Instant reaction: Seahawks lose, but don’t blame the refs

October 6th, 2013 | Written by Rob Staton

This man deserved to win today. Simple as that.

The Seahawks suffered their first defeat of the season today, losing 34-28 at Indianapolis.

Overall it was an infuriating game. Seattle handled the Colts early but managed to throw away a 12-0 start with a blown coverage touchdown and a blocked kick returned for a score. Despite a rally at the end of the half, the second half was pure domination from the Colts.

People are blaming the refs, who admittedly had a lousy game. But for me that is not the definitive reason why the Seahawks lost.

– The offense went completely to sleep in the second half. Marshawn Lynch rushed just five times after half time, despite regularly gashing the Colts earlier. While Andrew Luck led touchdown drives of 86 and 80 yards, the Seahawks couldn’t respond and had to settle for punts and field goals.

– Third down was a nightmare all day and is becoming a concern. On offense they converted 2/12 (16%) and defensively they struggled to get a stop.

– Russell Wilson missed on two throws he needed to hit for touchdowns — one to Golden Tate before half time and another to Sidney Rice after the break. Yet in the second half, too often the receivers failed to make a play for Wilson. We need to see more from the passing game. It’s properly clicked in only one game so far — against the worst team in the NFL. Does it rely too much on Wilson improvising? It’s an argument that can be made. Yet a conservative game plan last week received some criticism.

– Andrew Luck was sensational and deserved to win this game.

– At times the Seahawks were a disorganised mess. They wasted all three second half time outs, one because they had twelve men on the field and another because they failed to get ready for a two point conversion. They then gave up the two pointer anyway. Stuff like that gets you beat.

– One huge play changed the complexion of the day. At 12-0, Seattle gave up a touchdown bomb to T.Y. Hilton on a blown coverage. That’s bad enough, but Earl Thomas had a chance to limit the damage and avoid a score but whiffed on the tackle. At that point Luck had no rhythm, the Colts couldn’t run the ball and Seattle was rolling. What appeared to be a one-sided affair instantly became a game. It wasn’t the only example of a blown coverage and Seattle struggled playing zone all day.

– Whether it was a lack of pass rush or issues in coverage, the Seahawks couldn’t get a handle on defense. Richard Sherman had a rare off day, but so did the rest of the secondary. Up front we saw the usual dose of pressure early on but it quickly went flat. Seattle has a good defense, but the reason they aren’t the best is because they’ll have days like this.

So yeah, the refs having a bad day played a part. But only as much as everything else listed above.

It’s hardly the end of the world to go to Houston and Indy and come out 1-1. Seattle will expect to rebound against Tennessee next week.

But some old problems came back to haunt this team today, such as the third down issues on both sides of the ball.

After such a prolific start to the game that suggested only one possible result on the night, to lose in this fashion is incredibly frustrating. Yet ultimately, Andrew Luck and the Colts deserved it.

The Seahawks did not.

82 Responses to “Instant reaction: Seahawks lose, but don’t blame the refs”

  1. Patrick says:

    Rob,

    Excellent write-up and I couldn’t have said it better myself. The penalties were huge but I’m not mad at the refs. Other than that Golden Tate Pass Interference, the only penalties fell right onto Seattle’s shoulders. To me the turning point was when we got the PI penalty on the Colts 3rd and 22 attempt. You cannot let a team convert 3rd and 22 and expect to win the game.

    I’m sure we’ll bounce back next week against Tennessee but I agree with you, some old habits resurfaced today and it’s a bit of a concern.

  2. Colin says:

    The refs had a bad day, and like the Miami game last year, the Seahawks let it dictate the outcome. The Richard Sherman PI on 3rd down killed them- and they simply couldn’t overcome.

    I thought the offensive line did a nice job today. Lynch had good room to run and Wilson, for the most part, had outstanding protection.

