From: jorgand@sumax.seattleu.edu (Dave Jorgan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Seattle Midseason (Wash. 16-3 over Seattle)
Date: 9 Nov 92 02:27:29 GMT
Organization: Seattle University, Seattle WA


	Seattle was beaten 16-3 by the Redskins in Seattle. The offense
was as lame as the score implies, but much better than it has been in 
recent games, which tells you just how putrid it has been. Seattle actually
moved the ball fairly well against the Redskins. Chris Warren had a 103
yard performance on 19 carries.  The offensive line protected Gelbaugh
well, but Gelbaugh didn't come through. He was practically ineffective. The
defense stopped the Redskins though much of that was due to Mark Rypien
looking really out of tune and throwing a lot of poor passes, I didn't
see anything the Seattle defense was doing that caused the poor passing.
Seattle dominated (!) the first half time of possession stats and twice
got inside the 15 yard line but had to settle for FG attempts, both of
22 yards, and Kasay missed one. Once Seattle got the lead the defense
collapsed, as the Redskins pushed up and down the field at will. The defense
held them out of the endzone for the first three drives, Washington settling
for 3 FG's, but then Joe Cain, LB, replacing injured Terry Wooden, blew the
coverage on Redskin H-back Terry Orr and he went 21 yards for the knockout
TD, ending up 16-3. In the second half the stats were totally reversed,
and the defense was unable to stop the Redskins and force them to
give up them ball quickly- always Washington mustered a long, time consuming
drive. The defense was simply pushed around in the fourth quarter. So, 
Seattle ends up 1-8, after a promising 1st half (relatively speaking.) How
low have they sunk? In the Kingdome, you could hear the Redskin QB calling
his signals. I have never heard the Kingdome so quiet that you could hear the
opposing QB call his signals and adjustments, no matter how bad the defeat
may have been.



********************   Mid-Season Review **********************************


	Offense:  Before the season began, Seattle was not expected to have a
great offense. The loss of seven starters turned what probably would have 
been an average offense into a abysmal one. The line has played badly, the
QBing has been poor, and the team as a whole leads the NFL in penalties, which
killed many of the few drives Seattle could muster. The offense has no spark.
Even when they get inside the 10 yard line, the non-existent passing game
prevents them from scoring TD's, but the offense has been so ineffectual they
haven't even been able to try many FG's. More, they get behind so much that
defenses just stack 8 men at the line of scrimmage and dare Seattle to throw,
which has the double blow of stuffing the running game and putting enormous
pressure on the QB. It's up the the QB to defeat this kind of scheme with 
quick reads and releases, but they all have failed at this. Stouffer was
mediocre, but compared to his successors he looks like Dan Marino. He lacked
flair for the big play, but didn't throw a lots of interceptions. His problem
was in making the big play, or even a medium-sized play. The fact that Seattle
didn't have any NFL-caliber starters at WR hurt all the QB's, but Stouffer
had a chance to progress. He is close to being ready, but Flores wants his
shoulder 100% before he brings him back, and given Seattle's erratic pass
protection, he cannot risk bringing him back early.
	Dan McGwire was terrible in relief of Stouffer, and improved to
mediocre against Dallas in his first start, but then was put out with a
broken hip. This sets back McGwire's progress at least a full year. He needs
starts to develop the poise and reading ability to be a NFL QB, and he won't
get them this year. McGwire is still considered a future for Seattle, but
Flores is worried that his hip injury may reduce McGwire's already limited
mobility further. Actually, as far as pure speed goes, McGwire isn't that
bad- he looks slower than he is due to his huge size, but he covers lots of
ground with each stride. McGwire is not quick, though, or nimble, and that's
more important when the pocket is collapsing under pressure. If Flores'
fear is true, then McGwire is done for as an NFL starter.
	Stan Gelbaugh got some fans because he hit some long passes in
garbage time of big Seattle losses and his scrambling is somewhat reminiscent
of Dave Krieg. He does have a good arm. But he doesn't really do much,
either. He throws lots of dink passes, but doesn't make first downs with
any of them. He has received better protection than any of the other QB's
(except for the Raider game) but hasn't done anything. Against the Redskins,
he got excellent protection, and Chris Warren ran for 100 yards, but he was
totally ineffective, hitting for only 30% of his passes and 2 interceptions.
He said he felt he could hold onto the starter's job even after Stouffer is
ready to return. Don't bet on it, Stan. Gelbaugh had a couple of drops, but
many of Gelbaugh's passes were horribly off target, heading either beyond
the sidelines, into huge, empty voids upfield, or into the hands of opposing
defenders. He doesn't really have much of a future as a NFL starter.

