HawkShack.com

I was doing some research on Denver. They are a real wild card right now. They have an all new coaching staff installing all new schemes. Fangio was fired. They brought in some offensive guru named Nathanial Hackett, a WCO disciple from what I read who was with Green Bay the last few years. He plans to install a higher volume passing game for Russell Wilson and likely has a much higher tolerance for turnovers than Carroll. Not sure how good the guy will do as Rodgers makes any OC look amazing, but I see why Russell agreed to go there and give a higher volume passing attack a run like his hero Drew Brees.

They also have a green defensive coordinator from the Rams' staff named Ejiro Evero. He doesn't have experience as a DC, but has worked under various quality defensive coaches.

Bottom line is the Broncos coaching staff is very green. That can lead to a really bad team in a tough division like the AFC West. So we might get a real nice pick if Hackett can't manage a team very well. And he's stepping up to a whole new level as a head coach.

The DC sounds like he is installing a new defensive scheme. Do they have the personnel to switch to a 4-3 and still be effective? Or are they built for a Fangio defensive style and will have to acquire personnel to shift to a 4-3 if that is the plan?

It sounds like the HC and OC are going to install a much higher volume passing attack. Do they have the pieces to run that? Is there O-line any good? Russell never been a WCO QB that relies on the short passing game and doesn't work real well running around like he does. Will he adapt to that type of scheme? Be interesting to see how long it takes for him to adapt to a short passing game after ten years of Pete's play action pass built on the run offense.

I think Denver has a real good chance of tanking even if Russ does well. They have more question marks than we do on both sides of the ball with that rookie coaching staff in that tough division.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I was doing some research on Denver. They are a real wild card right now. They have an all new coaching staff installing all new schemes. Fangio was fired. They brought in some offensive guru named Nathanial Hackett, a WCO disciple from what I read who was with Green Bay the last few years. He plans to install a higher volume passing game for Russell Wilson and likely has a much higher tolerance for turnovers than Carroll. Not sure how good the guy will do as Rodgers makes any OC look amazing, but I see why Russell agreed to go there and give a higher volume passing attack a run like his hero Drew Brees.

They also have a green defensive coordinator from the Rams' staff named Ejiro Evero. He doesn't have experience as a DC, but has worked under various quality defensive coaches.

Bottom line is the Broncos coaching staff is very green. That can lead to a really bad team in a tough division like the AFC West. So we might get a real nice pick if Hackett can't manage a team very well. And he's stepping up to a whole new level as a head coach.

The DC sounds like he is installing a new defensive scheme. Do they have the personnel to switch to a 4-3 and still be effective? Or are they built for a Fangio defensive style and will have to acquire personnel to shift to a 4-3 if that is the plan?

It sounds like the HC and OC are going to install a much higher volume passing attack. Do they have the pieces to run that? Is there O-line any good? Russell never been a WCO QB that relies on the short passing game and doesn't work real well running around like he does. Will he adapt to that type of scheme? Be interesting to see how long it takes for him to adapt to a short passing game after ten years of Pete's play action pass built on the run offense.

I think Denver has a real good chance of tanking even if Russ does well. They have more question marks than we do on both sides of the ball with that rookie coaching staff in that tough division.

For people often disagree sharply we have some common ground here. I don’t know as much about Denver as I should . I know they supposedly have a really good defense although Chubb has been hurt and inconsistent . Their line is somewhat suspect giving up 40 sacks ( Seattle had 45 with Geno taking 13 of them ) and they are getting a guy who held the ball too long last few years . They have a couple of good running backs . they have some flyboy wideouts but nobody with nearly the resume of DK or Lockett .

The coach is a newbie dealing with an entitled 10 year vet with an unconventional game who wants control of the offense . As I took at the Hackett offense it involves pocket passing in the middle of the field . It doesn’t feature moon shots so let’s see how it works .