    The WR did not have a good day. Sidney Rice is #1 in name only. We needed him to step up and make plays and he did not. This team badly needs Percy Harvin and his abilities. It’s a milk toast group.

    I do think today shows just how good this team is. Being down 3 starting linemen and a TE and to physically man handle the Colts was impressive, though i’m not sold that Indi is really that good. I think Luck covers alot of flaws.

    No pass rush = no good defense.

    • Rob Staton says:

      We’re crying out for Percy.

      Doug Baldwin is clutch, Golden Tate makes plays… but outside of that there isn’t really a go-to target or an explosive difference maker.

      • Rugby Lock says:

        The PI on Golden was real weak considering some of the contact that the Colts were allowed. Also thought our block should have been a TD as well. That said those things weren’t the main reason we lost and as Rob said Luck was impressive…

  3. Dave says:

    I was impressed with the fact we scored as much as we did given the fact our O line has been decimated. In a game like this I would not blame the refs because quite frankly we did not help ourselves. Sure…the refs were not good, but I believe this D shows some chinks in the armor. I believe the D has been exposed the past two weeks. Talented and healthy but something is not right. With such. Strong D line and good pass rush, what can be said ? Should we have allowed so many points?

    • Rob Staton says:

      O-line played well today.

      • JW says:

        wow. SMH.

        It was their typical performance. Good run blocking, poor pass blocking.

        • Alex says:

          The oline was not remotely part of the reason we lost. The defense simply couldn’t get the stops when they needed it. There is no reason to lose when the offense has scored 28 points and you have a supposed top 5 defense. From what I saw, the dline applied decent pressure, but the secondary had a horrible day. It is possibly the worst I’ve seen them play in over a year.

          • Colin says:

            Don’t feed the troll. He’d bitch if you hung him with a new rope.

            • JW says:

              Who said it’s why we lost? Not I.

              If pointing out the Seahawks are among the league leaders in allowing QB hurries is trolling, this blog has reached a new level of poor O line play obfuscation.

              The idea that the O line played “well” is laughable.

              • Rob Staton says:

                I’m sure there are plenty of other blogs saying the backup-laden offensive line sucked today that you can visit.

                They’re wrong, too.

                • JW says:

                  if you want qualify your statement that the backup lade offensive line played well for being backups, then fine. But to say it was good pass protection by any objective NFL standard is simply not true. It was not.

                  Russell remains one of the most hurried QBs in the NFL. Today was no different.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    Jesus JW let it drop.

                    I’ve stated my case. You’re wasting time focusing on the line today. So many other things to discuss ahead of that.

              • Colin says:

                No, it’s not laughable. Considering the situation and the outcome, they did play well. You’re obsessed with pointing out, week after week, that they are a bad unit and don’t play well.

                The bigger issue today is why couldn’t any receivers get open and why did the defense go flat. But hey, if you want to lead your crusade about how bad the line played today, have at it Joan of Arc.

              • Alex says:

                You’re indirectly implying that O-line is a key reason that we lost if you’re still focusing on it when there are a multitude of other issues that warrant greater attention. The truth of the matter is that we can be at full health and we still wouldn’t have won if the defense (the secondary in particular) played the way they did today.

                • JW says:

                  I’m not implying anything. I’m directly responding to a statement that the O line played well by rather directly stating that the O line play was moderately acceptable, excellent in one area and sub par in another. Nor am I ‘focusing’ on it other than responding to a series of posts in which I’ve been called a ‘troll’ , “Joan of Arc” and responded to a number of rather absurd straw man arguments.

                  No interpretation of implications needed. I’m using rather plain language in response to a rather direct comment and I’m being very precise in responding to it. I’ve also stated a number of times I haven’t said that’s the reason they lost the game.

