Hell of a list man, great ass work. Your reasoning is, as always, foolproof.

It's interesting that you mention QBs second in the list of strengths. Yesterday, I was listening to WEEI (out of Boston - the most widely listened to sports talk show in America). Dennis and Callahan (the WEEI morning show) said that they were surprised the Seahawks weren't interested in Vick, because "Hasselbeck is old and injury prone" and Wallace isn't good. They made it sound as though Vick would be an upgrade over either QB. They also played a soundbite in the background during the discussion, "Matt Hasselbeck sucks!" Nice. Just ECB! (East Coast Bias.)

By the way, is anyone else finding themselves frequently checking the blog for a headline, "Unger Signs" or "Curry Inked"??? I hope to read both soon!

Nice list, Bill! I might move special teams a little lower and DBs a bit higher (Trufant, Lucas and Wilson is a scary trio, even if Wilson is small), but Brian Russell is still mediocre on a good day, I suppose, so its probably pretty safe there.

I concur. If Matt Hasselbeck is truly 100% from having back issues then he will be Red Hot with TJ and Carlson and that's if the O-Line is giving him time to pass. Out of the entire list I would really have to say that you nailed it with the O-line. It's this group that scares me. If Walter isn't healthy, Spencer continues to be Spencer, Wahle ends up going bye-bye because of injury, and Sims is a non-factor then say good bye to the whole offense this year. Matt will end up on his back and we will have the worst running stats for sure. Hopefully, there may be some nice O-Lineman available after or during the training camps around the league. We will see.

Bill, I agree with your top 2 as well. All the Seahawk faithful agree that Matthew H. is a great QB when healthy. We all hope and pray he is -- and stays that way all year. But, I think Seneca is seriously underrated. He had no O-line last year and second-, third- and fourth-string receivers to throw to. Still, his TD to INT ratio was outstanding. Compare that to Michael Vick's career stats. Given a healthy line an receiving corps (not "core") Seneca (if needed) can be a better-than-.500 backup, which is more than you can say for most backup QB's in the league. Nice job, Bill.

I totally agree with your ranking. Well thought out. If the new blocking scheme and healthy players gell we should be in the playoffs.

I concur with most of the assessment but special teams is a two headed monster. place kicking is a strength, punting a weakness. The return game a strength, the coverage game a weakness. (This is bsed on last year and not much has changed.) Also the D-line is tough to pre-judge as a strength or weakness with so many question marks. IF Kearney doesn't get injured and IF the two new guys play up to potential and IF Jackson or Tapp step up on the other side the D-line could be one of the best BUT if Kearney goes down and Cole is mediocre the line could struggle mightily again.

BillT, I think you're list is dead on. The questions on the O-line could easily lead to the Hawks having 2 top ten picks in next year's draft and, frankly, I'm not sure which I'd rather have--a great season or those picks to build for many future great seasons.

The fact that we will be strong at QB and receiver this year is a good sign. Look at the QB situation for most of the teams around the league and it bodes well for Hawkdom.

Even if the O-Line is not great, if they can use the ZB scheme to generate a half-way-decent running game, Hass and the receiving corps will have a chance to win some games this year.

I am also very optimistic about the Defense this year. The D-Line has been upgraded significantly, and that should spark a return to decency.

I respect your Hawks loyalty but are you serious about the quarterback position being a strenght? The NFC has had a weak talent pool of QB's this entire decade and Hass was many times the best of the worst. Hass would have never been a Pro Bowl alternate in the AFC. When Delhomme and Hass are your Pro Bowl representatives from the NFC you know the whole conference is rebuilding.
I see us near the bottom of the NFL at quarterback strenght. Wallace flat out sucks and Hass was satisfactory in his day but realistically, the man never even had a 30 TD season during his prime. Hass is ready to be a good backup, but is near the end of the line as a starter. Ruskell should have considered the immediate future and taken the golden opportunity to draft Sanchez who could be learning to hold the clipboard right now!

Great list. But I honestly thing the defensive line is number 2. Then three and four is a hard one. Hasselbeck can be great but we never know whats gonna happen, health wise, or which matt will show up. Same goes with the recievers. Will they perform the way they should or will they disappoint like we've seen far too much of. And obviously, again, will they stay healty? But I loved the list.

This is a season that could go either way...if everything works as "planned", we're SB bound...if Kearney can't come back, Tapp and Jackson don't produce, Cole and Redding are flops, Walt can't come back, Whale is out, Spencer is...well...Spencer, ditto for Sims, JJ and or Ducket gets hurt, we could end up with two picks in the top five of the draft (perhaps in an uncapped year) I'm optimistic but scared....

Nice, thoughtful work as always, Bill.

