NEW live stream with Jeff Simmons

October 13th, 2021 | Written by Rob Staton

Jeff Simmons is back with us today to debate the big topics involving the Seahawks… including who could be the next Head Coach in Seattle and the future of Pete Carroll, John Schneider and Russell Wilson…

55 Responses to “NEW live stream with Jeff Simmons”

  1. Roy Batty says:

    Loved the discussion, particularly the list of possible HC candidates, with their pluses and minuses.

    It was once again nice to have two fans discuss the end of the Carroll era in a pleasant manner. Both of you were on the same page regarding Wilson over Carroll. Jeff reiterating that blowing up the whole franchise, including trading Wilson, is a recipe for disaster. As he put it, are fans prepared to see a bad team take the field for a decade, maybe two decades? That is what is at stake when you do a complete rebuild, and it makes no sense when a new coach will have plenty of current, good players to retool around.

    Both your takes on the 2022 draft are a sobering reminder of how hard a complete rebuild would be, no matter the amount of picks they gathered. The comparison to the horrid 2013 draft was spot-on. The example of Miami, without a franchise QB, is also a prophetic sign of what could be.

    I really look forward to these, Rob. Thank you.

  2. BobbyK says:

    I believe in Pete’s program and philosophy. However, if you have his philosophy, you must have the horses to do it (as with any philosophy).

    Pete says he wants to run the ball. What does he do?

    He moves his promising rookie RG to a foreign position on the other side of the OL, which is proving pretty stupid (what else is new with moving ppl around). Said guard is not doing as well in year two as his rookie year. Should be above average year 2, but is below average at new position. Can you say, “S-T-U-P-I-D”?

    Center – WTF? How can you be a power running team if your Center is Pocic or Fuller? Seriously. If your goal is to “be the bully” and you’re marching out these clowns in an attempt to dominate the LOS – you need your brain examined (proof of your stupidity would be to trade a few 1st round picks for a lackluster SS).

    RG – After moving said RG to LG they trade a 5th round pick (cheap talent on rookie contracts = good things for salary cap) and pay good money (bad for salary cap) to a guy whose own fan base hated in Vegas last season. Not all fans are stupid, and when most think a guy sucks – it’s usually because they do.

    RT – I don’t think Shell sucks. I think he’s okay when healthy. This is not a position of strength or weakness when the starter is healthy. It is what it is. But when this guy is possibly your second best OL (when healthy), then you know the overall strength of your OL really sucks, especially if you want a good OL.

    LT – Duane Brown is the only guy who we can say is a pretty good OL. He might get dominated by a Bosa every once in awhile, but so does pretty much every NFL LT at some point each game. This single player on the Seahawks OL is the only one who can say he’s clearly an above average NFL player on the OL and yet he’s going to be a FA at the end of the season, even though he’s almost 4 years younger than the Rams above average NFL LT in Andrew Whitworth.

    Basically, Pete wants to run the ball but he only has 1 above average OL who is about to reach free agency at the end of the season.. He should have 2, but he moved one to a new position (same position, but opposite side he’s used to which equals a learning curve).

    Does Pete even have a philosophy about TE besides paying lots of money to waste them on the team (when, perhaps, they could take that money and invest on the OL so they could have a better chance to be a bully).

    That’s just my offensive criticisms about Pete.

    • bmseattle says:

      Moving Lewis for the sake of Jackson never made sense.
      Pete seems to have rectified his similar error on defense, moving Reed back to the RCB spot, where he played well last year. It shouldn’t be difficult to do the same with Lewis/Jackson, especially since Jackson has played plenty of LG in his career.

    • Big Mike says:

      Seahawks have a short QB. How did Brees do so well as a short QB? The Saints had really good Guards and a really good Center to keep the pass rush out of his face and create sight lanes for him. Out interior o-line is ranked by PFF in the 50s and 40s. So not only do we not have the horses to run, we don ‘t have anyone to keep a decent pocket or allow Russ to see through the interior LOS.

      Oh and “lackluster” SS is being kind Bobby. He’s shit.

      • OP_chillin says:

        Also brees would throw the ball to spots when he couldn’t even see the receiver. Lots of trust and arguably the most accurate Qb in football so it worked.

  3. BobbyK says:

    Since this era seems to be ending, I have a question about the HOF candidacy of Earl Thomas.

    The LOB seemed to have 3 HOFers at one point. Now, to me, Sherman is the only guy I think could/should make it on his first try (when he does retire, which seems like it should be sooner rather than later).