                • robert says:

                  I disagree. Our patchwork line did a great job of run blocking in the 1st half. But our pass blocking has RW ranked as the 2nd most pressured QB out of 32 teams. This really shows up most on 3rd downs when opposing D knows we must pass. Coach even said this week that 3rd down woes the last 2 weeks are OL protection issues that disrupt the timing of their plays. If we make a few more 1st downs, the game transforms exponentially in our favor: our offense has +10 plays and Luck has -10 plays. We find rhythm. Beast continues to gash a progressively fatigued defense in the 2nd half and we run away with this game. Pass protection breakdowns, particularly on 3rd down caused our drives to stall. Then the door of opportunity swung open and a very impressive Luck led his team on a couple of impressive, albeit zebra assisted drives. I believe our 3rd down pass protection breakdowns are the single biggest cause in the matter of this loss. Defensive breakdowns in the 2nd half were an effect of continuously being on the field and having to defend vs a great QB.

                  • robert says:

                    I was greatly encouraged with our run blocking in the 1st half. Bowie is a Beast! Carp and Sweezy are great run blockers, but horrible in passpro…WTF? RW can handle McQ getting blown up. But the rush up the middle is destroying passing lanes and flushing our QB. This is killing our ability to convert 3rd downs and sustain drives. Not only does that cost us points, but it puts tremendous pressure on our defense.
                    I think we will start to hit our stride this week.
                    Max Unger should settle the passpro.
                    Baldwin in some 2 WR sets and more Kearse…less Rice.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Russell Wilson was sacked once and did his thing.

          Let’s not get into a situation where unless Wilson has 10 seconds on every snap we’re going to say the line played badly.

          That was an excellent display given how many injuries are on that line.

          • JW says:

            He was actually sacked twice but let’s not get into a situation where we view the only way to measure pass protection is sacks allowed. You’re often the first to argue that quality pass rush is not measured by sacks alone. Why would you first resort to sacks allowed measure pass protection?

            No where have I said they lost because of pass protection nor that 10 seconds is required to qualify as good pass protection. More strawmen.

            • Rob Staton says:

              You’re angling for an argument, one I’m not interested in having.

              The offensive line allowed Wilson more than enough time to make plays today. This was a complete 360 from last week where they struggled badly. Kudos to them, given we’re missing FOUR starters. Aside from that their run blocking was sensational.

              There are a laundry list of issues to discuss why Seattle lost. Offensive line play is not one for today.

  4. ivotuk says:

    good stuff Rob, Thurmond got burned for 3 1st downs and didn’t seem to have his head in the game

    • Rob Staton says:

      One of the more confusing parts of the game — why Thurmond was covering Reggie Wayne inside. I know T.Y. Hilton was having a big day, but they had to put Sherman on Wayne IMO.

      • Alex says:

        That was infuriating. Wayne was being locked down for the most part until he moved to the slot and then proceeded to abuse walter thurmmond.

  5. JC says:

    I see football penalties like a strike zone in baseball. An umpire can squeeze the pitcher with a too small zone or hose the batter with a liberal interpretation of where the outer half of plate truly is. But he better darn well do that for every hitter or pitcher that steps into the box or climbs the hill.

    Inconsistence makes a game unwatchable (al la NBA). Incompetence leaves the outcome in doubt regardless of the score (al la, Super Bowl XL or the “Fail Mary” last year or any game with a Pac 12 crew). It has less to do with the Seahawks game today and more to do with principal; the very raison d’etre for the stripped shirts in the first place.

    • Alex says:

      The consistency part is understandable, but the game today was a clear loss. The officiating yesterday on the Huskies and Stanford game was far worse.

  6. Scott says:

    I wonder how much back to back east coast 10 am starts hurt them. They looked tired to me today, especially on defense and especially in the second half.

      • Michael says:

        I’m really tired of the 10 am excuse. Seems more to me like the “analysis” offered by national media members when they don’t actually know anything about the team or that particular game. Then again who knows, maybe it was a huge factor. One thing I can say with relative certainty is that time zones aren’t going anywhere, so we will always get stuck playing 10 am games; find a way to deal with it. The organization has known the start time of this game since mid-April, so allowing that to be a factor simply should not happen. I’m sure the coaches and players don’t want a free pass because of when/where a game is played, so as a fan, I’m not gonna give ‘em one.

