2015 Seahawks: Our offense doesnt need Lynch, Graham or Rawls

DanoooME · Sep 22, 2015

wibi said:
I havent been able to find any video of that online. Would love to see the all-22 video on it because what I saw was Britt having the ball and then the call coming. If they made the call before Britt came out of the pile with the ball then I dont have much of a complaint.

Found a great view of the offsides call showing the right side of the line moving well before the snap occurred.
https://vine.co/v/ePDdhWb0Qan

The end zone view of the All-22 cut off the play shortly after the dog pile started. The high sideline camera showed the fumble and a little bit after, but before the call was made.

NBC had the best angles on it. It looked like a Packer kicked it up into his arms and that's what the ref saw and gave possession to the Packers before Britt ripped it away.

RedOctober3829 · Sep 23, 2015

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter 2m2 minutes ago
Seahawks' safety Kam Chancellor is planning to return to Seattle today, per @Stephenasmith and me.

JohnnyK · Sep 23, 2015

https://twitter.com/MikeGarafolo/status/646677984133414912

This is the plan, per sources. However, still issues to be ironed out with fines, contract.

Wonder how long it will take him to get into game shape, too.

GeorgeCostanza · Sep 23, 2015

Jesus. Wish you had 'spoilered' that first one.

DanoooME · Sep 23, 2015

Still don't know how he missed blocking that FG.

Welcome back Kam, all is forgiven.

normstalls · Sep 23, 2015

DanoooME said:
Still don't know how he missed blocking that FG.

Welcome back Kam, all is forgiven.

And luckily for Seattle, Kam forgives the Seahawks and his teammates.

"Ima go help my teammates that are understanding of my position and the ones who aren't," Chancellor said in the text message. "God forgives all, why can't i? Time to help us get back to the big dance. I can address business after the season. Me and Marshawn started a mission 2 years ago. I can't let my Dawg down....Real talk."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13722598/kam-chancellor-end-contract-holdout-return-seattle-seahawks

lars10 · Sep 23, 2015

I assume he got penalized on that first one?

BlackJack · Sep 23, 2015

lars10 said:
I assume he got penalized on that first one?

It certainly looks like the ref is going for his flag at the end of the clip but I can't tell for certain.

Valek123 · Sep 23, 2015

GeorgeCostanza said:
Jesus. Wish you had 'spoilered' that first one.

Yeah that was a flagged, he has a real tendency to lead with his helmet even when if it's not a helmet to helmet it has a real probability of shortening his career or ending up with him being taken off the field on a stretcher. He's an incredible athlete and enormous talent but if he makes just a minor adjustment he could probably extend his career many years and improve his ability extend his potential of making $. I'd take him any day, so don't take this as a knock on him but rather a legitimate concern in the days of concussion protocols that he may hit himself out of the nfl early. He reminds me of a more athletic, longer Rodney Harrison and if he takes care of his body he may have the career path also. Huge return for Seattle's D...

/edit - can't spell

ThePrideofShiner · Sep 23, 2015

Fantastic news to wake up to.

Gunfighter 09 · Sep 23, 2015

Am I crazy to think that the Seahawks went to Chancellor with a trade proposal and gave him the option to get traded or report back on his current contract? I think he is motivated by a desire not to play in Jacksonville or Oakland more than a sudden remembrance of how much loyalty he has to Marshawn Lynch, great guy that he is.

As for the videos, are there any other safeties in the league that could destroy a tackle or guard like that?

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) · Sep 23, 2015

lars10 said:
I assume he got penalized on that first one?

Why do you assume big hits are illegal hits? The video quality in the .gif is pretty poor but it doesn't look like head to head contact.

DJnVa · Sep 23, 2015

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Why do you assume big hits are illegal hits?

Because he actually was flagged on it.

tims4wins · Sep 23, 2015

Defenseless receiver, no?

Red Right Ankle · Sep 23, 2015

Yeah, guy's feet weren't on the ground.

coremiller · Sep 23, 2015

wibi said:
This is the rule per nfl.com

I'll agree that Davis definitely falls into a2 but then you have to also have a part from the b sub-section. I dont see that Chancellor hit the head or neck area as the initial contact was dead center on the numbers and it never rode up to the head or neck area. Chancellor also had his head up the whole time but still initiated contact with his shoulder not his crown or forehead part of the helmet

The rule isn't "initiate contact" with the helmet, it's "make forcible contact" with the helmet. It doesn't matter if he hit with the shoulder first. I can't tell from the replay whether Chancellor led with the shoulder or the helmet, but his helmet clearly made contact. Vernon Davis suffered a concussion from that hit. It's exactly the sort of injury the rule is designed to prevent.

amarshal2 · Sep 23, 2015

coremiller said:
The rule isn't "initiate contact" with the helmet, it's "make forcible contact" with the helmet. It doesn't matter if he hit with the shoulder first. I can't tell from the replay whether Chancellor led with the shoulder or the helmet, but his helmet clearly made contact. Vernon Davis suffered a concussion from that hit. It's exactly the sort of injury the rule is designed to prevent.

