of assdom to match that.
@81- They've won nothing...except the vast majority of the games they've played. How Superbowls has your favorite team won in that time?

@82- Actually I had an impassioned plea against doxxing people just because you don't like them. I'm sorry you misunderstood that, I only restated a couple zillion times. Sorry I didn't join your witchhunt. I also pointed out that "People of Wal*Mart" is an awful thing to do to a stranger but for some reason we're OK with making fun of obese mentally ill people but horrified by people masturbating to sexuallized teenagers (except of course for in music videos, commercials, Woody Allen's family, Roman Polanski's past, etc....) Was that too much nuance? Was I just supposed to be gleeful that some Reddit guy lost his job? Like two weeks later a gay teenager killed himself because someone found his habits repulsive and doxxed him. What's bad for the goose is bad for the gander.

If that seems like an impassioned defense of reddit creeps I'm sorry you're such a bad reader.
@81: Won nothing except 18 games the following year, including two in the playoffs. Won nothing, except 100 games in the regular season since (out of 128). Won nothing except 7 more playoff games. Sure, they haven't won a Super Bowl, but "won nothing since Spygate"? You're joking, or deluded.
@ 83, obviously I was speaking of championships. And you did speak up for the creeps' right to post those pix - don't lie.

@ 84, obviously I was speaking of championships. Don't be daft.
@85: Then the Broncos have "won nothing" since 1998... And only 6 teams have "won anything" since spygate, so...
I mean, saying they haven't won a championship as an indictment on a team when they've been in the hunt every year is kind of dumb.
@ 86, if you say so. But you introduced the whole thing @33, so...
@84: The knock is a result of how they were more or less going to/winning the Superbowl every year for a while there, and then Belicheck was forced to stop cheating, and since they have not gotten to that level since. When that happens, it will always cause people to talk.

Obviously they are still a very successful team, but part of their playoff sucess is due to being in a division with the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins, all teams that were more or less very below average during those years, and really have only been forming into solid teams over the last couple years, meaning NE basically got to the playoffs comparatively easily for a long time. Obviously having perhaps the best QB of all time and an amazing coaching staff does wonders as well.

Personally I think the league changes too much each year to ascribe it to the cheating specifically, but the timeline is a bit embarrassing for the organization, and everyone knows it.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.