        • Mike K says:

          Thank you, I am so sick and tired of the 10 AM excuse for why this team doesn’t play well on the road.

          • Nick says:

            The coaching staff actually changed times of practices this year so that we are ready for the earlier games, so the 10 AM excuse is just that, a lame excuse.

            • Rugby Lock says:

              It’s hardly being used as an “excuse” here but it could be a contributing factor is all they are saying if I understand them correctly.

        • robert says:

          I don’t think it is good sportsmanship to use it as an excuse. But it is a factor and always will be. That we have 5 10AM games this year is ridiculous. I believe no team should have more than 2 or 3 in a season.

  7. cover-2 says:

    Browner gave a up big reception when he was playing off-coverage, Sherman/Thomas gave up a TD on the zone coverage, we gave up a rushing TD on 1 & goal with Mebane and Tony McDaniel on the sideline, gave up a 4th quarter 3rd & 5 for a rushing 1st down with no DT on the field (all d-lineman were DE’s)…I had a big problem with our defensive playcalling today. Stop trying to get cute with the zone coverage or all DE’s on the d-line. Browner is a man-press CB and he broke up two passes today in that coverage, but gave up a big reception in zone.

    That said, Luck is a playmaker. He is not easily brought down, he is a big dude, bigger than our LB’s. He can extend plays with his feet and he is a highly intelligent QB who should be able to pick apart teams that play zone against him. Colts were a better team today, as well as a healthier team. I want revenge on them in the Super Bowl, when we should be healthier on the offensive line and with our weapon of mass destruction Mr. Percy Harvin.

    • Glor says:

      Couldn’t agree more about the d playcalling. Browner is not an off coverage guy, he is a press guy. The d calling let him get abused on that td.

  8. House says:

    Rob,

    Very good write-up. I completely agree about the WRs not making plays and the OFF falling asleep. I just watched the game back and a player I have an issue with is Sidney Rice. I have have watched him over the past few weeks and really ponder what he is doing… There are several parts in the game where he just DISAPPEARS. I know SEA hasn’t really had a Legitimate #1 WR in quite some time and he isn’t helping anyone think otherwise.

    I know he has had some issues with his knee, but his routes have been sloppy for quite some time and his inability to come back to the ball is disgusting. I watched the final offensive snap 4 times (Wilson INT) and Rice didn’t even make an attempt to fight for it. I know there is great excitement for Percy to come in and change our OFF a bit. I can’t see Rice being paid $8.5M next season. Do you see us going after a WR early, perhaps Evans or Coleman in the 1st rd?

    • Rob Staton says:

      The way Coleman has played this year he won’t be a first round pick. Evans I have mixed views on. One guy I really like is Odell Beckham at LSU. Not a big, tall receiver but he’s going to be a player at the next level.

      • House says:

        I probably should not have used “1st rd”. I agree that Coleman has not played great this year and could be a 2-3 rd. I haven’t watched too much film on Beckham, I’ll check him out.

    • Alex says:

      Ugh, WR in the 1st round rarely pay dividends immediately. The exception are the really, really good ones (Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, AJ Green, Julio Jones) and those are usually in the top 10 picks, which I doubt we will pick in. The rest typically need a few years to develop or never develop at all. As much as I would hate selecting Oline in the 1st round, I would certainly prefer a Oline pick over a WR.

      • Colin says:

        DeAndre Hopkins was picked at 26 I believe and he’s made quite the impression in Houston. I agree with your overall premise that WR take some time to really get good, but I also think in most instances it has to do with the level of QB play as well.

