Seahawks re-sign Bobby Wagner

[BHF]

ok, well I make so many mistakes, I need help seeing the worse errors from the minor ones. Lil help, amigo?

How about actually reading post 104?

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

oh yeah I read that. It asked using what metric. I responded to use points allowed by the defense. You guys allowed 3-14-7-6-6. I haven't tallied the other teams, but I'd be very surprised if that wasn't top 5. You made some obscure reference to TB and Chicago, neither of which you played in 2014's regular season. So I still need your help, hombre.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

oh now2 I see you said last 8 not last 5. Still..those three games, they allowed 3,24 and 17. When you add up those last 8 weeks, where do they rank? I'd be pretty damn surprised to find many ahead of Seattle last year. Remind me, who was better?

 

[BHF]

oh yeah I read that. It asked using what metric. I responded to use points allowed by the defense. You guys allowed 3-14-7-6-6. I haven't tallied the other teams, but I'd be very surprised if that wasn't top 5. You made some obscure reference to TB and Chicago, neither of which you played in 2014's regular season. So I still need your help, hombre.

Read it again.

I have faith in you buddy.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Appreciate it. That's good of you. Of course I responded to 104, and you haven't addressed that, so I'm still left mystified. But keep on keepin' on, Seattle!

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

OK maybe I am being obtuse without realizing it. I responded to your question 'according to what metric", and I responded with Seatte's points allowed, and you think I should re-read it, and that's cool, I appreciate the dyslexia worry, but I'm still sort of lost.

What 5 teams allowed fewer points than Seattle last year during the last 8 weeks of the season?

(and if you tell me Chicago, why, I'm gonna get mad)

 

[BHF]

Appreciate it. That's good of you. Of course I responded to 104, and you haven't addressed that, so I'm still left mystified. But keep on keepin' on, Seattle!

Still mystified that Seattle's rankings were being discussed in that post, huh?

 

[BHF]

Still mystified that Seattle's rankings were being discussed in that post, huh?

Werent. I swear to God, Hammer....get a fucking edit feature working.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

could you please just spit it out? Why should I have been mystified by your rankings discussion? I am pretty damn sure they were Top 5 in points allowed, arguably the most crucial statistic, and you aren't responding to this. Are you just one of these annoying Seattle faux-intellectuals, or are you going to clue me in on your vast secret explanation to that basic question?

 

[Logicallylethal]

Can we put this Tony McDaniel thing to rest already

He was a valuable and productive starter for us last year but we have two DTs on the roster who are in most people's opinion better than Tony McDaniel.

It would have been great to keep Tony as depth and rotate him in for run situations, but a team like the Seahawks don't have that luxury.

No one is taking anything away from what McDaniels did and the player that he is. But he was expendable and he is not a core player.

Of course losing any player will make an impact. No one is denying that...yet it seems in post after post you try to insinuate that Seahawk fans are in denial. The key is being able to replace that player with someone of similar talent, skill level, and production.

Brandon Mebane and Jordan Hill are the two DTs that will anchor our defensive line. Learn more about these two guys and you will understand why Seahawk fans aren't the least bit worried or surprised by McDaniel's cut.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Werent. I swear to God, Hammer....get a fucking edit feature working.

yeah Hammer. One that makes his nonsense seem less pompous and stupid. Come one Hammer. Sheesh.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Logically, that's a far and honest post. Accept it, and hope for the best, and maybe it will work out. Good man.

 

[BHF]

could you please just spit it out? Why should I have been mystified by your rankings discussion? I am pretty damn sure they were Top 5 in points allowed, arguably the most crucial statistic, and you aren't responding to this. Are you just one of these annoying Seattle faux-intellectuals, or are you going to clue me in on your vast secret explanation to that basic question?

Yes, yes. The secret explanation is going to be the basis of Dan Brown's next blockbuster. If you promise to take it to your deathbed, I'll give you a clue that might lead you to enlightenment.

look at the stats you will see that the Packers were a top 5 defense the second half of the season when Matthews played inside

Use this wisdom wisely. The fate of nations is in your hands.

 

[BHF]

yeah Hammer. One that makes his nonsense seem less pompous and stupid. Come one Hammer. Sheesh.

And there is that doubling down!

 

[flyerhawk]

yeah Hammer. One that makes his nonsense seem less pompous and stupid. Come one Hammer. Sheesh.

This seemed needlessly obnoxious.

 

[LambeauLegs]

Top 5 defense the last eight games? Using what metric?

Go to the NFL website and click on Stats then team stats then total defense for both rushing and passing yards allowed per game. This is how the NFL ranks the team defenses. If you take the rushing yards allowed and passing yards allowed of all the NFL teams in the last 8 games since Matthews started playing in the middle you will see that the Packers were a top 5 defense the last half of the season.

The first half of the season was so fucked up the numbers they got then were so high that they finished 15th over all. See I did the calculations last season to see just how much improved in the last half of the season. In the early season the Packer defense was ranked almost worst in rush defense and total defense was like 25th. They improved to finish 15th over all so had to have some decent defense in the second half of the season to improve to 15th.