Hackett spent his career coaching one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time , a master at using the pocket and setting up his linemen for success by how he slides around . It’s the fix Russell’s game needs but will he listen to a first time head coach or go back to bailing out if he doesn’t like the first read ? Then look at the schedule . AFC west twice a year and NFC west this year including opening in Seattle . Russ had said it doesn’t matter , it will be a “ non emotional game “ . More of the mealy mouth bs he’s known for now . But it’s a must win for Denver isn’t it? It is for Pete too IMO if he doesn’t want 22 to be his swan song . Nothing will drive home the collapse of Seattle like Russ riding in here and hanging a 40 burger in Seattle . I’ve said I expect a Seattle win and I’ll stay with that . There’s more parts left in Seattle then people think and the Coach is better then many think . He cares more about this controversy then people think . If he fails on the 12th and beyond it won’t be for lack of trying . I’ve got Seattle at 10 wins . I’ll put denver at 9. If they are 12-4 I’ll tip a cap to Russ and Hackett.

The GB Offense was based on the WCO, but isn't like we used to see with Holmgren. It's more of a hybrid with allowances for doing what the QB is most comfortable with.
Russ being involved in designing the Offense will have it mastered and it will evolve as the season wears on. Their OL is better than ours has been, so that shouldn't be much of a problem and their run game
has the talent to be one of the best in the NFL. They have the ability to attack the edges much better than we have ever had under our philosophy. That by itself adds a dynamic that opposing Defenses have
to plan for.
They're going to have their growing pains on Offense but they should be pretty good from the start.

On Defense they have some real good talent - much more than us. How they evolve with the new DC will determine how well they do this year but they are capable of shutting down any team. It depends on if
their changes are too much to adapt to early. In that division they have to start strong and keep it going all year for them to have a chance.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I was doing some research on Denver. They are a real wild card right now. They have an all new coaching staff installing all new schemes. Fangio was fired. They brought in some offensive guru named Nathanial Hackett, a WCO disciple from what I read who was with Green Bay the last few years. He plans to install a higher volume passing game for Russell Wilson and likely has a much higher tolerance for turnovers than Carroll. Not sure how good the guy will do as Rodgers makes any OC look amazing, but I see why Russell agreed to go there and give a higher volume passing attack a run like his hero Drew Brees.

They also have a green defensive coordinator from the Rams' staff named Ejiro Evero. He doesn't have experience as a DC, but has worked under various quality defensive coaches.

Bottom line is the Broncos coaching staff is very green. That can lead to a really bad team in a tough division like the AFC West. So we might get a real nice pick if Hackett can't manage a team very well. And he's stepping up to a whole new level as a head coach.

The DC sounds like he is installing a new defensive scheme. Do they have the personnel to switch to a 4-3 and still be effective? Or are they built for a Fangio defensive style and will have to acquire personnel to shift to a 4-3 if that is the plan?

It sounds like the HC and OC are going to install a much higher volume passing attack. Do they have the pieces to run that? Is there O-line any good? Russell never been a WCO QB that relies on the short passing game and doesn't work real well running around like he does. Will he adapt to that type of scheme? Be interesting to see how long it takes for him to adapt to a short passing game after ten years of Pete's play action pass built on the run offense.

I think Denver has a real good chance of tanking even if Russ does well. They have more question marks than we do on both sides of the ball with that rookie coaching staff in that tough division.

Interesting observations. I haven't checked out the Broncos that thoroughly but I'll be following them closely once the season starts, not from the perspective as to how well Russell does, but that I want to see them tank as it would mean higher draft slotting in 2023.

I just started checking them out last night out of a sense of boredom just to see what that team is like. They had a pretty good defense under Fangio, but he was fired last year because of lots of losses. Fangio wasn't too good at the offensive side of the ball. Then I looked up their new head coach and he's a complete rook head coach whose only experience is leading the Jaguars after their head coach was fired. Their DC and OC are even greener.

Raiders hired Josh McDaniels after an interim coach that replaced Jon Gruden after his whole situation.

Brandon Staley on the Chargers is a second year head coach.

That whole division other than Andy Reid is green coaches. We all know how Josh McDaniels failed hard his first time out. That is going to be one weird division of rookie head coaches with talented teams seeing if they can outcoach each other and beat the old veteran Reid.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I just started checking them out last night out of a sense of boredom just to see what that team is like. They had a pretty good defense under Fangio, but he was fired last year because of lots of losses. Fangio wasn't too good at the offensive side of the ball. Then I looked up their new head coach and he's a complete rook head coach whose only experience is leading the Jaguars after their head coach was fired. Their DC and OC are even greener.