	Receivers- Seattle's receivers are still depleted. They have a bad
case of the dropsies, with Louis Clark and James Jones the primary
culprits. I doubt Clark will be back next year. The same goes for James Jones,
who used to be as sure handed a receiver as there was, but now drops a ton
of passes, and is getting old. Doug Thomas has spent a lot of time injured,
Dave Daniels showed some promise recently after being hurt the first part
of the season. Robb Thomas, the pickup from Kansas City, is fairly 
reliable, but no threat to go over 10-15 yards on his catches. The TE position
is extremely thin. Paul Green, the starter at the beginning of the year,
was a good receiver but not a complete TE. Ron Heller is even less so, and
waiver pickup Mike Jones could be one but is far too erratic. Blades will
not return unless he is 100%, Flores will not jeopardize his future and
bring him back early.

	Offensive line - Of course it has played horribly many times this
season, and the many changes have really hurt it, because teammwork and
continuity are vital in this unit. Joe Tofflemire is the bright spot on the
line, seizing the center position and holding onto it. He's far more
mobile than Grant Feasel, the old starter, and holds a lot less. He's a
good player. Darrick Brilz has replaced injured Bryan Millard all year and
has been pretty decent. John Hunter, who at the beginning of the season
had no NFL job, replaced injured Andy Heck and, if not great, is at least
not an embarrassment, and might get better. Now you say, these guys are all
decent, why is the line so bad? Well, the last two games they played fairly
well, playing very well against the Redskins, but they haven't developed
teamwork yet, and so while the talent is adequate they still suffer from a
lot of lapses.
	At tackle Seattle is struggling, though Ray Roberts has looked far
better the last two games. Bill Hitchcock has replaced oft-injured Ronnie
Lee, but how much his bone spurs have hurt his play it is hard to say from
my perspective. He was considered a player with a future last year, but
hasn't played well at all this season. Seattle has little to no depth in this
unit- all the second-stringers have already been put into the starting lineup.

	Running Backs- the bright spot of the offense. Chris Warren has been
excellent given the total lack of a passing game and little blocking and
stacked defenses. He now runs hard, and falls forward when tackled, which
all quality runners do. He breaks tackles, too, as he did on a 37 yard run
against the Redskins, where he cut back to the right after starting left,
broke two tackles at the line of scrimmage, and ran down the sidelines
for the big gain. If he doesn't pull a Derrick Fenner and disappear after one
good season, Seattle has their tailback for the next 5 years. He is regularly
put in motion and lined up at wide receiver. John L. Williams had a slow
start, and still hasn't gotten on track as a runner, but is coming on as a
receiver, now with 40 receptions. His reception average is really down,
though, since many of his receptions are due to Gelbaugh throwing him 3 yard
passes on 3rd and 10. Rueben Mayes hasn't played much at all, but he's
insurance in case of injury. Tracy Johnson is used as a blocker, not
a runner.