The "forcible contact with the head or neck area" is about the defenseless player, not the player initiating contact. He's not allowed to lead with the crown of helmet but he didn't appear to, as Wibi pointed out. I think Wibi is correct that this was a technically legal hit.

However, the fact that VD suffered a concussion from an obviously brutal hit makes one wonder if it should be illegal. The problem is how you write rules to get rid of this type of hit? Outside of an extremely subjective unnecessary roughness determined by "you know it when you see it" that is also unfair to the defender or disallowing all contact with a defenseless receiver (another step towards flag football) -- I'm not sure you can, which is the problem football faces.

Edit: I watched parts of this to help me understand it a bit and was struck by the absurdity of the whole thing. Striking a defenseless player really hard below the head or neck area is not going to stop concussions in any way. Those players are going to get whipped around and smack their heads in any number of directions and suffer the consequences. Exhibit A is just up above.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap2000000114070/Rules-for-hits-on-defenseless-players

coremiller · Sep 23, 2015

amarshal2 said:
The "forcible contact with the head or neck area" is about the defenseless player, not the player initiating contact. He's not allowed to lead with the head but he didn't appear to, as Wibi pointed out.

I think Wibi is correct that this was a technically legal hit. However, the fact that VD suffered a concussion makes one wonder if this type of hit should be illegal. The problem is how you write rules to get rid of this type of hit. Outside of an extremely subjective unnecessary roughness determined by "you know it when you see it" that is also unfair to the defender or disallowing all contact with a defenseless receiver -- I'm not sure you can, which is the problem football faces.

I was referring to (b)(2): "Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body." This refers specifically to the defensive player's helmet, not the defenseless player's. And it doesn't matter if you "lead" with the head; all the matters is 1) "lowering the head" and 2) "making forcible contact" with the helmet. Chancellor did both.

soxfan121 · Sep 23, 2015

wibi said:
I'd bet you see him play a few snaps on Sunday if they can workout the details on the contract today. I'd also be very surprised if Chancellor doesnt fire his agent given how much bad advice he was given by him .

This is a pretty common refrain from fans in the wake of a holdout, but I don't think it's true in this case, or in general. First, I doubt very highly the agent told Chancellor to holdout, because fines eat into the agent's % as well. Second, unless the player has serious leverage, holdouts rarely result in new contracts, so there's no money to be made. Third, Chancellor's public statements from the outset have pretty clearly made the case that the player thought the player was being under-compensated, so even if the agent encouraged Chancellor to hold out, it was still the player's decision not to show up for work.

Basically, it's really easy to blame the agent, especially for fans who want to cheer for their favorite player. But it's probably not the agent's fault.

In any case, I suspect that this will be Chancellor's (and Lynch's) last season in Seattle because history suggests that one holdout becomes a second holdout - and in this case the team "policy" will no longer apply, so they'll either need to pay him, cut him or trade him.

amarshal2 · Sep 23, 2015

coremiller said:
I was referring to (b)(2): "Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body." This refers specifically to the defensive player's helmet, not the defenseless player's. And it doesn't matter if you "lead" with the head; all the matters is 1) "lowering the head" and 2) "making forcible contact" with the helmet. Chancellor did both.

I don't think he lowered his head to use the "top/crown or forehead/hairline parts of the helmet" but it's clearly a subjective call that we might not be able to agree on.

edit: I also don't think the distinction matters beyond the flag. It's a pretty horrible hit you don't like to see regardless of his exact head position. The head position is a red herring created by the NFL to be able to claim they're making the game safer.

coremiller · Sep 23, 2015

soxfan121 said:
This is a pretty common refrain from fans in the wake of a holdout, but I don't think it's true in this case, or in general. First, I doubt very highly the agent told Chancellor to holdout, because fines eat into the agent's % as well. Second, unless the player has serious leverage, holdouts rarely result in new contracts, so there's no money to be made. Third, Chancellor's public statements from the outset have pretty clearly made the case that the player thought the player was being under-compensated, so even if the agent encouraged Chancellor to hold out, it was still the player's decision not to show up for work.

Basically, it's really easy to blame the agent, especially for fans who want to cheer for their favorite player. But it's probably not the agent's fault.

In any case, I suspect that this will be Chancellor's (and Lynch's) last season in Seattle because history suggests that one holdout becomes a second holdout - and in this case the team "policy" will no longer apply, so they'll either need to pay him, cut him or trade him.