Raiders hired Josh McDaniels after an interim coach that replaced Jon Gruden after his whole situation.

Brandon Staley on the Chargers is a second year head coach.

That whole division other than Andy Reid is green coaches. We all know how Josh McDaniels failed hard his first time out. That is going to be one weird division of rookie head coaches with talented teams seeing if they can outcoach each other and beat the old veteran Reid.

I’ll say this for Russ he didn’t pick a doormat division. Frankly I think Mcdanials will be fine . It’s a veteran team with a highly underrated qb whose leadership led a team with a special teams coach calling it to the playoffs and a last second pick from beating the AFC champs . I think Carr is genuine and a true leader of men and with chandler Jones and Devante Adams they are ready . It will be Intersting the first time they see Denver and the guy whose agent leaked Carrs job as one Russ would take . Chargers gotta get to the postseason. The coach will be on the hot seat if they don’t . They barely missed . Now Kalil Mack is across from Bosa .

Reid is proof you don’t give up on a great head coach who is older and has a couple down seasons . We will see with no Tyreek hill and the weird finish to Mahomes playoff loss .

I’ve seen Denver picked first to 4th. Russ ranked 5 th to 8th league wide . I’ve seen an article suggesting he will lead a team that hadn’t made the playoffs in 6 years to a title . If he does I’ll choke on crow cause my views are known . It will be a fascinating division for sure z

Hawktawk wrote:I’ll say this for Russ he didn’t pick a doormat division. Frankly I think Mcdanials will be fine . It’s a veteran team with a highly underrated qb whose leadership led a team with a special teams coach calling it to the playoffs and a last second pick from beating the AFC champs . I think Carr is genuine and a true leader of men and with chandler Jones and Devante Adams they are ready . It will be Intersting the first time they see Denver and the guy whose agent leaked Carrs job as one Russ would take . Chargers gotta get to the postseason. The coach will be on the hot seat if they don’t . They barely missed . Now Kalil Mack is across from Bosa .

Reid is proof you don’t give up on a great head coach who is older and has a couple down seasons . We will see with no Tyreek hill and the weird finish to Mahomes playoff loss .

I’ve seen Denver picked first to 4th. Russ ranked 5 th to 8th league wide . I’ve seen an article suggesting he will lead a team that hadn’t made the playoffs in 6 years to a title . If he does I’ll choke on crow cause my views are known . It will be a fascinating division for sure z

Andy Reid has one Super Bowl ring and three appearances. Same as Holmgren and same as Pete. He lost again to Tom Brady getting severely outcoached even with a stud like Mahomes. He may never go back to the Super Bowl again. I would not want Andy Reid here as head coach. Reid gets outcoached a lot. Only reason he likely got over the hump this time is Mahomes is that damn good. Reid would be still losing if not for Mahomes.

Not sure why you think Mcdaniels will be fine. He certainly wasn't fine in Denver. I haven't seen many coaches from the Bill B tree do too well. I think it is because Bill B controls too much of the show and doesn't develop coaches, he develops lackeys who do exactly what he says. When he's not there to coordinate everything, well, they don't do great.

That whole division is a bunch of question marks with a lot of talent. Only at least reasonably sure team is KC because of Patrick Mahomes, not Andy Reid. Same as Seattle used to be a near sure thing because of Russell Wilson, not Pete Carroll. We were to a 6 to 7 win team before Russell Wilson arrived with an elite defense. Now we're headed back to that until we find the next franchise QB.

Head coaches are only as good as their QB barring occasional fluke years. That's why Bill B looks pedestrian with Brady gone and Arians now has a Super Bowl ring. Andy Reid was some washed up coach before Patrick Mahomes. Pete Carroll was an NFL failure that people starting to lose hope in before Russell Wilson arrived.

Fans know. Owners know it. Head coaches know it. You're only as good as your QB allows you to be.

