Because this is what people are talking about today - talk about it here! Also, follow the action at SB Nation Seattle at this StoryStream...

You know what is great about Week 3? Seattle wins. You may have already known, but I want to remind you from the beginning that this one ends happily, for the first time this season, and get you juiced up from the start. Because, well, we're coming off Week 2. Yuck.

Coming into this one, the offense was showing little sign of life; pass protection wasn't helping an easing-into-his-role signal caller that wasn't exactly on the mark. The defense was playing okay and even stout at times, but they couldn't get the quarterback to the ground. Turnover margin mattered Week 1 (-3) and it was zero Week 2; zero turnovers forced through two games. 17 penalties through two games, eh. Missed tackles leading to big plays on special teams, notably two inside of 4 minute left return touchdowns in Week 1, we're an issue. You could say youth and/or discontinuity appeared to be a factor in all of this, not to mention the offense was yet to have all of its pieces.

Seattle was welcoming the 12^th man for the first time this year, and a loss would not be welcomed. The fans were ready to hound the new starting quarterback, and this team needed something good to happen. This was a game Seattle could win. They needed some home cookin', and they knew it.

It's worth acknowledging that I actually went to 7 of 8 games at the CLink; the second year of my life with tickets (the other was 2006). It was pretty cool and insightful at times. If I remember something I'll mention it, but I'm not trying to go overboard with "I remember this happened" moments unless it's pertinent. Anyway, the Cards were 1-1, coming off of a 1 point road loss at Washington. Back to Week 3.

On the opening kick Paul McQuistan looked juiced for his first start since 2007 (Robert Gallery was recovering from surgery) and made a strong block; Lemuel Jeanpierre got leveled.

Seattle ball at their 23, they come out in '12' with Zach Miller and Anthony McCoy both right. Jackson takes a seven step drop scanning the right side of the field. He has the two tight ends and Sidney Rice - he started!!! - out there. Guess where the ball is going...

Right away, it happens; the whole prior chemistry with Rice thing comes into play on the first play of the game. Well look at that. On 2nd and 1, Mike Williams lines up on the bottom and Jackson misses him high and behind on a quick slant. So now 3rd and 1; opening play scripts have been a conversation point in both games this season and this intrigued me.

Check the formation:

An extra lineman (Breno Giacomini) right, with Zach Miller and fullback Eddie Williams - Mike Rob out since the 1st quarter of Week 1 - also in the game. They run a fullback dive away from all of the underlined defenders - note the circled safety well outside the box - and get the 1.

On the next 3rd and 1 comes another six offensive lineman set with Giacomini right again, but this time Miller is up top creating the seven man line (also, the receiver is tight):

Cardinals' timeout leads to this formation again and a Lynch run for eight, sprung by good blocking by Miller, the left side of the line and Eddie Williams. Back to the intrigue; did Seattle mix in these heavy sets thinking that either one of these calls would catch the defense off guard; or that they may find themselves in need of a heavy set on 3rd and short - planning to get certain yardage with their calls on 1st and 2nd, short passes or runs to this point - to sustain a drive? We know heavy sets are a part of the game plan through two weeks, so maybe I'm looking too much into things? Anyway, ball moving.

Then it begins to rain.

Continue reading this post »

They say that a picture says a thousand words. They also say that Eddie Murphy says A Thousand Words in his new hit comedy, coming soon to a theater near you. **SBN Editor pulls gun away from back of my head**

It's the off-season, which means that it's a time for reflection. A time to remember the season and learn from it and never forget exactly how the Seahawks wound up at 7-9. A time... well, come on... it's a time for me to think of shit to write when there aren't any games.

But this is a fun exercise because it was easy to write (about 15 words plus this) and it's really easy for you to read. Even if you don't speak English, you can understand this article. Well, not this part. Or this part. But the pictures part. You don't have to read a picture, because it says a thousand words. Why do you think I watch movies and don't read books?

Seattle played 16 games. They won almost half of them. They lost the rest. As best I could, here is each game in a single picture. I can't wait to hear you tell me how much of an idiot I am for choosing this picture and not that picture.

Just remember that the following takes about 18 seconds. It took me a lot more than 18 seconds to make it so I hope it's mildly enjoyable.

Week 1 @San Francisco 49ers

Continue reading this post »

Thursday!!

BREAKING: NBA, NHL In Seattle? Christopher Hansen Schedules Press Conference To Announce Plans for New Arena Deal - SB Nation Seattle
Arena backer Christopher Hansen has scheduled a press conference for 2pm Thursday. Could mean potential for new arena and possible NBA, NHL franchises for the city.

Local News | NBA arena backer Chris Hansen to reveal Seattle plan Thursday | Seattle Times Newspaper
Christopher Hansen, the wealthy San Francisco mystery man who wants to build a sports arena in Seattle to lure NBA and NHL teams, will unveil his proposal at a news conference Thursday, according to two city sources.

Seahawks among teams pondering pass-fail draft
The Seahawks want a young quarterback to compete with and learn from incumbent starter Tarvaris Jackson. The top two QBs in this year's draft class should be gone in the top four picks, but there are other options.