	Defense- This is the only good part of the team. It is good at 
holding down scores, and would be fine complemented by an offense that
could score some points. Because Seattle can't score, and actually gives
up scores directly on offense, it really suffers. But, it can't force the
issue. It's not a stopper defense, because it only has one big-play player-
Cortez Kennedy. He doesn't give the offense good field position, because
it can't stop opponents cold or make a lot of turnovers. And it may lack 
mental toughness. Against both the Giants and Redskins, they stonewalled
the opposition until the offense finally got a lead. Then, it collapsed
and just yielded, unable to stop either opponent from driving down the
field and scoring *the rest of the game.* Not just one series, the
opposition just cranked it up and drove down the field on every possession
after the initial Seattle lead. They get worn down, possibly due to age
and lack of size. Whatever the reason, they haven't proved mentally tough,
having far too many lapses. They may not have lost Seattle any games, but
they haven't won any (save for one) game for Seattle either, directly or
indirectly- in most of the losses the defense made plenty of mental
errors. Seattle has only one great player on this unit in Kennedy, a few good
ones in Porter, Wooden, and Wyman, and the rest are average.

	Defensive line: Cortez Kennedy- what more need be said? The other
players are undersized and either too old or too young. Jeff Bryant can still
play some, Joe Nash looks finished. He'll make a play every couple games
on tenacity and experience, but he can't hold his ground or penetrate any
more. Michael Sinclair still needs another season to add more weight, and
he's not shown his pass-rush skills yet. Natu Tuatagaloa appears to have
a future somewhere on the line, Tony Woods' stock is dropping due to his
inability to pressure the passer. All the linemen are small except for
Kennedy, Bryant topping them off at 270 or so. They have a surprisingly high
QB sack %, but not a high ranking in total sacks, because they are behind so
much teams just grind it out and run the ball. A telling statistic-  Seattle
is 2nd against the pass, but 23rd against the run, 12th in QB sack %. 

	Linebackers- The starting triad of Rufus Porter, Dave Wyman, and
Terry Wooden are good, but Wooden is hurt. Porter is not as good as some
people think. His main skill is in rushing the passer, and he's inconsistent
doing that, doing well at the Kingdome but poorly elsewhere. He has the 
speed to cover but not the skill or feel, and can be blown out by a blocker,
though he chases well. Wyman is having the best season of his career, and his
tackling is sure, his coverage decent, and he is doing a good job in the
middle. Coaches felt Wooden was having a great season and getting better, but
his knee flareup derailed his season, and now you have to wonder if his knee
will be a problem for the balance of his career. The backups are passable, but
no match for the starters.

	Defensive backs - This unit has really dropped off. The corners are 
can't really handle man-to man coverage this year, even though Seattle gets
more pressure on the QB than they used to. Seattle is 2nd ranked against
the pass, but it isn't because Seattle is a good cover team, it's because
opponents have no need to pass, since they are rarely behind and usually
have the lead. On those few situations where teams have trailed Seattle,
opponents have been able to go right after the secondary and pass at will.
	Eugene Robinson has been decent, but has hurt Seattle by making some
bad reads and not being in time to help the CB's deep. Robert Blackmon has
not been an impact player. He's not tackling "like Ronnie Lott," and 
unlike last year he's not made many plays on the ball. You don't even 
notice he's out there most games, and that is a grievous failing for a strong
safety. The backups are nothing special either, especially the younger
players, who are all rejects put on the roster out of desperation. Nesby
Glasgow also looks finished, and if he make the team next year Seattle
is in real trouble at DB. No insult to the big-hearted Glasgow, but he
has done little this year save to hold on kick-off returns (he did it
again against the Redskins.)


	The future: What would Seattle do if the draft were next month?
What should they do? (Assuming there is a draft, of course.) Well, let's
look at what Seattle has or hasn't done:

	They have drafted very poorly the last few years. This isn't a case
of not allowing players time to mature before passing judgement- I know it
takes 3-4 years before you can evaluate a draft, but the problem is the
players from these drafts aren't on the roster any more. So they can't
ever contribute. The 1990 draft was good- Kennedy and Wooden were great,
Blackmon at least a starter, Warren has a great future, and Hitchcock can
play some.  Not bad. In 1991, it is less good. McGwire might be a player,
Doug Thomas and Dave Daniels have to be given a chance to come on. John Kasay
was good, and Mike Sinclair may be a player. The jury's out, but at least
all these guys are on the roster. Average let us say.
	But this year's draft was a disaster. Ray Roberts has a good future,
he just needs experience. But, picks 2 and 4 are non-existent, due to the
horrible Millard trade and the trade for Mayes. Spitulski might be a good
LB. But, that's all folks. Everyone else is gone. Maybe Michael Bates could
be a player if he returns from track and Seattle gets him signed next year.
But even so, that's only three players off this years' draft. Everyone else
was waived, and they're not even on the practice squad. It was terrible.
Most likely Bates will not make it, and Spitulski is not a sure thing,
so it is entirely conceivable Seattle will have gotten only one player off
the 92 draft, which is inexcusable. 

	Had Seattle retained its 2nd round pick, they could have filled
many of their needs, even if they had restricted their draft to the local
Washington Husky college roster. Aaron Pierce could have been Seattle's
TE. Siupeli Malamala would have been a fine backup at tackle, with a chance
to be a good starter. Ed Cunningham could have helped at guard and center.
Going beyond the local roster, Keith Hamilton (taken by the Giants) or
Santana Dotson (starring for Tampa Bay) could have helped Seattle's defensive
line. The Rueben Mayes trade might be considered a failure because Mayes isn't
playing much, but I feel it was a good one, because he's insurance. If Warren
got hurt, Seattle would be dead if Mayes weren't there, they have no other
decent tailback on the roster and none of the pre-season TB's were a match
for Mayes, Mayes looked great in pre-season. Given the Seattle injury history,
it's no mistake to get a good backup for Warren, and worth the 4th round
price (plus, given the bad drafting, Seattle probably would have blown the
pick anyway.) Hurting worse than that was the questionable pick of Gary
Dandridge in the 5th round at safety. There were many other, higher rated
prospects, but Seattle went for the obscure player from Appalachian State,
and got burned when he they waived him off IR. If he hadn't been hurt, he'd
have been cut in pre-season. Mike Frier was cut, but Seattle could have
used him this year. Instead they kept Jacob Green, who they ended up waiving
anyway. Michael Bates was no help this year.


	Seattle looks to be in running for a very high pick. Rumors go that
Seattle would like Washington State Cougar product Drew Bledsoe. I don't
think this will happen, for two reasons: Seattle needs the #1 pick, and
the Patriots have a two game "lead" over them for that ( Seattle won once,
and that win was over New England.) If Bledsoe, should he come out, isn't
the sure-fire, drop down dead #1 pick overall, and falls to #2 or later
(the Patriots need a QB badly) should Seattle take him? He has to be a
sure fire prospect for Seattle to take him. The other reason is Seattle
has McGwire still on the roster, who offensive coordinator Larry Kennan
and Flores like. People like to call him a bust, but he simply hasn't
had a chance to prove himself yet. I'd have to see him play for at least a
half a season, with even mediocre protection and average receivers, before
calling him a failure, and even then it would be premature, really. Bledsoe
probably would do no better under the same conditions. McGwire seemed to look
more comfortable and less mechanical even in the short time he was in the 
Dallas game. But, if McGwire's hip is really, permanently injured, or
Bledsoe is the next GREAT QB, and Seattle can get him, then of course
Bledsoe is the man.

	If not, then Seattle likes local college product Lincoln Kennedy,
huge offensive tackle for the Huskies. Having the two Kennedys (Cortez
and Lincoln) would mean 600 + pounds of beef for both lines, going a long
way to make Seattle a truly physical, powerful team. Lincoln would give
Seattle bookend tackles for the next decade teamed with Roberts, though
like Roberts he will need at least a year of seasoning. Hopefully, unlike
Roberts he'll not have to start and can take his time learning. A lot depends
of Bill Hitchcock, who inexplicably went from up-and-coming young player to
stiff this year. If off-season ankle surgery fixes his legs up, Hitchcock
might yet be a good player - I have the suspicion his bone spurs are what
makes him look bad this season, but Seattle has no one else to play there.
There is word that even Kennedy might be considered the #1 overall pick,
which despite Kennedy's quality would mean this is a poor draft (a offensive
tackle going #1.) If this is the case, and Bledsoe doesn't come out, then 
Seattle might be able to trade up to get him fairly cheaply. Assuming, of
course, cheapskate Ken Behring will pay #1 pick dollars to a offensive
lineman.