Has he changed agents since his last contract? If so, I could see the new agent pushing for a holdout, since the new guy doesn't get any commission from the previous contract and probably doesn't lose anything from the fines (depending on how the representation agreement is structured). The new agent's incentive is to get a new contract ASAP, so that he gets paid. You see this all the time European soccer.

And Wibi, the video in the GIF you posted above with the shot from behind showing Chancellor's numbers shows him pretty clearly lowering his head. Of course most hits involve that sort of forcible contact with the helmet, but most hits are not against defenseless receivers, so the rule wouldn't apply to most hits.

soxfan121 · Sep 23, 2015

wibi said:
Lynch has $5M in dead money for 2016 if he is traded or cut. I cant see them moving him unless something significant happens.

Until we see what contract concessions Seattle gave to Kam I'm not sure anyone can make a solid guess as to what will happen to him in 2016.

I'd bet both are with Seattle in 2016 and then both are gone for 2017 as on the current deals Lynch has $2.5M and Chancellor has $1M dead money in 2017 if traded or released.

You think Lynch (& Chancellor) are playing in 2016 under the deals they are currently under? I disagree, especially after KC's citation of Lynch, and their pretty obvious plan to challenge "team policy".

I agree that it's possible the Seahawks did something other than negate the pre-season fines, but I doubt (again, based on what we know from KC's statement) that new money was added or future salary converted, meaning he's back because there was only money to be lost (in fines) going forward.

Based on the facts available at this time, the idea that either player will be back with the Seahawks in 2016 is optimistic.

wibi said:
He's with the same agent (Alvin Keels) that he has been since he joined the NFL. Keels has a bit of a history for advising his clients in his best interest and not theirs.

Did not know this...got a link?

lars10 · Sep 23, 2015

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Why do you assume big hits are illegal hits? The video quality in the .gif is pretty poor but it doesn't look like head to head contact.

1. I assumed because I thought I saw the ref reaching for a flag.
2. Also because Chancellor's head hits the body but seems to continue into the head to make Davis' head snap back.
3. Because of how Davis looks after the hit..he's obviously out.

None of this means it's not necessarily a legal hit.. I do kind of think Kam launched a bit but I'm not sure how else he could tackle there given the end zone and how late he is to get over...he has to cover a lot of ground to make that hit happen.

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) · Sep 23, 2015

lars10 said:
1. I assumed because I thought I saw the ref reaching for a flag.
2. Also because Chancellor's head hits the body but seems to continue into the head to make Davis' head snap back.
3. Because of how Davis looks after the hit..he's obviously out.

None of this means it's not necessarily a legal hit.. I do kind of think Kam launched a bit but I'm not sure how else he could tackle there given the end zone and how late he is to get over...he has to cover a lot of ground to make that hit happen.

This is always my problem with these types of hits...I'm not sure what Chancellor could have done differently. Maybe he could have lowered his target area, but Davis was in mid air when Chancellor had to set up his hit and despite Davis coming down back to the field the hit was still shoulder to chest.

I understand why the Ref threw the flag because it all happened really fast and looked bad. It's bad that Davis got a concussion, but it wasn't helmet-to-helmet and his head didn't hit the ground hard (you can clearly see this in the .gif Wibi posted in post #314). He likely (speculating a little here) got the concussion because his neck/head whipped back when his momentum was stopped. So Davis very well may have got a concussion even if Chancellor had put his head to the stomach instead of the chest.

The outcome of the play is bad, but I'm not sure how to remove this play from the game, what is a reasonable expectation for the defender to do differently in this situation and how to avoid the concussion when the physics of the play are unavoidable.

soxfan121 · Sep 23, 2015

wibi said:
Trying to find the article that I saw a couple of weeks ago discussing this subject. It was out of the PNW but talked about his management of Koren Robinson during the Vikings booze cruise period, Larry Johnson and Andre Smith and how Keels was really only in it for the quick money

Thanks for looking. I do love sources. ;-)

Van Everyman · Sep 23, 2015

Nice to have Kam back I imagine esp. since this story appears to have popped up the same day:

@BleacherReport: Jimmy Graham is extremely “pissed off” and “hates” his role in Seattle, reports @mikefreemanNFL http://t.co/38RjUt7MfX

In the video Freeman says "several players" are telling him that if he doesn't get the ball, he's "going to blow up."

Must be hard being targeted less than the great Doug Baldwin.

soxfan121 · Sep 23, 2015

wibi said:
This was the main article that influenced my line of thinking but it doesnt discuss Keels' past with other players
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seahawks/take-2-why-i-blame-kam-chancellors-agent-for-ill-conceived-seahawks-holdout/

Yeah...that's kinda what I was talking about above; in the absence of information, fans like Mr. Sullivan will blame the agent to protect their ability to cheer the player.

