Aug 24, 2012; Kansas City, MO, USA; Seattle Seahawks wide receiver Kellen Winslow (82) scores a touchdown against the Kansas City Chiefs in the first half at Arrowhead Stadium. Mandatory Credit: John Rieger-US PRESSWIRE

12th Man Mailbag: Is Terrell Owens coming back to the Seahawks?

Use your ← → (arrows) to browse

It’s Wednesday, and that means it’s time to empty my inbox and answer a few of your Seahawks questions. Lets jump right to it.

1) Why do the Seahawks always look so bad at the start of the game, then so much better after halftime? -James

This is one of those questions I’ve been getting for a while now. Its incredibly frustrating to see the team start off so poorly week in and week out when the 2nd half show they’re capable of outplaying their opponents.

Its hard to give a reason after week 1. Teams don’t show what they’re going to do in the preseason, so game plans are based partly out of tendency from last year, partly out of preseason film, and partly out of guessing based on the way personnel matches up. But starting now, there is no such excuse. The Seahawks have film on on the Cowboys, and need to prep for what they do defensively. We’ll see if it happens, but Pete Carroll’s history in Seattle says that it’s unlikely.

I think it’s a philosophical thing with this coaching staff. They concentrate on themselves during the week, and not on the team they are playing. This leads to game plans that fit what the Seahawks do well, but don’t attack the weaknesses of the opponent, nor counter what they do well. Then, changes are made throughout the game, mostly at halftime, that tweak the plan into the Seahawk’s favor.

This idea works when you have the better team. It also pays off later in the season when “concentrating on themselves” has generated some areas in which the team is simply going to always be able to beat the opponent. The problem is that is looks ugly, especially early in games and early in the season.

2) Why didn’t the Seahawks run the ball after getting down inside the 10 at the end of the game? - Andy 

The time on the clock and the lack of timeouts is the obvious answer to that question. Any running play, and you can expect the Cardinals to lay on the pile for an extra 10-15 seconds and keep the Seahawks from spiking the ball or running another play until a lot of time had run off the clock.

Complicating things is that they were far enough away from goal line that you can’t really expect Lynch to get into the endzone with just one run. Any plan at that point that included running the ball needed to have enough time to run the ball twice in order to get the ball into the endzone, and there likely wasn’t time to do so.

On the other hand, the Seahawks did give the ball back with 16 seconds left on the clock, so it is possible to make the argument that the Seahawks could have ran the ball twice, spiked that ball with 1-2 seconds left if Lynch didn’t get in, and then still had a 4th down pass to try and win the game.

The problem there is that it is a huge risk that the clock would run out on the team and they wouldn’t get that final chance. So in a way, you’d be choosing 2 running plays over 4 passing attempts to get the same yards. Probability states that you always take the option that gives you 4 chances.

3) What was the problem with the pass blocking, was it scheme or the players? – Eillra 

The correct answer is both. The players involved certainly struggled, especially Sweezy at RG and, to a less degree, Giacomini at RT. Both were beaten over and over throughout the entire game. Unger at Center, and the left side of the line did better, at least until Okung’s injured knee slowed him down enough that he struggled with the Acho’s speed, but even then the left side was substantially better than the right.

The gameplan didn’t help them any either. There wasn’t nearly enough backs and TEs being kept in to help the pass protection. It was like the coaches expected Wilson’s legs to constantly bail out the O-line again and again. He did, but it still hurt the offense’s ability to consistently move the ball.

4) With Martin out, will the team bring back Terrell Owens or Kellen Winslow?

I’ve learned never to rule anything out when it comes to Pete Carroll, but I’d have to say that the likelihood that Owens returns is near zero. Remember that he wasn’t cut at the cut down to 53, he was cut the week before when the team cut down to 75. Deon Buttler and Richardo Lockette both were given better chance to make the team than TO did.

If the team adds a receiver, then I expect it to be Lockette off the practice squad. Lockette had a good camp, and adds a speed element to offense that it lacks. Owens doesn’t offer anything that Edwards and Rice don’t already bring to the table.

Winslow is a different story. He made the original 53 man roster, but was let go because of his salary and the fact that the entire salary was about to be guaranteed. Now that week 1 is past us, his salary isn’t going to be guaranteed anymore, which protects the team financially. Winslow could be big weapon for the Seahawks if he came back, and he already knows the offense here. It’s a good fit for both player and team.

 

Have a question? want it answered? send an email to [email protected]

Use your ← → (arrows) to browse

Next Seahawks Game Full schedule »

Tags: Kellen Winslow Pete Carroll Seattle Seahawks Terrell Owens

comments powered by Disqus