    Earl flipping off Pete isn’t any different than why TO wasn’t a first ballot HOFer, especially when he blew up and proved himself a worthless pile of crap for a new team in Baltimore. The fact NOBODY wanted him after, when a FS seems to age better than most positions is especially alarming. All ET is now is a Derrick Henry meme.

    If Kenny Easley wasn’t a HOFer for decades after his career ended, is Kam Chancellor? Kam’s individual career achievements pale in comparison to Easley. Kam played 8 seasons; Easley 7. But Kam never started a game his rookie year, so is playing ST for a year HOF worthy or a difference maker? If so, maybe Homer should get some HOF consideration later if he becomes a good starter at some point? Which he won’t. Kam has less Pro Bowls, no conference DPOY, no NFL DPOY, etc. He was just a stud (his career credentials are less impressive than Jacob Green, unless a hit and INT in a Super Bowl propels him, in which case Terry Bradshaw should be considered much better than John Elway, Dan Marino, and Steve Young combined).

    The Pete Carroll era definitely seems to be ending and all we’ll have moving forward is our memories of this era, especially if they keep Pete and get rid of Russ. At least with Russ there’s still a chance for another one. It’s a sorry day when I write this but ignoring reality is dumb, too.

    • Big Mike says:

      Earl: no shot.
      Kam: very outside chance, could get in via vets committee in 15-20 years
      Sherm: absolute shoo-in

      • TomLPDX says:

        Bobby is also a shoo-in when his time comes.

        Kam’s leadership skills and dominance on the field were what set him apart. Unfortunately, stats-wise, he didn’t make as big of an impact. He will definitely be in the ring of honor but seriously doubt he makes the HOF.

      • Tallyhawk says:

        I think ET gets in eventually. He was the best player at his position for most of his time is Seattle. How his time here and career ended definitely delay that imo. Kam is an interesting case. If he gets in it’s probably with the veteran committee and some lobbying from those who played with him and Vernon Davis. Sherm no debate first ballot.

        I agree with Bobby up above. Pete’s style and philosophy still works and will always work but his implementation of it has gone well off the tracks. Something that I haven’t seen mentioned in the talk of next season and scares the shit out of me is Pete retiring but maintaining his other title and being extremely hands on in picking his replacement. Please welcome KN jr as your new head coach.

      • pdway says:

        No shot, why? the way it ended?

        I think Earl and Sherm are for sure in; and Kam is a candidate, but doesn’t make it.

        Bobby makes it too. Anyone else from that D, have a shot? I guess probably not..

    • GoHawksDani says:

      Kam might not be a HoFer ever, but he WAS the legion of boom.
      Kam kept it all together. He was their leader and when Sherm or Earl got a little hot headed he calmed them down and helped them re-focus. Without Kam there wouldn’t be an LoB. Just Sherman a good CB and Earl an above average FS

      • BobbyK says:

        Kam emerged as the heart and soul of the LOB, but if I remember correctly, the name started not because of ET or Kam, but more so because of the big starting CBs the Seahawks were starting with a big Richard Sherman and an even bigger Brandon Browner.

  4. Rowdy says:

    Say wilson is involved in a hc and has a short list of coaches he will play for. Let’s say nagy is the only one that’s willing, because he will be fired and no one else will touch him. We all know wilson wants to play for him and it’s him or wilson walks? What would you guys do?

  5. Tomas says:

    I was glad Doug Pederson’s name came up. The Eagles sustained a staggering number of injuries following their Super Bowl triumph, which I felt prevented any real chance of repeating. Then, it became fashionable to credit Frank Reich, the OC, for the Eagles offensive success … perhaps too much so, for Peterson was clearly all in for the go-for-the jugular offensive approach, expressed so beautifully, and almost shockingly, in that Super Bowl win over the Pats. Anything less aggressive would have resulted in another Brady ring. I believe Pederson deserves careful consideration, along with the other worthy names mentioned during the podcast.

    • Big Mike says:

      Yeah I hadn’t thought of him at all but I agree that he’d be an outstanding choice.

    • TomLPDX says:

      I’ve always like Pederson and his coaching style. I think what killed him is his boss, Lurie. They didn’t see eye-to-eye and that was what got him in the end.

    • GoHawks5151 says:

      I agree about Pederson. I was hoping he would be the OC this year. I think he is creative and puts his QBs in positions for success. I guess my only concern is that he got bullied by his last QB. Wentz clearly wanted to run things that played to his strength at the expense of his system. Russ is a bigger talent and a better player. It would be easy for him to do the same. He may already be doing it with Waldron. Obviously there is a balance that is good for all but can that be achieved?