        • Alex says:

          I know. Hopkins actually was the player I wanted the Seahawks to select if they had kept their pick. I thought his competitive mentality is what the Seahawks look for; however, an exception does not make the rule. There actually was a nice bust rate article posted on this site 3 years ago in the Okung draft tracking the success rate of each position picked in the 1st round. I distinctly remember CBs have a success rate of over 60% and the WR only had something between 30-40%, which is one of the lowest. That was why I wanted Joe Haden if we missed on Trent Williams, Russell Okung, or Eric Berry. Haden would have been BPA on a team full of holes at the time and the success rate of the position is one of the highest.

          • robert says:

            I wanted Hopkins too. The PH signing comes with a big price that will soon cause us to let go of other quality players.

      • cover-2 says:

        I’m kind of I your line of thinking when it comes to 1st round WR, especially late in the 1st round. But, I agree with Rob in that Odell Beckman is a late 1st round talent that could contribute as a rookie (if given the playing time). Beckman may be a bit redundant with our current WR’s, but could see us cutting Rice and letting Baldwin sign elsewhere. Beckman would be a safe solid choice late in the 1st round. That would only give us one WR over 6-0 (Kearse) which isn’t really what coach Carroll wants, which is why I would personally prefer Oregon TE Colt Lyerla who could be flexed out most of the time.

        • Chris A says:

          No way we pay Rice that money, and for how he’s played so far this season I think cutting him would be best. But keeping Baldwin is a must, he makes too many big plays especially on 3rd down. He’s also probably our most consistent receiver and also has the intangibles this team looks for. Pay this man PCJS please

      • House says:

        I know what you mean. The guy I REALLY wanted in the ’13 draft was DeAndre Hopkins. At that time, we had already traded for Percy Harvin. Had we not have made that trade, Hopkins was still on the board @ #25. Would he have had the same impact in SEA that he is currently having in HOU? Probably not…

        I don’t see us using a 1st rd pick on an OL. Tom Cable has worked wonders with the current guys and IMO, if the team is comfortable with Bowie/Bailey. This is potentially a HEAVY draft class at OL and I can see us drafting some guys to replace guys like McQuistan, Jeanpierre and Giacomini (potentially).

        I know it is way too early to be talking draft…

        • SunPathPaul says:

          Sidney Rice had 1 catch for 8 yards… Talk about a waste of millions, and needing another #1!?!

          He seems destined for trade or release this off season. Thus we can sign Sherman & Thomas!
          Plus, if Zach Miller is so injury prone, we must consider cutting his big $ too…

          • Colin says:

            How is Zach Miller injury prone? He’s only missed 2 games, including this one, in his 3 years here.

            • SunPathPaul says:

              Didn’t mean to imply prone, but he was in a boot all preseason, and then missed this crucial game. If it continues, then paying him millions might be a farce…

              • Colin says:

                He missed this game because of his hamstring, not his foot. His foot hasn’t been an issue since he was cleared to play. I think you are overstating the situation a little bit.

                • SunPathPaul says:

                  I know that… Not overstating… Have to play to get payed though- let’s see what happens next week and this season as a whole…

          • House says:

            Rice:
            2014: $8.5M
            2015: $9M
            The dude is gone after this season.

            Miller:
            2014: $4.8 million (+ $1 million roster bonus)
            2015: $2.8 million (+ $2 million roster bonus)
            I think Miller would be willing to take a paycut. He loves the area and just started a family there. Willson seems to be building a good rapport w/ Wilson and I think Miller is definitely helping him in the blocking dept. If our OL gets healthy, we could possibly start running for 2 TE sets with both as receiving targets, not as a 6th OL (Miller’s carved position).

            • robert says:

              2 x TE sets create extra blocking power for our Beast game. And then it’s a play action fake and a couple of chip blocks and our TE’s are behind the LB’s all day!

    • Nick says:

      House,

      I couldn’t agree with you more. Rice is just an empty threat out there. Until he steps up and has a 100+ yard game! That’s all he’ll be in my eyes. We need a constant threat that opposing D’s have to cover to let our other weapons attack. Why did we just dump Williams anyways? Any good reason?