Just how good is LSU DT Michael Brockers? | National Football Post
We breakdown the hotly debated underclassman.

NFL.com Blogs " Blog Archive Mayock: Browns should trade up to draft RG3 "
Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III widely are considered the top two prizes of the 2012 NFL Draft, and many experts believe that if Luck goes No. 1 overall to the Colts, then the Rams’ second-overall pick — potentially RG3 — will be available for the right price.

NFL.com news: Agent: Ex-Jaguars QB Garrard healthy after back surgery
Former Jacksonville Jaguars quarterback David Garrard is nearing a return from back surgery and is intent on playing in 2012, according to his agent, Albert Irby.

Real Rob Report - Mike Rob Goes Skydiving - YouTube
For Mike's 29th birthday his wife took him out skydiving. Here it is in all it's glory! Michael Robinson's first trip skydiving.

Draft analyst Mike Mayock talks Hawks | Seahawks Insider
NFL Network draft analyst Mike Mayock held a conference call with media members this afternoon. For the eighth straight year the NFL Network will broadcast the NFL Scouting Combine from Indianapolis beginning next Thursday, Feb. 23.

Manuel labor
Marquand Manuel, an unintended standout on the Seahawks' Super Bowl team in 2005, has returned as the club's assistant special teams coach and three others also have been added to Pete Carroll's staff.

Expert vs. expert: Tannehill's talent, inexperience spark debate - NFL, NFLDRAFT - CBSSports.com - NFLDraftScout.com
Come April 26, Ryan Tannehill might be forever indebted to Matt Barkley and Landry Jones. Then again, it could be an NFL team down the line that feels fortunate it was lured into a gamble that paid big dividends. When Barkley announced he was returning to Southern California and Jones opted to remain at Oklahoma for another season, Tannehill became the consensus third-best quarterback in the 2012 draft behind headliners Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III.

Continue reading this post »

The Seahawks will give up their fifth round pick this year to Buffalo as part of the 2010 Marshawn Lynch trade, according to the Bills' official website (and pointed out by Danny O'Neil). The Hawks originally traded for Marshawn Lynch for a 2011 4th Round pick and an undisclosed 2012 pick. It was speculated to be a 5th or 6th Round pick, but apparently Lynch hit a playing time benchmark this season that made it a 5th.

Per BuffaloBills.com:

Not super surprising considering Lynch's playing time and success this season, but stings a bit. The Seahawks have had a lot of success in the 5th round these past two seasons, picking up Kam Chancellor and Richard Sherman. In my opinion, if anything, the escalation from a 6th to a 5th in this case just makes it more likely that the Seahawks will be trading back in this year's draft, at least once, to pick up another pick or two.

Caveat: I have read sections of the new CBA - not the entire thing, and I will read the whole thing very closely after the 2012 Draft. Even after I read it, I know I will still have more questions than answers, but I am sure some things will crystalize. Right now, I am reading sections and interpreting them the best I can - I am not an attorney or a cap expert - just a fan trying to follow my team and figure out how much money the Seahawks have to spend.

That being said - a couple cap odds and ends I wanted to follow up on are here below. Just trying to learn and push the conversation forward. Chime in if you know the answer - and if you have chapter and verse in the new CBA please share!

Alas-

51 TOP PAID PLAYERS

Thanks to Mr. Beekers - he reminds that during the offseason, the top-paid 51 players' salaries are used to calculate the cap (this is how teams stay under the cap even with 80 man rosters). When the league year begins, I believe the top 51 contracts are counted toward this figure, and if there are some futures contracts in there, then I believe the highest priced futures contracts are in that top 51 figure. I may be wrong- but that is how I read those parts of the CBA. The Seahawks may have only 46 or 47 2011 players under contract in 2012, but they have many players signed to futures contracts as well.

Some of the drafted players will take the spots of these futures contract players, and will increase the cap by perhaps $100-200k per non first-round drafted player. There may be an additional $1M to $2M in cap room for the Seahawks than my original post speculated, but I don't think it changes the overall article greatly.

WHAT DOES A TYPICAL ROOKIE CONTRACT LOOK LIKE AND HOW DO I CALCULATE A CAP FIGURE?

This is a good thing to know. Let's use for example, the Seahawks second pick of the 2011 Draft.

John Moffitt, 2011 3rd Round Draft Pick. John's contract looks like this:

2011 $375k base
2012 $505k base
2013 $625k base
2014 $725.5 base

Signing bonus $637.5k

How do you calculate his cap figure? Pro-rate his signing bonus over the number of years in his deal (max five years per the CBA), in this case - 4 years.

$637.5k / 4 years = $159,375 per year pro-rated signing bonus

Add that to his annual base salary:

2011: $375k +$159k = $534,375 Cap
2012: $505k +$159k = $664,375 Cap
2013: $625k +$159k = $784,375 Cap
2014: $725.5k +$159k = $884,875 Cap

That's it. Most non first-round rookie contracts look a lot like this, and are pretty simple to calculate. The previous CBA 1st Round Contracts (Aaron Curry, Earl Thomas, Russell Okung) are the hardest to calculate. There are various easy-to-attain bonuses and club options/salary escalation/etc that make calculating those contracts difficult without having direct information. In fact, I was stuck calculating these deals last year - had done the other 50 or so players - and Mike Sando threw me a bone and gave me the figures for Earl and Russell. So, thanks Mike!