I would rate the strengths similar, especially Seneca - to have that good of a TD to INT ratio behind a 3rd string O line, throwing to 7th string receivers...most NFL starters wouldn't play that good were they dealt a hand that bad. Maybe the Manning boys or Brees, but none of the much-ballyhooed QBs around the league have as thin a supporting cast as Seneca did last year. And most of the really good passers don't have Seneca's wheels. Vick? Puhlleeeeeeezzzzz!!!!

Agreed also on the Dline as injury and performance question marks keep it from rating higher. One of the regular Addicts posted the thought a few months ago that even if the line doesn't provide fantastic push, they can serve the same function as an Offensive line, namely occupying blockers so that the guys behind them can make plays. Thus, if they are merely adequate, good enough will be good enough.

Agreed also on Special teams, but DeHaven and co. will be thoroughly pissed off enough and there is enough influx of fresh talent (see Reed, Taylor plus Hawthorne, Adams etc.) that coverage ought to be better. Not all that worried about Ryan as he had lots of practice last year...I really want to see someone more expendable than Burly and Wilson returning punts and kicks on the Suicide Squad. I also like the idea of trading Mare for cap room and depth elsewhere - Safety perhaps?

As for DBs, as the piece is based on everyone being completely healthy, there is cause for optimism. Lucas was dinged up and less effective last year in Carolina. When he's on, he can be devastating opposite Trufant, and his run support is strong as well. The much maligned Jennings had rib injuries all of last year which made it extremely difficult to keep his hands above his head and to wrap up tackles. I would expect him to look better than his decent 2007 performance as he's a smart guy (Master's degree in 4 yrs while starting for Miami) and will be in the dime package covering 4th receivers. If he makes the cut...trade bait anyone? I am also very excited about the Wilson/Lucas duel for the starting spot and the added depth allowing Wilson to execute the corner blitz. I saw it used effectively last year, but there wasn't enough depth to employ it regularly. As for Russell, I think he was mostly a victim of a scheme that required him to cover too mush territory for his range, plus cover for JP's lapses while Mr. Superstar was busy whiffing on highlight attempts. The change in scheme plus the addition of Curry's range and sound fundamentals in coverage will minimize the liability and allow for him to make enough plays on guts and guile to pull his weight. Also praying for depth at his position like everyone else...

RBs will be a surprising positive this year as both have produced nicely before, have a proven lead blocker in Griffith and a talented, hungry blocker in facemask-busting O. Schmitt and neither have had many hits on their legs lately due to lack of carries. I can see Duckett starting games and wearing down defenses in the first quarter, letting JJ run wild after the D is tired, and smashing them into the ground with Duckett in the 4th quarter. Forsett will make things interesting simply because he is a small target and a strong runner. I thought he did a credible job returning kicks last year as well. I am still looking to pick up some more depth at the position, probably a practice squad player or 2.

Oline is , of course, the biggest question mark. But with Mora's emphasis on conditioning, all the guys playing for a job except Locklear and assuming for the sake of the exercise that everyone is fully recovered from their injuries and will stay healthy, the ZBS will allow them to shine. Last year's breakdowns were an example of the danger of relying on precision timing and flawless execution when not everyone has played together for 5 years or more. The simplified assignments will allow for guys to just fire off and execute the block vs trying to devote their tiny windows of available time to finding their assigned man. When you don't have the luxury of the combined talent and experience we had in '05, you gotta adjust your system to the available talent and experience. Solari has coached up some stellar lines in KC out of mostly average players, and Knapp has squeezed offensive production out of some VERY marginal players.

Conclusion: Much better at ball control on the Offensive side, and fundamentally sound, attacking D. It will make for lots of ugly wins. Any geezers remember the personnel groups in that magical run of '84? A few very solid players (Joe Nash, Keith Butler, Dave Krieg, Dave Brown), a couple of really good ones (Easley, Largent, Jacob Green), and lots of question marks (David Hughes? Bruce Scholtz? Steve August? Terry Taylor?). Won ugly all the way to 12-4 and the AFC title game against Marino and Miami and came within a couple of plays of the Super Bowl. I would grade this year's team as significantly better than those guys.

Ugly wins are still wins.

Great read.

Nice writeup, Billt!

Seriously, though--this WR group the best ever is Hawk history?! Um, hardly. Burleson has NEVER been a consistent contributor, and is coming off MAJOR knee surgery, as is Branch--and him for the second time on the SAME KNEE! Branch has yet to make a whole season healthy for us, and may have lost his only redeeming quality, his speed and agility. Housh is aging, and not considered a real threat to stretch the field. What he is, is the most expensive posession reciever ever....Behind those guys we have a rookie WR who weighs TWO POUNDS more than Kelly Jennings and is generously listed at 5'-10" (though I do think Butler will be a great player soon), and after that are a bunch of scrubs, not one of whom has caught 15 passes in a season. Some have never caught an NFL regular season pass! Not even close to being a strength, or the best in Hawk history. Darrell Jackson, K-Rob, and Engram in thier one magical season before Robinsons addiction derailed his career was a much better group, as was Jackson/Engram/Jurevicius/Uhrban in 2005. Thats not even mentioning the 1984 squad with Largent etc....

While its nice to have Burelson and Branch back, at least for training camp, and its great to have Housh no matter how much he costs, it remains to be seen what these guys can do as a group.

I also think the D-line is going to be a bigger strength, and you never even mentioned Cory Redding. My bet is that neither Tapp nor Jackson sees much playing time unless Kerney goes down. I think Redding is going to be a monster at both DT and DE.

Hawkon, I hear you. Good yes, great no. We shall see as the games are played. I will root for our QB's though, as they are our QB's. But if it's not on the money this year from Hass, then I jump on the bandwagon to dump him. No more excuses for him or his every other year performances. Let's also hope Seneca gets the nod and is used in creative packages.

STTBM,

I stand by what I say about the receivers. I've personally watched every group of receivers the Seahawks have ever fielded play and while there have been some exceptional individual performers, (like Largent, Blades, etc.), remember that I assumed everyone would be healthy and we're talking about the top 4 who play the most. Housh, Branch, Burleson coupled with Butler's potential as a 4th receiver has to rank right up there with the finest group of receivers the Seahawks have ever put on the field.

Branch when healthy is is very aggresive and makes big plays all over the field. Housh is definately the best receiver Hass has ever thrown to (which is what I said). Burleson had a very good year catching 10 TD's the year before he was injured and seemed poised to have a career year. I think he has arrived as a veteran receiver. His speed and elusive ability to make YAC's make him a dangerous man on the field. Many of the Seahawk coaches have touted Butler as having a rare combination of speed and precise route running ability to go along with good hands. It is unusual to have a speed receiver who runs the precise routes a possession receiver runs. He's being called a bonafied polished receiver with speed as opposed to a speedy player trying to become a viable receiver as a lot of speedy receiver types are (see Kent for example). What really takes this group over the top is John Carlson. If you look at all the other wideout groups in Seahawk history, you won't find a tight end anywhere near Carlson's potential in the mix. He set almost every tight end receiving record for the Seahawks as a rookie last season and that should speak for itself as far as comparisons to previous tight ends.

I stand by my statement which was that this COULD be the best receiving corps in Seahawk history and is the best group Hass has seen. No big surprise there.

Its cool, Billt-we'll just have to agree to disagree!

I think Blades was a better WR than Housh, simply because Blades had at least 10 excellent seasons playing on lousy teams--with no Carson Palmer or Chris Johnson to take the heat off him.

And for 6 or 7 years, Darrell Jackson was a much better player than Housh. Jackson could do EVERYTHING, even go deep, and he single-handedly won games in 2002-2007 (especially in 04/04) where everyone in the stadium knew Hass was going to him for the first down. Housh has never performed in that situation, and he doesnt have the stats for all the years Jackson and Blades had. That said, as long as Housh avoids the multiple knee injuries that destroyed Jackson, he will play well longer. But he has never been the number 1, win the game guy Jackson was for us.

I never did understand all the hate directed at Jackson for wanting to be the highest paid WR on the team: he earned it. And Deion Brach did the EXACT same thing in New England, which is why we ended up with him. Branch will never have another 1,000 yard or 10 TD season, and he has never had 10 TD's in 10 games, as Jackson did on rickety knees in his last season for us. And Branch drops passes as well, though not as bad as Jackson. Still, Jerry Rice dropped tons of passes, and it didnt matter, because he was still the guy who would win the game on the next play...

Hopefully youre right and these guys have the best year ever. I would love that no end...

:woohoo:

Great job as always Bill! You da Man!

I do have a queazy feeling about our 2 1st round picks next season, since Ruskell has an aversion to taking offensive linemen early in the draft...
And of course, from a pessimistic (draftwise) view, it would really suck if we got to play Denver in the SB. #31 and #32 oh joy (ghod would I love that misery)

On special teams: footballoutsiders.com has us as the 9th-best unit in the league last year (and 5th-best in their weighted DVOA measure that prioritizes the latter part of the season). According to their advanced stats, we weren't the best at anything, but reliably above average on place kicking, kickoffs, and kickoff returns, and league average on punts and punt returns. Add getting Burleson back plus Butler (and a year more experience for Wilson and Forsett), and I think it's a strength for us, not a weakness.

Jeff,

The question is though, are they better than the defensive line, quarterbacks, receivers, and linebackers on the current team? Do they need less work than one of the 4 units ranked ahead of them?

I'm not sure that they do.

Your technology is so terrific!
I know an online store which has a lot of XX in this style, they are suit you very much,can reveal your personality better!
Go to have alook when some time left, there must be many surprises!,