  9. juliyp says:

    Was in Lucas Oil. How do we loose this one after dominant first half. This team will not do anything serious (SB) without the patient passing game. Is it about receivers? Do we really have the bad group? Does Colts have better receivers or better passer? RW was great in keeping drives alive with his legs, but i think he is regressing in passing the ball.

  10. SunPathPaul says:

    Sorry Rob, but I must say it – The REFS gave this game to the Colts!!!

    It is hard enough to win against a good team in the NFL, but when crucial plays are negated by idiot zebras, it becomes impossible!!!

    Beyond that, yes, we gave up a 70+ yard TD to Hilton!??!??! WTH?

    Earl just missed the tackle too…talk about a momentum shifter! We did make many mistakes and I have to say OC Bevell is slowly becoming my least favorite coach up there… No Lynch, no rollouts last week… He seems to get stuck in his play calling!

    We let Stephen Williams go with what, maybe 1 pass to him all season? We could have used someone with a down field threat today, but their ‘belief’ in their game plan stays stubborn and static.

    Why isn’t Christine Michael playing? Turbin did nothing to help us win, yet keeps being our #2 RB!?
    If Michael had one big run we might could have overcome this BS called game by the refs.

    Did anyone see Tate even come close to an offensive penalty??? Really?
    I know it is lame to blame the refs for a loss, but I get sick watching teams kill themselves to perform, only for it to be disrespected by ridiculous calls… I think we need “Penalty Review”! Throw a flag to question the penalty, and have refs in the booth with film and replay to help clean up the game!
    They fought to help the colts win and be a media sensation… F – that…

    I know we played mediocre after half, but I want teams to WIN, not be given a game…

    • Colin says:

      Stephen Williams was stuck on the Cardinals practice squad for a reason: He’s not very good. Yea, he flashed in preseason, but who doesn’t?

      I don’t think Christine Michael is trusted in pass pro yet. Lynch is pretty good at picking up blitzers and do you trust a rook to protect Russell and understand all the adjustments when it’s not necessary? I think we’ll see him get more playing time later in the year.

      Don’t complain about the refs. We all know they had a pretty bad day but Seattle still should have dropped 50 on them and went home. We didn’t play well enough.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Maybe I’m the only one but- I don’t think the refs calls were that far off. We play a rough game of defense, Browner bumps and holds, so does Sherman sometimes. We got called on it. Just that simple. Our two biggest mistakes were the blown coverage on a long touchdown pass (where were you Sherman????) and a blocked punt because our line couldn’t contain theirs. That’s 14 points and a complete shift in momentum.

  11. SunPathPaul says:

    With less emotion, can I ask what you peeps think about this idea?

    We went from no challenges to having a red flag for challenging a play…

    What about getting the NFL to admit that the game is going so fast that the refs can’t always make good calls? What about having 3 refs upstairs with all angles of video, and instant replays to aid in not allowing games to be changed by bad calls… Referee Review!

    If a team feels a call was subject, they throw a flag to have it reviewed with slow motion and video upstairs!? This game is too popular and awesome to have games decided by what seems to be paid refs at points… I know the NFL wouldn’t like to admit that their refs aren’t perfect, but everyone knows it.

    “A bad reversal call even ended Washington’s chance of beating Stanford:
    1. Was Washington’s final offensive play actually an incomplete pass?

    Not one angle shown on ESPN’s broadcast could conclusively show that Smith did not catch Price’s fourth-down pass attempt on Washington’s last offensive play, yet the Pac-12 replay official apparently saw enough to reverse the original call. On the field it was ruled a completion that would have given the Huskies a first down, and they would have been knocking on the door of Travis Coons’ field-goal range with over a minute left to play and just a three-point deficit.

    That was the Huskies’ last chance, and it was a heartbreaking way for their offense to come off the field in the first of two straight games against an opponent ranked among the top five.”