Over under on Denver 10.5, bet the over. I am sorry they are going have a killer Defense. They picked up Gregory from Dallas, the kid DJ Jones from SF, who is one of the best young DT's in the league. They have 4 good WR's, Juedy has put up good numbers, with a dumpster fire at QB. A good RGame, with Javonte Williams, got 900 yards in his rookie year. He has a way way better OL than he had in Seattle. He has a coach that is offensive minded, and is going to build around RW. IF they finish 9-8 I will eat it, but barring injury I just do not see that happening. In spite of HT, River, Tricity, and others, who blamed RW for our decline, sorry I think they are going to eat it this year. He has been working out more this year than ever, he and the team are totally energized, I just do not see them failing. Seattle? dooooooooom! Outside of DK and Lockett, we got nothing, with NO qb to get them the ball, 2 Olineman that are 2 years away, a defense that "might" with the 3-4, be even middle of the pack at best. I am calling Adams a bust. SO where are the plays going come from, IF they win 8 games, and I think that is a major reach, we will be lucky. The downside is they are in now the toughest division in FBall and RW has a lot pressure on him. OBTW Reid has always been way better on offense than Pete. Pete's drafting the last 7-8 years is a joke. Reid? come on. Reid has had one OC, Pete, has had a revolving door at OC. I worry about Andy's health, but as coach he is still at the top of the League, Pete is done, stick a fork in him Hawk Talk.

Hawktawk wrote:I’ll say this for Russ he didn’t pick a doormat division. Frankly I think Mcdanials will be fine . It’s a veteran team with a highly underrated qb whose leadership led a team with a special teams coach calling it to the playoffs and a last second pick from beating the AFC champs . I think Carr is genuine and a true leader of men and with chandler Jones and Devante Adams they are ready . It will be Intersting the first time they see Denver and the guy whose agent leaked Carrs job as one Russ would take . Chargers gotta get to the postseason. The coach will be on the hot seat if they don’t . They barely missed . Now Kalil Mack is across from Bosa .

Reid is proof you don’t give up on a great head coach who is older and has a couple down seasons . We will see with no Tyreek hill and the weird finish to Mahomes playoff loss .

I’ve seen Denver picked first to 4th. Russ ranked 5 th to 8th league wide . I’ve seen an article suggesting he will lead a team that hadn’t made the playoffs in 6 years to a title . If he does I’ll choke on crow cause my views are known . It will be a fascinating division for sure z

Aseahawkfan wrote:Andy Reid has one Super Bowl ring and three appearances. Same as Holmgren and same as Pete.

I'll let you correct that one yourself.

Aseahawkfan wrote:He lost again to Tom Brady getting severely outcoached even with a stud like Mahomes. He may never go back to the Super Bowl again. I would not want Andy Reid here as head coach. Reid gets outcoached a lot. Only reason he likely got over the hump this time is Mahomes is that damn good. Reid would be still losing if not for Mahomes.

Not sure why you think Mcdaniels will be fine. He certainly wasn't fine in Denver. I haven't seen many coaches from the Bill B tree do too well. I think it is because Bill B controls too much of the show and doesn't develop coaches, he develops lackeys who do exactly what he says. When he's not there to coordinate everything, well, they don't do great.

That whole division is a bunch of question marks with a lot of talent. Only at least reasonably sure team is KC because of Patrick Mahomes, not Andy Reid. Same as Seattle used to be a near sure thing because of Russell Wilson, not Pete Carroll. We were to a 6 to 7 win team before Russell Wilson arrived with an elite defense. Now we're headed back to that until we find the next franchise QB.

Head coaches are only as good as their QB barring occasional fluke years. That's why Bill B looks pedestrian with Brady gone and Arians now has a Super Bowl ring. Andy Reid was some washed up coach before Patrick Mahomes. Pete Carroll was an NFL failure that people starting to lose hope in before Russell Wilson arrived.

Fans know. Owners know it. Head coaches know it. You're only as good as your QB allows you to be.

This I agree with. Belichick's coaching tree, as well has Pete's, isn't very pretty. They may do a good job of building teams, but they don't do a very good job of procuring coaches. I don't think it any coincidence that once Brady left, Patriots look 'pedestrian' and the Bucs became world champions. It takes a bit of the shine off of Belichick's gold jacket, that he was great because he had a great quarterback, not the other way around.

There is no doubt that the AFC West is a tough division, but it's not any better or worse than our division. We've seen what a very good quarterback can do for a number of teams, and although he's going to have to make some changes in his game from what he had been doing the past few years here, I'd rate the Broncos chances ahead of the Raiders. It will be an interesting division.