    • BobbyK says:

      Pederson +1

  6. Tomas says:

    Bobby K, I agree with every single point you made, 100%.

  7. AlaskaHawk says:

    What I’m hearing from this is that the next draft will suck, and that is going to set back any plans to rebuild the team. Plus some people want to replace the coaches. So we will basically go into 2022 with little in the way of changes, maybe a few new draft picks will prove out, but it is unlikely to be more than 3 who become starters.

    Overall it seems that a rebuild will take at least three years. That is also when Russell Wilson’s contract expires and he will probably demand 50 million per year. Plus whatever Metcalf demands. Interesting times.

    • Blitzy the Clown says:

      This isn’t the first time you’ve commented that Wilson will probably want a record average salary per year on his next contract, so maybe we should just move on from him now.

      Meanwhile, Aaron Rodgers signed a $33.5m apy contrac at the age of 35 in 2018.

      Tom Brady has never been paid more than $28m apy in any year of his career.

      Patrick Mahomes signed a 10 year contract worth $45m apy…after winning the Super Bowl in 2020 and at the tender age of 25.

      So why do you think Wilson, who presumably won’t just have won a Super Bowl at the end of the 2024 season (let alone a playoff game), and who will be 35 years old, will demand a record-setting $50 apy?

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        I think average quarterback salaries will be higher by then. It’s just a guess but I’ve never seen them go down.

  8. Denver Hawker says:

    Not surprising here, but interesting context from Sherman on Bucs’ culture:
    https://twitter.com/mikegarafolo/status/1448703789243015172?s=21

    Sounds like Brady leads a culture of accountability, probably less “fun” at practice, but winning is also fun. Fournette’s comment probably lacks some credibility coming from the Jags.

    • 12th chuck says:

      what else is he supposed to say, my other team was better?

      • Denver Hawker says:

        I do t think it’s that- it’s just culture. There aren’t many players who get to tour the league and play for championship level teams with HoF players. I took the comments to say Brady sets a tone and example that is unrivaled in the NFL.

    • Garry says:

      Russ and accountability don’t go hand in hand…. Seems like he learnt that from Pete.

      Folks here who think just changing the HC alone will take us to SB are either really naive or overate Russ as well as the new HC/GM that’s gonna come onboard. Russ is going to be 34 waiting for his last big contract and he ain’t giving any team friendly deal. He ain’t gonna wait for a rebuild as well. If you think that this team is just missing a few pieces and that all Russ needs is an OL to win SB, have I got news for you!

      • Rob Staton says:

        This is a really dumb comment.

        People are not making such a simplified argument as you’re suggesting. And you don’t get to imply they are in order to avoid making a better argument yourself

        • Garry says:

          What’s dumb about this comment Rob? Can you elaborate?

          1. I am saying Russ hasn’t grown as pocket QB as we all wanted him to and he holds back any offense from truly running within the scheme. Can you please comment why this is dumb?

          2. Because of #1, even an offensive minded HC can’t change the way Russ plays. What you have done for 10 years isn’t easy to change. Ask all the 3 OCs who has played with him so far. If you think Pete is the one holding back, I think you are super biased and not ready to look into facts.

          3. While Russ’s stats how his eliteness, he’s yet to elevate this offense to play consistently week in and week out. Their staple plays are all low % throws and when Ds take those away, guess what happens..

          4. What makes you think Russ is going to wait 2-3 years while the team rebuilds around with the probability that the next HC may not be able to elevate the team like you are imagining? You think Russ takes a risk on that instead of maybe going to a team which has everything except QB.

          5. What makes you think he will take a team friendly deal? Also, when has Russ shown accountability for his plays? Instead of acknowledging he was as much a problem last season, he deflected. Is that dumb?

          I request you to have a healthy debate instead of just shutting down a person who makes points that you necessarily don’t agree with. I hope you can do that instead of saying how dumb the comment is.

          • Rob Staton says:

            What’s dumb about this comment Rob? Can you elaborate?

            “Folks here who think just changing the HC alone will take us to SB are either really naive or overate Russ as well as the new HC/GM that’s gonna come onboard.”