James Carpenter's deal is actually pretty straightforward. The new CBA is much better than the old on many levels, in my view.

ROLL FOREVER?

Can a team roll over excess cap space each year in the new CBA? Yes. Can a team balloon to a humongous salary cap this way? Not sure. I haven't figured out all the scenarios - and we will see how teams with big cap space operate in 2012 (CIN, KCC, TAM, etc...). Do I think these teams will spend a big chunk of their cap? I actually do. Will they roll some over to 2013? Perhaps.

Let's assume the 2012 Cap is $120M and the 2013 Cap is $130M (no one knows yet as it is calculated each year based on revenues).

2012 Assume $120M Cap

Let's say a team rolled over $30M from 2011, and had $90M committed to 2012 already. The team would have $60M in available Cap and have a "soft cap" or "adjusted cap" of $150M. This seems like a nice advantage for a Tampa Bay over the current cap situation in Pittsburgh.

2013 Assume $130M Cap

89% of $130M is $115.7M. It would be wise for this "big cap room" team to spend $115.7M in 2013, so assuming the team has only $90M committed to 2012 and 2013- then they should look to shell out an additional $25.7M in 2012 and 2013.

The CBA ensures that all teams spend the riches of the NFL on the players.

Now, if they are under that 89% floor in 2013, they actually are not in violation until 2016! The team has to add together the 89% floor from the 2013-2016 years Announced Cap and the 4 year total of those combined Announced Cap has to be measured against what the team actually spent in that four year period. If the team was short (think Cincy), the team has to pay out in 2016 to "match up".

Continue reading this post »

There is an argument that running back is a fungible position in the NFL, and that effective NFL RBs can be consistently drafted in the mid to late rounds. I’ve (without a shred of evidence) made the argument that maybe NFL scouting is just poor at identifying which college RBs will succeed in the NFL, and that is why you can draft them in the mid-late rounds. In this article, I wanted to test the assumptions that: 1) RBs are fungible, 2) effective NFL RBs are available to be drafted in later rounds, and 3) that NFL front offices are poor at identifying NFL caliber RB talent.

I evaluate five years of draft history from 2006-2010 (concentrating only on those backs in recent memory, and in the "pass happy" NFL era). I’ve decided to exclude the 2011 draft for the following reasons: 1) like other positions, there is a learning curve for RBs in the NFL and it is hard to assess players after only one year, 2) with the short offseason, players had less than normal time to learn offensive sets and coordination with blockers, and 3) we saw an inordinate number of season ending injuries among the 2011 draftees, in the preseason and early season - possibly related to the prolonged lockout and players not having ideal conditioning regimens.

I have excluded analysis of UDFA RBs as there is no reasonable way for me to determine the number of UDFAs who have churned through all the camps in the NFL, and thus no way to analyze the success rate of UDFA RBs (but it should be obvious that teams don't rely on finding their franchise RBs in the UDFA pool).

My subgroupings of successful RBs are wholly subjective; grading is pretty much only results-oriented – I am not evaluating vision, elusiveness, quickness, breakaway speed, catching ability, power or potential in any specific way, nor am I analyzing tape. Given the number of players involved in this analysis, I would assume that each person who reads this article will differ in the way they would rank at least several players. The point of this article is not to determine how players should be ranked, and the ensuing discussion should concentrate instead on the questions presented above – Are RBs fungible? Can you find a franchise-quality RB in the mid-late rounds? And, are NFL scouting teams poor at determining which players will succeed in the NFL?

For the purposes of this analysis, I have broken down player quality into 4 tiers:

- The first tier is RBs that I would call "franchise-quality RBs." Almost everyone would be satisfied with this player as their team’s starting RB, as in "I sure wish we had player X as our starter" or "if we lost our starter, I sure would be happy with player X." Knowing how they would perform at the NFL level, and in a vacuum (i.e. ignoring team needs), I wouldn’t think it a mistake if my team's FO spent a late first round pick on these players.

- The second tier is backs that I would term "successful NFL RBs," and have at least one of the following qualities: 1) has been a successful part of a backfield share, 2) has been a successful situational back, or 3) would qualify for the first tier excepting a history of injury (Steve Slaton comes to mind). Using the retroscope, I think of these players as previously worthy of a 2nd or 3rd round pick.

- The third tier is RBs that have been successful for short stints as a backup or a history of consistent but low level contribution. Mostly replacement quality, these RBs hang around in the league only because there aren’t enough 1st and 2nd tier RBs, and they are really only worth a late round (4-7) pick – again in retrospect.

- The fourth tier is backs that have had limited success in limited opportunities – basically non-factors in the league. When teams draft these players, two years later the GM asks the scout "Why did I listen to you about that guy? We could have drafted Doug Baldwin."

The year by year evaluation of RBs is quite long, so if you want to skip the gory details, after the jump search for the paragraph that starts with bold and italic text after a four line break…

Continue reading this post »