There is no doubt that the AFC West is a tough division, but it's not any better or worse than our division. We've seen what a very good quarterback can do for a number of teams, and although he's going to have to make some changes in his game from what he had been doing the past few years here, I'd rate the Broncos chances ahead of the Raiders. It will be an interesting division.

No way River, usually we are usually in lock step but the AFC West is way better than the NFC West. We are bottom feeders, Rams are the class and Niners have to get rid of Jimmy G, to allow Lance to stick, so they will slide out of the playoff. The Cards are a good team, but they fall apart later in the season, as Murray gets hit. The AFC West has in most peoples eyes, the 4 of the best 8 QB's in football. Carr is vastly underrated, Mahomey is 1 or 2 depending on who you talk to, Herbert is great but a year away, and RW you know. Come on its going to be brutal. The Rams barring injury, will have a cakewalk to the playoffs.

On the Chiefs, they lost Hill, a good move long term and they got a boat load for him. They lost Honey Badger, who was a real leader type and a play maker on defense. The scary thing is according to a lot of sources, their LT and them are miles apart on their contract. So theirs no way they can be as good as last year, its mathematical. I see the Donkeys and the Raiders battling it out, with the Chargers in a CLOSE 3rd or 4th.

RiverDog wrote:I'll let you correct that one yourself.

Nothing to fix. They all have one ring to show for their efforts with a team led by an elite QB.

Appearances may be off for each, but who cares. You don't like losses anyway.

obiken wrote:On the Chiefs, they lost Hill, a good move long term and they got a boat load for him. They lost Honey Badger, who was a real leader type and a play maker on defense. The scary thing is according to a lot of sources, their LT and them are miles apart on their contract. So theirs no way they can be as good as last year, its mathematical. I see the Donkeys and the Raiders battling it out, with the Chargers in a CLOSE 3rd or 4th.

You know what's weird my buddy pointed out to me. The Chargers coach is a defensive specialist but the Chargers defense sucked last year. And their offense was amazing because that Herbert kid had an amazing year. If they can keep up the offensive production and improve the defense, Chargers a real contender.

Aseahawkfan wrote: You know what's weird my buddy pointed out to me. The Chargers coach is a defensive specialist but the Chargers defense sucked last year. And their offense was amazing because that Herbert kid had an amazing year. If they can keep up the offensive production and improve the defense, Chargers a real contender.

I agree, but he is on the invisible hot seat AF, IF he doesnt make it to the playoffs this year, with Herbert at QB, he is done, and no one is saying that. I think just adding Mack will make Boza's job a lot easier, their defense way better.

RiverDog wrote:I'll let you correct that one yourself.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Nothing to fix. They all have one ring to show for their efforts with a team led by an elite QB.

Appearances may be off for each, but who cares. You don't like losses anyway.

I care. You said that Pete has 3 SB appearances. He has just 2.

I never like losses, but SB appearances are part of a HC's resume. They count.

RiverDog wrote:I care. You said that Pete has 3 SB appearances. He has just 2.

I never like losses, but SB appearances are part of a HC's resume. They count.

I don't think they count much. You lost.

I think Pete has a higher win percentage than Holmgren, maybe than Reid. He developed a better QB. He definitely built a better defense than Reid or Holmgren ever built, it's not even close.

I'll take Pete's peak team for that five years over any Holmgren or Reid team. They were magnificent. Their obliteration of that legendary Denver offense was better than any Super Bowl Holmgren or Reid won. It was a glorious obliteration.

I think Pete has a higher win percentage than Holmgren, maybe than Reid. He developed a better QB. He definitely built a better defense than Reid or Holmgren ever built, it's not even close.

I'll take Pete's peak team for that five years over any Holmgren or Reid team. They were magnificent. Their obliteration of that legendary Denver offense was better than any Super Bowl Holmgren or Reid won. It was a glorious obliteration.

No on this one your wrong ASHF, 633% for Andy, 592 for Holmy, and 593 for PC. AR is way better than either one of them, period. Remember RW was dropped on PC as a 3rd rounder, he came within one play of taking us to the NFC title game in his rookie year. Pete didnt develop a damn thing in Russ. NO doubt I agree with you on the defense. Moreover, he has 10 more wins to catch Holmy, he has 80 to catch Reid, he never will! Moreover, IF not for the injury to TO, he would have won his first SB win way before PC, and he took two different teams to the SB. Mahomy was scouted by Reid, and passed over by 9 other teams, when he had a good QB in the house. AR had the vision to see that Smith was a good not great qb. Pete never had that kind of vision. Holmy, traded for Reggie White and Farve, who was a steal from Atlanta, that cost Granville his job. OBTW Jamal Adams was taken before Mahomy, silly them. Moreover, the Chiefs have had 3 trips to the AFC title game, 3 years in a row, something PC never did. I love Pete, I will always be grateful for his time here, but keeping PC and dishing out RW, was a colossal mistake. No way PC is the coach of Seattle for the 2024 season.

RiverDog wrote:I care. You said that Pete has 3 SB appearances. He has just 2.

I never like losses, but SB appearances are part of a HC's resume. They count.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I don't think they count much. You lost.

I think Pete has a higher win percentage than Holmgren, maybe than Reid. He developed a better QB. He definitely built a better defense than Reid or Holmgren ever built, it's not even close.

I'll take Pete's peak team for that five years over any Holmgren or Reid team. They were magnificent. Their obliteration of that legendary Denver offense was better than any Super Bowl Holmgren or Reid won. It was a glorious obliteration.

All Time Career coaching wins:

#5 Andy Reid, 223-135, .633
#16 Mike Holmgren 161-111, .592.
#21 Pete Carroll 152-104, .593.

All Time Career playoff wins:

#3 Andy Reid 19-16, .543, 3 SB, 1 Champ.
#7 Mike Holmgren 13-11, .542, 3 SB's, 1 Champ,
#10 (tied with 4 others) Pete Carroll, 11-10, .524, 2 SB, 1 Champ.

You can spin their careers to fit your personal narrative, better 5 peak years, better defense, yadi-yadi-yada. But it's clear that both Reid and Holmgren have better numbers than Pete. Plus Pete is an active coach, so his numbers could change not only for the better, but also for the worse if things go south for the next couple of years as both of us have agreed is more likely than not.

RiverDog wrote:#5 Andy Reid, 223-135, .633
#16 Mike Holmgren 161-111, .592.
#21 Pete Carroll 152-104, .593.

All Time Career playoff wins:

#3 Andy Reid 19-16, .543, 3 SB, 1 Champ.
#7 Mike Holmgren 13-11, .542, 3 SB's, 1 Champ,
#10 (tied with 4 others) Pete Carroll, 11-10, .524, 2 SB, 1 Champ.

You can manipulate their performances to fit your personal narrative, better 5 peak years, better defense, yadi-yadi-yada. But it's clear that both Reid and Holmgren have better numbers than Pete. Plus Pete is an active coach, so his numbers could change not only for the better, but also for the worse if things go south for the next couple of years as both of us have agreed is more likely than not.

Right, but Reid's are probably going to get better. Lombardi only had 100 wins but how many championships before there was a SB, and he had very few bad seasons. Pete, IMHO is done, I hope I a wrong but if he wins 7 games this year we will be lucky.

RiverDog wrote:All Time Career coaching wins:

#5 Andy Reid, 223-135, .633
#16 Mike Holmgren 161-111, .592.
#21 Pete Carroll 152-104, .593.

All Time Career playoff wins:

#3 Andy Reid 19-16, .543, 3 SB, 1 Champ.
#7 Mike Holmgren 13-11, .542, 3 SB's, 1 Champ,
#10 (tied with 4 others) Pete Carroll, 11-10, .524, 2 SB, 1 Champ.

You can spin their careers to fit your personal narrative, better 5 peak years, better defense, yadi-yadi-yada. But it's clear that both Reid and Holmgren have better numbers than Pete. Plus Pete is an active coach, so his numbers could change not only for the better, but also for the worse if things go south for the next couple of years as both of us have agreed is more likely than not.

Not really. The Hall will take into account things like building an elite legendary defense. Always have, always will. Pete has quite a few measurables over Holmgren and Reid. Measurable facts the Hall of Fame can and will look at when it comes to ranking what coaches did. Holmgren and Reid got nothing whatsoever close to what Pete Carroll did on defense, not even close. It's recorded in the record books and no idea when or if it will be matched while we live.

Andy Reid's win percentage better. About the same in Super Bowls and playoffs. Pete Carroll built a much better defense. If one of them makes it in, others are a real possibility. I'm surprised Pete reached the top 10 that quick in the playoffs. But that is what having a great QB and defense will do for you.

Yep. Pete may be done. Still had the most amazing run of the three coaches listed. When you look in the record books, only Pete's defenses will be remembered, not Reid or Holmgren's offenses or defenses.

I'd put Pete's team at it's peak against any team in NFL history. I wouldn't do the same for Holmgren or Reid. Pete beat Peyton manning in a record setting year and almost beat Tom Brady and Bill B but for some injuries and a real stupid play call. Change that and I'd bet money he's a shoe in. Damn those injuries even more than that play call because we were about embarrass Brady like we did Manning. But Tom Brady is luckier than Peyton and he got the breaks that day.

I still consider Pete Carroll a better coach than Holmgren or Reid. It took him some time to get his method down, but damn it worked like gangbusters in Seattle.

I'm more hopeful now that we're doing a full rebuild than when I thought we traded Russell to maybe get a few draft picks and hope for a decent QB. But when Pete cut Bobby and Duane Brown, it signaled he plans to go back to the beginning and try to do it over again. Better chance of that than trade Russell and try to keep doing the same thing with some lesser QB.

Personal narratives aren't stat driven. The sum of Pete's accomplishments within a similar time period easily match or exceed Holmgren. Reid's still playing as is Pete. So we'll see when that ends.

But if Holmgren makes it in, a good chance Carroll does too and Reid.

No matter how you try to paint it, the Legion of Boom is up there with the Steel Curtain and all the other great defenses in NFL history from the LT led Giants to the Tampa Bay Bucs and the Baltimore Ravens. The fact they set a most consecutive years of number one points allowed given the number of amazing NFL defenses speaks volumes to how good they were in this era of soft QBs and rules to protect the offense. Put the Legion of Boom back in the days of beating receivers down and punishing QBs, and their legend would have been greater than it was. That was one mean, big group of dudes with Earl being the smallest.

Legion of Boom defense was legendary. Pete Carroll gave Seattle that defense.

obiken wrote:Right, but Reid's are probably going to get better. Lombardi only had 100 wins but how many championships before there was a SB, and he had very few bad seasons. Pete, IMHO is done, I hope I a wrong but if he wins 7 games this year we will be lucky.

Reid isn't exactly known for coming back from being down, man, Andy Reid has been outcoached in every Super Bowl he's been in but one. Even with an incredible QB like Patrick Mahomes, he gets outcoached by Arians. Reid's good enough at building a playoff competitive team and he finally got his ring. But he's very beatable and can fall of a cliff at times when it comes to the playoffs. He didn't get fired in Philly for doing well. They got tired of him just like we some of us with Pete. Reid's the kind of coach that can hit a peak and then be done while still going to the playoffs because he gets out coached and can't close the deal again.

Even in 2019 with Patrick Mahomes it was a 31-20 win against a lame 49er team.

Whereas the 2013 Seahawks massacred Peyton Manning and the best offense pure numbers of all time and the 4th or 5th rated offense using DVOA of all time. Massacred them.

Even when they are facing Brady, they were destroying the Patriots until Cliff Avril got hurt and had one of the most exciting and close Super Bowls ever. Hell of a game.

I'd sure love to see Pete do it again, but I know it's a longshot. When Pete's on, he can be really, really on.

AFC west
KC
CHargers
Raiders
Let’s ride a donkey .

It’s out there . Denver will be looking for the flight data recorder by December . They are not coming in here with a passing offense featuring 2021 Russ and winning anything . For his prior greatness Russ needs a strong run game as evidenced by his late season stats with Penny running wild . But they are gonna let Russ cook . Hackett is known as a pocket passing guru and his offenses have featured chain moving throws as much as deep balls. If he fixes Russ to back to prior to mid 2020 to moving chains as well as being dynamic with his deep ball I will be eating crow . But if he wouldn’t accept coaching or criticism from a veteran coach who took him to the top of the world he ain’t gonna listen to a newbie either . His linemen are gonna need eyes in the back of their heads and particularly his defense will learn real quick their stats will suffer being on the field after another 3 and out . Good luck Denver

[quoteReid isn't exactly known for coming back from being down, man, Andy Reid has been outcoached in every Super Bowl he's been in but one. Even with an incredible QB like Patrick Mahomes, he gets outcoached by Arians. ][/quote]

With that game against the Bucs in the SB, their OL was playing with 4 of 5 2nd stringers.
It's pretty difficult to play your game when you're overmatched along the LoS. Mahomes was running for his life most passing plays and they had trouble running the ball.
It's a large part of why they decided to restock up front the next year.