    If we really love this game, then why not just change rules to protect players, but add an ability to protect the dignity of the game beyond horrible calls by humans that make mistakes and can’t always see things moving so fast without video…?

    Any takers???

    It would “slow” the game at times, but who cares how long it takes to make the game right, eh?

  12. Bob Dole says:

    Hey rob,
    Hope life as a father is treating you well. Just thought you should know, one of the more intriguing TE prospects, Colt Lyerla has left the Oregon program.

  13. House says:

    Bob,

    I saw that too. Intriguing situation. Not sure if he’s eligible to play elsewhere. If he’s not a Combine invite, his Pro Day should be interesting

  14. Michael says:

    Way too much zone in this one. The lack of run calls in the second half was also a major point of frustration for me. Right now I am really just hoping that Luck being really good was more responsible than our defense being bad. If our D makes Fitzpatrick, Palmer or Bradford look half this good I am gonna be really worried. Looking for a huge bounce back next week after some home cookin’

  15. rrrhawkout says:

    The way I see it, it’s really really hard to go 16-0. I was expecting us to lose at least 2 close ones to good teams, and 1 more just because we come out flat against a mediocre team some week. Even that result (13-3) feels pretty brash given the parity nature of the NFL. Losses will happen.

    The Colts had to play a pretty flawless second half against us to win, on both sides of the ball. That’s probably good news, as that’s not a sustainable game plan: “Play flawlessly.” If only that were easy. Can the Seahawks lose in the playoffs to a good team playing flawlessly? Yep, and so could all the other 31 teams in the league. It happens. Repeatedly, actually. No team is bulletproof.

  16. Barry says:

    I agree with Rob’s analysis. That said;
    I cant say the line wasn’t an issue. Most of Wilson’s yards came after the he had pressure on him within one or two seconds. The first half that didn’t hurt us because the Colts hadn’t settled down yet or found a rhythm. What hurt us with Wilson scrambling because of little to no time is it hurts his rhythm and the offense pass game. That goes for the offensive coordinator also. The play calling never got going it seemed except for Lynch and the running game.

    The coaches never trusted the line play on a passing down and neither did Wilson and that showed up eventually in his accuracy. He had a off game and its not just magic as to why. If you cant get settled and in a rhythm that’s going to happen especially if you have no faith in your pass protection. What I can surmise if I had to is that Pete and Bevell told Wilson a quick one, two read and go. On some plays it looked like maybe even just a one read. Now that is a aggressive counter of a playbook wrinkle for a heavy pass rush, but I’d love to see some screens and other faints of that nature thrown in there also. ( I address that in a sloppy way later )

    As a rule I never blame the reffs in a loss.
    But I will talk about how they factor in a game when they shouldn’t. Momentum, and once again rhythm, a deep pass to Tate on a phantom push off. End result at least is a FG. A push off by Wayne for a two point conversion.
    In relative sense that’s just five points, but in the game that sets up much more. One, its a momentum changer when a big play is negated. Yes good teams should be able to play through that, but on the road there are factors why a better team loses and that is one of them. It was also mentioned that our DB’s had a off day. They did but once again these things don’t just happen. When one team is allowed to be more physical then another it is going to throw you off your game. We saw that build until no constant play was shown in our secondary.

    Sidney rice continues to struggle to get separation. Though if a player is hugging my back through a pattern I’m not sure I’d do much better. The point stands though, he’s had a hard time against man all year. Tate needs more plays his way. Its frustrating because the patter chart is cut in half until we get some blocking. I’d love to see play action to out-digs or deep slants or even come backs. but that pocket isn’t there right now that is needed for the throwing lanes. Wilson has limitations, and right now the play calling nor the o-line is helping much.

