New podcast: Discussing the Seahawks’ pass-rush dilemma

August 14th, 2020 | Written by Rob Staton

Yesterday we piloted a new podcast on YouTube with myself and Robbie Williams discussing the Seahawks’ pass rush situation. Check it out below.

Let us know whether you want more of these in the future. Apologies for the lighting at my end — it was late at night and I didn’t anticipate it being as bad as that.

The reaction so far has been positive and if that continues we’ll look to make this a regular thing.

38 Responses to “New podcast: Discussing the Seahawks’ pass-rush dilemma”

  1. GlastoHawk says:

    Rob, enjoyed listening to the Podcast, yes please let’s have many more, it did look a little dark in the grim north

  2. Scott Hill says:

    good listen thanks!!

  3. DancingBuddha says:

    Caught in on YT and just wanted to say I loved it. Always love your work on podcasts, and if you want my 2 bits worth, a SDB podcast has a ready audience thats been waiting for it about 5 years haha

    • stregatto says:

      +Format (25 minutes, focused single topic)

      Felt like you and Robbie have a good balance and your cadence was easy to follow. I liked the format, focused and no fluff (plenty of other fun seahawks pods out there for that already :))

  4. Brendan O'Leary says:

    Yes please to more. I read and listen to everything. Cheers from Maui

  5. pks says:

    Excellent – just the right length.

  6. DancingBuddha says:

    OK Rob, a question since I see it come up a bit and nobody seems to have addressed it head on in the media that I’ve seen. there’s been a debate, that I’m sure you know well about, about coverage vs rush in terms of creating pressures and sacks. Now, I’m not here arguing coverage sacks are the same as rushing ability, more along the lines of is this a philosophical focus? Does the FO genuinely perhaps subscribe to secondary just mattering way more and rush being a cobbled together to be good enough department? Obviously the opposite of how SF does it, but do they simply value it less than we do? yes it contradicts what they say but I’m not sure how forthright they’d actually be about true intentions either way.

    I should note that the loudest analytics voices on Twitter that used to beat this dum now claim a pass rush totally also matters, its like they have great confidence till someone threatens to actually test their hypothesis

    • Rob Staton says:

      I don’t think the Seahawks believe that. Otherwise they wouldn’t have spent what they have on DLers (high picks, high profile trades) and resorted to picking DB’s later in the draft. I think they believe a dynamic pass rush is vital and merely connects with a great secondary and strong linebackers.

      And there’s no doubt that coverage sacks exist and can be beneficial. But you’ve also got to have four guys who can beat five. If a QB has all day to throw someone will get open or contain will break and even a mediocre running QB will find opportunities. If you can’t create pressure and force mistakes up front you will waste a good secondary.

    • pdway says:

      Coverage sacks happen. But they’re WAY more rare than completions caused when the QB has time to throw.

      No team can cover NFL athletes forever.

      Was re-watching the Hawks/Panthers game, and the end of the 2nd half was just demoralizing for how easy a crappy Carolina team w a back-up QB was able to move the ball – and it was all about pass rush. Among other things, a strong pass rush is how you close out games defensively.

    • Ashish says:

      Another way to answer the question is a team with good pass rush and average coverage will have more sacks than average pass rush and good pass coverage team.

  7. James C says:

    Hi Rob,

    What are your thoughts on how the run defense will be? Obviously the pass rush is a huge issue, but the run defense doesn’t get mentioned as much. I thought it was a huge reason the defense was so bad last year. That is another strength in Clowney’s game that rarely gets mentioned too – elite run defender.


    • Rob Staton says:

      I’m satisfied they’ve made the necessary moves to upgrade the perimeter run where they really struggled last year. I am a bit concerned about their interior run defense though with their terrible depth at DT and lack of quality at DE.

  8. Dand393 says:

    Yes please will definitely stay tuned in for more podcasts

  9. Trevor says:

    Thanks really enjoyed it and would love to see more.

  10. Ukhawk says:

    Rob you don’t need to remain in witness protection for continually asking the tough questions and seeking answers!

    Keep up the good work in shedding some light on our favorite team !!

  11. Steve Nelsen says:

    This was fun! Please do more.

    Rob, I love the way you are rocking the quarantine facial hair 🙂

  12. Scot04 says:

    Great podcast as usual Rob. Thank you again for the consistant quality content

  13. Matt says:

    Hi Rob,

    Great work as always. I know you’re aware of the lighting issues, but here are some “all weather” suggestions… 🙂



  14. Ashish says:

    Great to hear you Rob!. One thing i noticed is when you spoke about the DL & Clowney situation felt lot different than you write. You sound more logical and rational, sorry no offense on your writing it just able to see body language.
    Will love to hear more from you.

    • Bmseattle says:

      Not to worry.
      You see, rather than spend $50 dollars on only a couple of high impact players this off season, the Seahawks hedged their bets by spending all that money on depth… filling out their roster with quality players, to protect themselves from just such a scenario as Reed getting hurt…

  15. Scot04 says:

    Our D-Line was bad and short handed at DT with Reed. This is a scary development.
    Clowney getting more leverage daily.

  16. Rob Staton says:

    It’s OK because Poona Ford also got injured:

    Green Mone Christmas Mayowa

    What a terrifying prospect.

    • cha says:

      I thought Clowney made money with Robinson being overweight and Taylor still being hurt. My goodness did he make some money today.

      And here Joe Fann wrote an article saying that Clowney’s leverage is lessening by the day, basing it on Griffen only getting $6m. Oof.

      • Rob Staton says:

        As if Clowney’s situation is in any way impacted by Griffen’s contract.

        People keep misjudging the Clowney situation… over and over again.

        • BruceN says:

          Yup, got it! Clowney is going to sit out the year unless he gets the fat contract he wants.

          Can we place a bet on that for a pint of beer 😊

  17. James C says:

    Green Mone Christmas sounds like a children’s novel. It really is laughable at this stage.

  18. Dan says:

    Enjoyed it Rob! I also appreciate the length. Sometimes committing to 60+ minutes is tough, but around 20 is spot on.

  19. Bankhawk says:

    I’m with the consensus, Rob! The podcast are a winner. I do like the ‘bite-sized format’, but have also enjoyed many of the long-form ones from the past too, so will leave all that to your discretion.

  20. Jordan says:

    Jarran Reed injured… Hopefully it isn’t too bad.

  21. Danny P says:

    Awesome. As has been said, please make this a regular thing!

  22. Mel says:

    Appreciate your analysis, Rob. Any Hawk podcast is welcome. Short, long, longish short, shortish long, whatever works for a given subject.