It is highly unlikely Keels told Chancellor to holdout and even if he did, Chancellor is the guy who decided not to report to work - not Keels.

For all we know, Keels got down on his knees and begged Chancellor to play out this season so they'd have better leverage on a renegotiation next year. An agent who doesn't do what the player wants, when the player wants, has one less client.

JohnnyK · Sep 27, 2015

https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/647870471514533888

The #Seahawks have activated S Kam Chancellor and waived his former replacement Dion Bailey. Chancellor will be on the field tomorrow

Marciano490 · Oct 7, 2015

So, what're the causes? The poor O-line play? Lynch not dominating/playing like usual and thus allowing opposing defenses to focus on Wilson and the passing game? Something else?

DanoooME · Oct 7, 2015

Marciano490 said:
So, what're the causes? The poor O-line play? Lynch not dominating/playing like usual and thus allowing opposing defenses to focus on Wilson and the passing game? Something else?

1. The offensive line sucks like a Dyson.
2. Lynch has been hurt, but even when healthy the main problem is #1
3. See #1
4. Kam Chancellor is a Terminator

ThePrideofShiner · Oct 9, 2015

Lynch will not play Sunday.

dynomite · Oct 9, 2015

How do you feel about this game, especially without him?

Winning in Cincy wasn't going to be a picnic no matter what, right?

Rudy's Curve · Oct 10, 2015

wibi said:
Im nervous about this game even if Lynch was healthy. Cincy is hot right now and Dalton is finally showing skills that people thought for years he had.

This game is going to come down to the Seattle O-line and how well they hold up against the Cincy rush. If they can provide average protection to Wilson and average run blocking then I think the game is a coin flip. If Wilson has to scramble then it will be extremely interesting to see how the Cincy LBs can contain him as Wilson running opens up a ton of other options.

If they can keep the Bengals in their base defense they have a good shot to move the ball. Hawk, Maualuga and Vincent Rey are a pretty athletically-deficient unit at the second level. The nickel defense is a real strength with Leon Hall covering the slot and Emmanuel Lamur replacing Hawk and Maualuga. The Bengals deal with Roethlisberger twice a year extending plays although Wilson's mobility presents a different challenge. The Seahawks are in a tough spot injury/scheduling-wise but it should still be a really good game.

tims4wins · Oct 11, 2015

If the Hawks make the playoffs they are gonna be looking back on that Lions game and thanking their lucky stars

GeorgeCostanza · Oct 11, 2015

That was a very entertaining game from both teams. Too bad there isn't more of that is this NFL.

pappymojo · Oct 15, 2015

This seems sad.

Seahawks fullback Derrick Coleman suspended after felony hit and run, agents issue statement
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/seahawks-fullback-derrick-coleman-suspended-after-felony-hit-and-run/

“On the evening of October 15, 2015, Seattle Seahawk Fullback Derrick Coleman, Jr. was involved in a two-car collision soon after leaving a team meeting,” the statement said. ” While the facts of the case are still being determined, it seems Derrick may have fallen asleep while driving home from a Seahawks’ facility.

tims4wins · Oct 15, 2015

Really interesting (and important) game this week for Seattle. Carolina is coming off a bye, getting Kuechly back, and looking for playoff revenge. Their D should be able to hold up pretty well against Seattle's offense. With the game in Seattle I generally like the Hawks in this one but this could be a total dogfight - low-scoring, defensive battle. Really excited for this one on Sunday.

With the Cardinals looking like the real deal, GB being GB, the Falcons and Panthers off to hot starts (and favorable schedules), and the NFC East in shambles, the 6th spot in the NFC playoffs is still pretty wide open, so even a Seattle loss likely wouldn't put them out of that race. But a loss would definitely further diminish any slim chance they have of hosting a playoff game, especially if Arizona goes into Pittsburgh and wins. But an Arizona loss and a Seattle win would close the gap significantly. Huge swing week.

2015 Seahawks: Our offense doesnt need Lynch, Graham or Rawls

Member

above replacement level

Member

Member

Member

tiger king

above replacement level

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Crests prematurely

wants to be caribou ken

T&A

Dorito Dawg

PN23's replacement

Formerly the Story of Your Red Right Ankle

Member

Member

Member

Member

JAG

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

JAG

Member

Member

T&A

JAG

Member

Member

JAG

Member

Member

Urological Expert

above replacement level

Member

Crests prematurely

Member

Member

Member

Member

PN23's replacement

tiger king

Member

PN23's replacement