    Now no I’m not saying the reasons above are the only ones why we loss. But they add up and contribute. I know there was one so completely obvious hold occur against Clemons that had to be called. I counted a good number more that could have been called.
    What either frustrated me about the Hawks play calling or impressed me about the Colts was the way each team handled the pass rush. The Colts towards mid way through the second quarter started to run some screens and plays of that nature. The Hawks never really have. We have ran flare outs to the backs that worked, or didn’t if you count the second to last possession we had were Lynch wasn’t ready for the pass.. The great thing about the screen is it can negate such things as a heavy pass rush and add a extra element to a already divers playbook. The whole front seven have something else to watch out for if you burn them on it a few times.

    I could almost accept this lose and tip my hat to the Colts but all these issues along with that last 3rd down play call. Just watch it again if you don’t know what I’m talking about single option play for Wilson without the added threat of a pass with 11 guys in the box. I don’t know if I was supposed to laugh or cry.
    Speaking of cry sorry if this had to much of it in it.

  17. Michael says:

    On the plus side, I thought Bruce looked pretty damn good in his first real game of the year/at his new position.

  18. Ukhawk says:

    I thought our Hawks got a taste of their own medicine. Colts continued to compete in all phases when down and for the whole game. They were opportunistic and played hungry. On defense, I stopped counting the number of lynch/turbin runs on 1st down for little yards, once they then made us one dimensional and they kept everything in front whilst contesting each throw on obvious passing downs, sound familiar? On offense, they kept balanced, absorbed our DL pressure, played smart and controlled and had that extra amount of time not seen in an opponent this season. Their WRs created separation versus our big DBs who esp especiallystruggled on a fast surface.

  19. Ukhawk says:

    Look forward to the Lyeria article Rob. Im def thinking a TE in R1 (Lyeria, ASJ, Ebron) and a WR in 2 or 3. Still love Coleman’s upside esp after R1 if/when he’s fully recovered and has a better QB to play with. Worst case he is a Rice-type replacement as a possession /jump ball receiver

  20. adog says:

    a major problem with the passing game is that play action is not getting anybody open down the field. Number one receivers are few, i don’t think you need one to win a championship. What the Seahawks need is a running game outside of the option play. When they run that lead option or whatever it is, it completely eliminates deep play action. The option run game looks good, but it’s not really utilizing this offense. Bevell needs to bring his scheme back to the west coast offense of high percentage completions, gash the middle of defense with counter and counter leads, and the occasional and highly effective play action deep ball.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      I would like to see a west coast offense also, but I’m not sure if RW is tall enough to pass in the middle over the linemen.

  21. Kyle says:

    The most impressive play in my opinion from Bruce Irvin was his first tackle. He did something that he didn’t show any ability to do last year. He got off a block to make a tackle on a running back. This is huge for our long term needs at the Leo end position. Last year the “experts” said he was too small to play the run from the Leo spot. I totally disagreed. You can see him driving o-line into the backfield on running plays w/ bull rushes and the ball carrier going right by him. He’s off to a great start this year showing some actual ball location instincts in the run game

  22. sdcoug says:

    Bowie?

    Does anyone who can dissect O-Line play/nuances better than me have an opinion on his play? Is he going to make re-inserting Giacomini a difficult decision? Is he missing too many assignments? Improving? Curious if anyone has any thoughts.

    • Brian says:

      I was wondering that too, anyone know?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I suspect Breno will be back in there. Clearly the staff like Breno. I think any thought that Bowie has somehow usurped Giacomini is very premature.

      • sdcoug says:

        Thanks…I’m not in the anti-Breno camp. Was more wondering if it looks like we’ve found a keeper in Bowie. does he seem to be holding up fairly well?

        • Rob Staton says:

          Hard to say after two games. I think he struggled against Houston but didn’t study his performance exclusively. And in fairness, everyone struggled against Houston. Yesterday I thought the run blocking on the right side was terrific all night and I thought the pass protection was good too. So I think we definitely have a keeper and a possible replacement for Breno next year if he doesn’t re-sign due to cost. But for this season, I think Breno will start when healthy.