If we look at what the defense actually did in the last 8 games of the year with Matthews in the middle they allowed 1753 passing yards against them for an average of 219 yards per game. If you look at the year end NFL stats a team that allowed 219 yards per game on passing defense would have been ranked #5. Number 6 would have been San Fran with 220.7 yards per game.

If we look at rushing defense the last half of the season the Packers allowed 691 yards rushing for an average against per game of 86. A defense allowing 86 yards per game would have been the #4 defense just ahead of Baltimore.

So yes in the yards per game average in pass defense would have been 5th in the NFL and the Rush defense average in the last 8 games would have been 4th.

If you look at total defense adding them together the Packer defense allowed 305 total yards per game which on the NFL final rankings at season end would have been ranked 3rd in the NFL tied with Denver.

So yes a #3 ranking in the last 8 weeks is a top 5 defense for the last half of the year.

When I post things on these boards I dont just make shit up I have looked or researched what I am talking about.

The benefit with this year is we will have the same defense starting out the whole season so that should be helpful

People will be surprised with the Packer defense this year as most because of the horrid start to last year did not realize just how good they were the last half of the season

 

[LambeauLegs]

Can we put this Tony McDaniel thing to rest already

He was a valuable and productive starter for us last year but we have two DTs on the roster who are in most people's opinion better than Tony McDaniel.

It would have been great to keep Tony as depth and rotate him in for run situations, but a team like the Seahawks don't have that luxury.

No one is taking anything away from what McDaniels did and the player that he is. But he was expendable and he is not a core player.

Of course losing any player will make an impact. No one is denying that...yet it seems in post after post you try to insinuate that Seahawk fans are in denial. The key is being able to replace that player with someone of similar talent, skill level, and production.

Brandon Mebane and Jordan Hill are the two DTs that will anchor our defensive line. Learn more about these two guys and you will understand why Seahawk fans aren't the least bit worried or surprised by McDaniel's cut.

well most are posting about cutting this player for the simple reason that if one would go back and look at all the Seattle threads from back last year talking about how Seattle had a nice advantage having a cheap QB they could spend money in other places giving them better depth and such because they didnt need to spend it on a QB

Non Seattle fans were posting that will only last so long and once you have to pay a $20 mil QB you will have to get rid of people and depth will not be as good.

The things is there were Seattle fans telling the rest of us that Seattle had an amazing guy doing the contracts and that they would not be hurt by having to sign your QB to big money and depth would not be hurt.

So now because a guy was cut just because he coudnt fit under the cap the non Seattle fans are trying to point out that see it will affect the team in a negative way with having less money to spend on other players.

For some reason some of the Seattle fans didnt see this coming and that is why there is this talk about the payer cut for cap reasons.

And I am sure you will find it is not just me on these boards who have seen some Seattle fans saying signing Wilson would not cause the Seahawks and cap issues and having to cut other players to keep him.

It just got a lot harder to field a team with good quality depth for the Seahawks

 

[jakedog56]

Not Smith, but your two o linemen, and your starting CB and your most important DT, yes. I definitely think that the most important DT on a great defense counts as a "core player." Sorry, I can't help it.

LOL! Seriously?!?

McDaniel was a rotation DT. Losing him hurts depth. Hill broke into the starting line up and was a monster until he had an injury issue at the end of the year. Mebane has been our best DT for years now.

The fact that both Mebane and Hill both had injury issues at the end of the year is the worrisome issue but stating the McDaniel was our best DT shows how little you actually know about the team. Would have liked to keep him based on that but the FO obviously has other plans.

 

[Podunkparte]

Mebane and Hill are your starters now that McDaniel is gone. McDaniel (449) logged more snaps last year than Mebane (280) and Hill (362) by a wide margin. Hill only missed three games.

Look, they may be fine, but acting like it's nothing is probably an exercise in denial.

Haven't read passed this because of so much stupid, but McDaniel played so much last year, which all of the naysayers are using to pretend he's a "starter", because our real starter, Brandon Mebane was injured.

Mebane is the better player, not McDaniel. Losing McDaniel while keeping Mebane doesn't prove your point that the Hawks are losing core players.

Have I made this simple enough for you?

 

[jakedog56]

well, for some reason, McDaniel was put in by the coaching staff on nearly 2x more plays than Mebane. But OK, maybe you know something the Seattle coaching staff doesn't, and you are right, and McDaniel is irrelevant.

Seahawks fans have to be the most thin-skinned in the country. This isn't even a criticism of the Seahawks, I'm just observing that they lost a few core guys, and you guys get so defensive that you resort to acting like the DT who got more snaps than anyone else on a team fueled by defense doesn't matter. OK boys, have a nice day. Feel free to expound more deep football wisdom to the rest of us ignorant dolts.

So you state something that is completely incorrect and then complain that Seahawks fans are to blame when they correct you?!?

Hmmmmmmm....