            As I’ve already pointed out, people are not making such a simplified argument. I’ve not seen a single person suggest that ‘changing the Head Coach alone will take Seattle to a Super Bowl’. People have talked about this for a whole host of detailed reasons, including why a change is necessary to avoid further drama with Russell Wilson, why it’s a better plan to proceed with Wilson rather than go into total rebuild mode, how the team can re-establish a competitive nature by going a certain route — then listing everything from coaches, coaching philosophies, potential free agent additions, adjustments to the roster and more. We’ve debated, at length, the draft classes and why in particular the quarterbacks in college shape the argument.

            You reduced the argument to ‘you are all naive for wanting something I’ve just made up to make you all sound simple’. Presumably to avoid having to address these relevant points (which is why you’ve tried now to flesh out your argument).

            There, that’s what was dumb about it.

            • Garry says:

              I am actually directly challenging your point around going with Wilson and avoid drama and give him more power etc.. I don’t think that’s a good formula for a franchise to be successful and you have already mentioned that all you care about is Seahawks winning another SB. I am countering your point that says “Build with Wilson” by saying even an offensive minded HC won’t be able to change his style of play, especially after 10 years of habit in the pocket. You still haven’t provided an argument or evidence you see as to how he can take us to a Super bowl while earning north of $50 million in the next 2-3 years and building a talented roster while GM and HC is new. I am assuming your time period here to get to SB is next 2-4 years with a new HC. Is that realistic? You compare this to Cowboys but with them only the HC changed. You are bringing up ideas which aren’t realistic in the next 2-3 years.

              If this is a 7 year plan, I understand, but 2-3 years, you really must be living in a different world. As you said, it’s not simple even with your idea of rebuilding this team. Yes, I get QBs are hard to get, but I would rather do a full rebuild. I don’t think Russ can take us to a Superbowl unless we have a top 5 defense and top 3 offense and building that is gonna take time unless he’s going give $$ back to the team and that’s another gamble I don’t think you can make.

              • Rob Staton says:

                I am actually directly challenging your point around going with Wilson and avoid drama and give him more power etc.

                No you didn’t. I directly quoted you word for word. You lazily accused people of saying something really basic (a new HC = Super Bowl) ignoring all the nuanced debate we’ve had on the matter, just so you can dismiss an argument you presumably don’t agree with.

  9. TomLPDX says:

    Tre to the Bengals. I honestly wish him well. He was put into a no-win situation.

    https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/10/14/bengals-claim-tre-flowers-off-waivers/

  10. Sea Mode says:

    Interpret and contextualize as you will with any stat, but I’ll take any strand of hope for the future I can get from this season.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/seahawksPR/status/1448345819745120258

    • uptop says:

      Darrell Taylor and Alton Robinson have the potential to be bookend pass rushers for years to come, IF THEY PLAY!

      • Rob Staton says:

        And I’m not sure Pete will take the training wheels off.

        He should.

        Maybe someone could press him on that at, say, a press conference?

        • cha says:

          Every time he’s asked to praise Taylor or Robinson, he does, and then quickly throws in a caveat about how they’re learning and make mistakes and so they cannot use them fully.

          The irony makes my ears bleed.

      • Roy Batty says:

        I’ve written this a few times in here: “Always Compete” faded into obscurity long ago. It simply does not currently exist in this franchise. It’s as if Carroll went into this season on cruise control and thought it would all work out somehow.

  11. uptop says:

    I’d draft this guy in a late round just for fun, wouldn’t it be cool if he were any good?

    Nate Cox QB Nevada Sr 6’9″ 225lb

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3uOT0x4XGQ

    • BobbyK says:

      Sounds like when the Seahawks drafted Dan McGwire. Except Ken Behring meddled and the Seahawks drafted the man he wanted in the first round. He didn’t give Chuck Knox who he wanted. For those of you who don’t remember those years, Knox wanted to draft Bret Favre in that slot. Knox even told his assistants to polish their resumes because they’d all probably be out of jobs because of it. He was right. It took the Seahawks over a decade of band-aids at the position (they sucked) to finally get to a decent Matt Hasselbeck (who sucked early on in his Seahawks tenure). Moral of the story is it’s hard to get a good QB.

      But, yes, it would be fun/funny to draft a guy like that in the late rounds.

  12. swedenhawk says:

    great episode rob. really appreciate jeff’s perspective. one question: you mentioned Joe Brady and Doug Petersen as candidates for a potential head coaching vacancy. if i’m not mistaken, both run versions of the west-coast offense (like Waldron presumably would, if he had the chance). could you, or someone in the community, briefly break down some of the key differences between their respective approaches to the WCO? is it a matter of different personnel groupings and use of pre-snap motion? or are there philosophical differences that I’m missing?

Leave a Reply