Is the run over for Seattle?

[Valuist]

Its been a great run. 2012-2014. One can make a case they were the best team in all three of those seasons (yes, I believe they were better than the Niners in 2012, and the Niners were favored in the SB). So they got close in 2012, they reached the top in 2013, were there to repeat last year, but let it slip away. Now the team is showing clear cracks; 5 blown 4th quarter leads. The team used to pride itself on its killer instinct; clearly what is missing this year.

When I look at some of the Super Bowl teams anchored by great defenses; the 1985 Bears and 2000 Ravens come to mind. Neither team was able to repeat. The same cast may be there for the most part, but some of the hunger is gone. I think that's happening here, and it could get ugly for Seattle before it gets better.

[thaskalos]

Seattle is finished...as are the Packers. It's a brand new world out there...

[Stillriledup]

What's different personnelwise w Seattle besides lack of hunger?

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

What's different personnelwise w Seattle besides lack of hunger?

I could say the same thing about the 2002 Rams. It was mostly the same cast. Should be the same results, right? Wrong. I think the talent is so balanced throughout the NFL, that things like a strong team losing its hunger becomes big.

Being a Bears fan in the mid 80s, we took for granted we'd win 2 or 3 Super Bowls. We got the first, and the team was even better defensively in the 1986 regular season. But we got ambushed by Washington in the playoffs. It was a fluke, right? Played them again in 1988 and same result. Maybe the initial result wasn't a fluke. Maybe the Bears were fat and happy and too busy doing commercials and music videos.

Like Belichek or not, have to give them credit for the sustained run of excellent play. Toss out a couple of great catches by Giant receivers, and they'd have 5 Super Bowls since 2003.

As for the personnel, I think Seattle misses Max Unger more than they realize. The talking heads rarely talk about the guys on the O-line, but they are clearly important.

[thaskalos]

What Arizona did tonight is practically unheard of when you consider the supposed quality of the team that they were playing. Carson Palmer threw an interception in the end-zone from 10 yards out...and then handed Seattle 14 points on two strip-sacks. And Arizona still won the game handily...IN SEATTLE.

The only thing lying ahead for Seattle is mediocrity.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Valuist

I could say the same thing about the 2002 Rams. It was mostly the same cast. Should be the same results, right? Wrong. I think the talent is so balanced throughout the NFL, that things like a strong team losing its hunger becomes big.

Being a Bears fan in the mid 80s, we took for granted we'd win 2 or 3 Super Bowls. We got the first, and the team was even better defensively in the 1986 regular season. But we got ambushed by Washington in the playoffs. It was a fluke, right? Played them again in 1988 and same result. Maybe the initial result wasn't a fluke. Maybe the Bears were fat and happy and too busy doing commercials and music videos.

Like Belichek or not, have to give them credit for the sustained run of excellent play. Toss out a couple of great catches by Giant receivers, and they'd have 5 Super Bowls since 2003.

As for the personnel, I think Seattle misses Max Unger more than they realize. The talking heads rarely talk about the guys on the O-line, but they are clearly important.

I watched a sports documentary about a decade ago, where a round-table discussion about the Bears took place featuring Mike Ditka, Dan Hampton and Willie Gault. Hampton was mocking Ditka...claiming that, with "better coaching"...the Bears could have won three Super Bowls. An obviously agitated Ditka shot back:

"We WOULD have won three Super Bowls...if I was able to keep you and McMichael out of the BARS."

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Valuist

I could say the same thing about the 2002 Rams. It was mostly the same cast. Should be the same results, right? Wrong. I think the talent is so balanced throughout the NFL, that things like a strong team losing its hunger becomes big.

Being a Bears fan in the mid 80s, we took for granted we'd win 2 or 3 Super Bowls. We got the first, and the team was even better defensively in the 1986 regular season. But we got ambushed by Washington in the playoffs. It was a fluke, right? Played them again in 1988 and same result. Maybe the initial result wasn't a fluke. Maybe the Bears were fat and happy and too busy doing commercials and music videos.

Like Belichek or not, have to give them credit for the sustained run of excellent play. Toss out a couple of great catches by Giant receivers, and they'd have 5 Super Bowls since 2003.

As for the personnel, I think Seattle misses Max Unger more than they realize. The talking heads rarely talk about the guys on the O-line, but they are clearly important.

I don't know if the Pats 'run' is all legit, how can a team always be good no matter what, injuries, great players leaving, you have Wilfork and Welker and other greats and these guys just keep getting replaced and winning it just makes no sense to me that there's never a bump in the Road with these guys, it's almost impossible to believe, you got Brady who's old by football standards and he's playing like a bionic man, just makes no sense.

[Kash$]

Media couldn't wait to put Wilson in the HOF...Want to build your franchise around Wilson now?

[ManU918]

Originally Posted by Kash$

Media couldn't wait to put Wilson in the HOF...Want to build your franchise around Wilson now?

I 100% agree with this. All the noise about Russell Wilson has been pathetic the past few seasons. He was and I suppose still is an above average game manager. He is nowhere near and never will be an elite QB. I give his representatives credit. They knew the team would start to crumble and got the organization to give him $60 million guaranteed a year early.

[ManU918]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

I don't know if the Pats 'run' is all legit, how can a team always be good no matter what, injuries, great players leaving, you have Wilfork and Welker and other greats and these guys just keep getting replaced and winning it just makes no sense to me that there's never a bump in the Road with these guys, it's almost impossible to believe, you got Brady who's old by football standards and he's playing like a bionic man, just makes no sense.

One of the greatest if not the greatest QB ever + having one of the best offensive lines year in and year out + a spread system that is hard defend even with mediocre WR's due to Brady/OLine + Hernandez and now Gronk + FG kickers that don't miss + Playing in a shit division + A respectable defense (4th in the league this year in scoring) + Having a head coach that is better than every other head coach = Why the Patriots are successful...

BTW there isn't a franchise I hate more in all of sport that NE... But its impossible not to respect them.

[burnsy]

Seattle just can't block, their line sucks. Can't pass protect, can't run as good.

Green Bay is having problems too, scoring wise and defense.

The NFC may be seeing a change of the guard which has been coming for a couple years. The Cardinals and Panthers look pretty damn good right now. Of course, there are 7 weeks to go. They've been on the fringe the last couple of years....both teams.

Peyton is at the end, his run is just about over. His arm may not make it through the season. Funny how he's "hurt" at about the same time the last couple years. He's old, he's sore, his arm is falling off. He's done.

[cj]

Russell Wilson is similar to Joe Flacco. Decent enough QB but not a superstar...just paid like one.

[Valuist]

Odd that Wilson is bearing the brunt of the criticism, except for the one post who said Seattle can't block (which is true). Look at the receivers he's had to work with. Nobody would ever call Doug Baldwin or any of the others an All-Pro. He's got Graham now but Graham doesn't seem like he's got the new system figured out.

They've blown FIVE 4th quarter leads. That is on the defense. Against Jimmy Clausen, Colin Kaepernick, Matt Stafford and Matt Cassel, the Seahawks D is allowing 6 points per game. Against Rodgers, Nick Foles, Dalton, Newton and Palmer, Seattle is allowing 31 points per game. The 2012-2014 Seahawks would never have allowed that to happen.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by ManU918

One of the greatest if not the greatest QB ever + having one of the best offensive lines year in and year out + a spread system that is hard defend even with mediocre WR's due to Brady/OLine + Hernandez and now Gronk + FG kickers that don't miss + Playing in a shit division + A respectable defense (4th in the league this year in scoring) + Having a head coach that is better than every other head coach = Why the Patriots are successful...

BTW there isn't a franchise I hate more in all of sport that NE... But its impossible not to respect them.

I have to agree with this. Have to think Belichek is every bit as good as Lombardi or Noll or Walsh or any of the all time greats.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Valuist

Odd that Wilson is bearing the brunt of the criticism, except for the one post who said Seattle can't block (which is true). Look at the receivers he's had to work with. Nobody would ever call Doug Baldwin or any of the others an All-Pro. He's got Graham now but Graham doesn't seem like he's got the new system figured out.

They've blown FIVE 4th quarter leads. That is on the defense. Against Jimmy Clausen, Colin Kaepernick, Matt Stafford and Matt Cassel, the Seahawks D is allowing 6 points per game. Against Rodgers, Nick Foles, Dalton, Newton and Palmer, Seattle is allowing 31 points per game. The 2012-2014 Seahawks would never have allowed that to happen.

I wasn't implying Wilson was the problem, just comparing him to Flacco. Neither has much of a line or very good receivers. Neither are really going to win you games you shouldn't win, but with a good cast around them can be very good.