	But, if Seattle has the #1 or 2-3 picks, and there is a great
defensive lineman or pass-rushing LB on the board, Seattle should go for
him. They need impact players, and Seattle isn't so strong at any position
that they can say we don't need one of these guys. Better to get an impact
player than a good player at at a position of need. because they need big
plays for than anything. A Steve Emtman or Quentin Coryatt-type player
would really boost the defense from a decent one to a stopper one. However, if
there isn't such a impact defensive player, go for Kennedy.
	Forget running back, even Marshall Faulk or Garrison Hearst, unless
Seattle's pick slips below the 6th slot somehow, and even then consider
trading down for more picks later. Sure, you may say it is crazy to pass on
a great back, but even a great back won't help Seattle. A great RB might
make Seattle respectable, but then we're back in the Chuck Knox era of
.500 ball. Seattle needs to build the rest of the team first, and without
a offensive line Seattle could be drafting another Curt Warner- a great back
who played well and made his team respectable, but never reached his full
greatness because he played with a very weak offensive line. Of course, if
the RB is by far the best player left on the draft table, and you can't make
a good trade for him, you take him. You don't pass on great players unless
you can get full value in return, naturally. Plus, unless Chris Warren 
pulls a Derrick Fenner and vanishes next season, he'll be plenty enough
runner for Seattle, and can do things even Faulk and Hearst cannot (like
line up at wide receiver in the Seahawk motion schemes.)

	Later on in the draft, Seattle has to address what they didn't
address above, of course, and also take a look at defensive backs. 
Right now, Seattle looks really thin at DB. Patrick Hunter is
27, in his 7th season, Dwayne Harper is 26 in his 5th season, and both are
erratic. Their backups, Jefferson and Davis, are 28 and 29. CB is a position
where even at 28 you can fall off pretty dramatically, CB's don't last
long for the most part. It also takes 3-4 years for a CB to develop. Unless
Seattle gets some young CB's now, they won't have anyone ready to take over
when the starters fall off. At times you suspect the fall off has already
begun given the poor play this season. But, Seattle has no prospects at all,
their rookie DB's are all reject fill-ins. A safety would be a big help too.
Dedrick Dodge might be a good player, so he's a young prospect, but the
washout of Dandridge meant Glasgow soldiered on one more season than he 
should have. Seattle could use a big, strong, athletic safety (who couldn't)
but they don't even have a prospect who fills that description, so they
ought to try for one of those. They have no 3rd round pick due to the
 Millard trade. Finally, a TE would be really nice, perhaps they may
have a shot a getting Ferrell Edmunds from the Dolphins in the off-season.
At WR, Seattle should give the players they have a chance to recover from
injury and prove themselves before drafting any others. This shouldn't
be a high priority, though a punt and kick returner would be really nice to
given Warren a break. So, in order of priority,

			OL-DB-TE-DL-LB 

is how I see it, but with the stipulation the OL and DB guys have to be
definitely superior prospects, by a good margin. Even though Seattle needs the
OL/DB/TE guys more, never, never ignore a good DL or LB (especially DL.) And,
the Drew Bledsoe rule described above applies.

	Seattle has little to fear from total free-agency- who cares if
the personnel from a 1-15 or 2-14 team flies the coop? All they have to do
is keep Cortez Kennedy, and a couple of other players, the rest are free
to go. If Behring will spend the $$$, it could help rather than hinder
Seattle. But, probably he won't. Will Seattle overcome New England's lead
for the #1 pick? Stay tuned and see.






Dave Jorgan
jorgand@sumax.seattleu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro