Quick thoughts - Seahawks - ColtFreaks.com

GoBigBlue88 · #1 10-02-2017, 08:14 AM

1. I only saw the first 3 quarters, but that was enough for me. Uverse here, so no WTHR. Had to watch a stream, which crapped out at the end of the 3rd quarter. Sounds like for the better.

2. Actually thought there were some notable positives...

Defensive line continues to look legit.

Defensive backs are a good unit. Farley making me look dumb for saying I didn't see anything more than a special-teamer in him. He looked pretty rangy last night. Malik Hooker just finds his way to INTs. The back-end of this defense is pretty solid, although you can nitpick about needing a better third safety to rotate in or Vontae Davis not being physical enough in his first game back.

The kid who came in at center did a heckuva job considering the circumstances. Leads me to believe Joe Philbin does a pretty decent job preparing these guys, and most issues just come down to talent. He should have been a wreck. He wasn't.

Sanchez looks like the real deal.

Future of this team still looks bright, IMO. I think my biggest takeaway in the early season is that Ballard -- despite a few misses you're just going to have with young GMs -- really does have a good eye. The QB mess was egregious and someone will have an interesting story to tell there one day. But the guys he brought in largely look like guys who will keep you in any ballgame Andrew Luck is under center.

3. This team really misses Marlon Mack, IMO. Even though he's struggled in early season, there's just no surprise element to Colts backfield right now. Everyone else runs at the exact same pace as Gore.

4. Jacoby Brissett regressed to the mean ... which you had to expect, on the road in SEA. I like that the pick-six didn't destroy his confidence. I like that he does play the part, not just look the part, of a leader. I don't like that he doesn't climb the pocket or seem to have particularly good vision, but honestly, that's why he's a high-end QB2 and not a QB1. QB2s eventually give you QB2 play. And that's fine. This team needs a high-end QB2; I still think Brissett is exactly that.

5. I do wish Brissett would stop making Kamar Aiken his go-to guy. If you're going to be throwing interceptable passes, I'd prefer they be thrown to Hilton or Moncrief instead. You at least give yourself a chance.

6. A bit concerned that Jack Doyle got paid and then took his eye off the prize a bit. He needs to hit the reset button on himself; he's not playing to his contract. You can say the same about Jon Hankins, btw.

7. Unsurprisingly, ILBs are still the fatal flaw of the defense. Jon Bostic does an admirable job and is underrated for how he organizes folks, but he's the cream of that crop, and that crop features a player who shouldn't ever see a base package formation in Antonio Morrison. Morrison is awful, and looks more awful every game.

8. I didn't expect it in Year One with Ballard, so I'm not overly concerned, but this team needs to figure out some kind of return game. Quan Bray is maybe the most boring, unspectacular return option in the league right now. Some of that is just a lack of blocking ever set up for him. Some of it is just Bray not really looking that explosive as he's come back from injury.

9. Vujnovich and Haeg remain the weak points on the OL, IMO. I think Ballard needs to upgrade in free agency next year. He needs the draft capital for pass-rushers and athletic ILBs.

10. This team is no worse than 2-2 with Luck, has an outside chance of being 3-1. I think the roster is ahead of where I expected it to be, believe it or not. I really don't think a major rebuild is needed, although clearly EDGE, OL & ILB need serious attention.

The only reason we're giving this team shit is because Pagano is an obvious lame duck coach and Irsay said some incredibly dumb things before the season begins. Put in a new coaching staff and get the owner to stop writing checks his actions can't cash, and I think most people are at least content with the direction of this franchise.

DrSpaceman · #2 10-02-2017, 08:38 AM

Agree with all you said, except the run D and collapsed late in the second half.

I think what we are seeing is flashes of individual potential from a whole bunch of players. What they struggle with is playing a whole game and everyone playing well together at the same time.

ANd much of that still comes down to coaching

I didn't expect a win, so that is not disappointing.

But I have never been so filled with hope based on one half of football only to see it all utterly and totally collapse in about 20 minutes of awful football.

There are still too many injuries, too much inexperience and too little quality coaching, along with continued OL problems, for this team to beat quality opponents.

But I am still hopeful for the future. I do think there is a lot of talent and potential in the D. But Pagano just has to go, we all know it.

HoosierinFL · #3 10-02-2017, 09:24 AM

The run D collapsed because they started running to the outside. We need ILBs that can run sideline to sideline and cover the field to defend those runs. Seattle figured that out at the half, realizing our d-line was gonna hold up in the middle. They knew that if they started forcing our defense to run laterally they wouldn't be able to keep up.

GoBigBlue88 · #4 10-02-2017, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrSpaceman

Agree with all you said, except the run D and collapsed late in the second half.

The part of the game I missed! (Thankfully?)

Coltsalr · #5 10-02-2017, 12:12 PM

The D also collapsed partially (fully?) due to it being completely worn out due to the offense having the inability to stay on the field.

The Seahawks weren't really running long, methodical, clock-eating drives in which they moved at a glacial pace. They were relying off bigger explosive plays. They just happened to get a lot of them because they were on the field so often.

Doesn't completely excuse the defense, but the offense did them no favors.

DrSpaceman · #6 10-02-2017, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coltsalr

The D also collapsed partially (fully?) due to it being completely worn out due to the offense having the inability to stay on the field.

The Seahawks weren't really running long, methodical, clock-eating drives in which they moved at a glacial pace. They were relying off bigger explosive plays. They just happened to get a lot of them because they were on the field so often.

Doesn't completely excuse the defense, but the offense did them no favors.

I don't know about that because the D was barely on the field in the first half and then the Seahawks started with the ball the second half. So you are criticizing one or two short drives in the 3rd quarter?

Luck4Reich · #7 10-02-2017, 04:17 PM

The worst thing about these games is every Monday comes and goes yet Pagano is till here.

omahacolt · #8 10-02-2017, 05:15 PM

i think you are a bit too hard on hankins. not sure what you expected of him but he is playing pretty much how i thought he would.

i think woods is very underrated. i like that dude.

wtf is with aiken getting so much playing time? the dude has done nothing

VeveJones007 · #9 10-02-2017, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HoosierinFL

The run D collapsed because they started running to the outside. We need ILBs that can run sideline to sideline and cover the field to defend those runs. Seattle figured that out at the half, realizing our d-line was gonna hold up in the middle. They knew that if they started forcing our defense to run laterally they wouldn't be able to keep up.

Absolutely this. And Sheard has no lateral quickness to jump off a block and get a RB before he rounds the edge, but that's a "nice-to-have" in an EDGE player. As long as he's setting the edge, the ILBs should be flowing to the ball.

VeveJones007 · #10 10-02-2017, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coltsalr

The D also collapsed partially (fully?) due to it being completely worn out due to the offense having the inability to stay on the field.

The Seahawks weren't really running long, methodical, clock-eating drives in which they moved at a glacial pace. They were relying off bigger explosive plays. They just happened to get a lot of them because they were on the field so often.

Doesn't completely excuse the defense, but the offense did them no favors.

The defense was on the field all of 10 minutes in the first half. Wearing down wasn't the issue last night.

The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to GoBigBlue88 For This Useful Post:
1965southpaw (10-02-2017), Coltsalr (10-02-2017), Dewey 5 (10-02-2017), DrSpaceman (10-02-2017), omahacolt (10-02-2017), Pez (10-02-2017), Racehorse (10-02-2017), Spike (10-02-2017), VeveJones007 (10-02-2017)

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to HoosierinFL For This Useful Post:
Maniac (10-02-2017), VeveJones007 (10-02-2017)

The Following User Says Thank You to DrSpaceman For This Useful Post:
VeveJones007 (10-02-2017)

The Following User Says Thank You to Luck4Reich For This Useful Post:
Spike (10-02-2017)

The Following User Says Thank You to VeveJones007 For This Useful Post:
DrSpaceman (10-02-2017)