You guys have interesting opinions on what makes a candidate for Hall of Fame whether player or coach...so I'll offer mine. To begin with the selection committee itself is a media representative board :

The Committee consists of one media representative from each pro football city — with two from New York and two from Los Angeles, as those cities each have two teams in the National Football League. There are 16 at-large Selectors, who are active members of the media or persons intricately involved in professional football, including one representative of the Pro Football Writers of America. All appointments are open-ended and approved annually by a majority vote of the Hall of Fame's Board of Trustees.

The committee itself does not nominate...nominations are received from a variety of sources...but the committee decides from those nominations who actually gets enshrined. Certain standards...minimum thresholds can be assumed by career statistics or the achievement of some pinnacle event like a Super Bowl or World Series...but the intention is to recognize the people who embodied/are representative of...the ideal merits/influence of the sport they represent whether it be a combination of career stats/character/influence...something that draws a collective appeal to honor and single out those individuals that made a difference ...in the minds of those committee members.

Career stats are always filtered by being relative to the time period they were made...that is what makes them standout otherwise all career stats would be plagued by an "asterisk"...rule changes...equipment changes can alter how an individual performs...even subtle changes in the way colleges play their seasons can help shape the odds of when a player can "jump start" their career. Opportunity and what an individual does with that opportunity can often shape the time era they influenced. An individual who "transforms" a sport often gets first time enshrinement...Walter Payton...Wilt Chamberlain...Hank Aaron...Wayne Gretzky. Several Seahawk individuals past and present may one day merit themselves as viable consideration for the Hall of Fame.

NorthHawk wrote:[quoteReid isn't exactly known for coming back from being down, man, Andy Reid has been outcoached in every Super Bowl he's been in but one. Even with an incredible QB like Patrick Mahomes, he gets outcoached by Arians.

With that game against the Bucs in the SB, their OL was playing with 4 of 5 2nd stringers.
It's pretty difficult to play your game when you're overmatched along the LoS. Mahomes was running for his life most passing plays and they had trouble running the ball.
It's a large part of why they decided to restock up front the next year.

Andy Reid had the eagles in the conference championship 4 times I believe along with a super bowl . As opposed to outcoached I’d say he was let down by Mcnabb who was so fat and out of shape he was puking in the huddle on what should have been a game winning drive . His win over the 9ers was fueled by a late second half comeback like every playoff game that year . Reid is a great coach . So Was Holmgren . So is Pete and I agree with Asea a historic defense like that elevates a coaches resume darn near as much as a Lombardi . In hindsight it’s fair to ask what might have happened had Brady or Manning had that defense ? . Basically Manning did in his last Super Bowl when his arm was shot .

As for Arians his defense won as much as Brady did . Defense wins championships . Brady is great . He’s also lucky . You have to be .

Andy Reid had the eagles in the conference championship 4 times I believe along with a super bowl . As opposed to outcoached I’d say he was let down by Mcnabb who was so fat and out of shape he was puking in the huddle on what should have been a game winning drive . His win over the 9ers was fueled by a late second half comeback like every playoff game that year . Reid is a great coach . So Was Holmgren . So is Pete and I agree with Asea a historic defense like that elevates a coaches resume darn near as much as a Lombardi . In hindsight it’s fair to ask what might have happened had Brady or Manning had that defense ? . Basically Manning did in his last Super Bowl when his arm was shot .

As for Arians his defense won as much as Brady did . Defense wins championships . Brady is great . He’s also lucky . You have to be .

No it doesnt, Offense wins Championships now, period. Did you bother to watch the AFC Playoffs? There is no defense that can stop Hill, Mahomy, or Kelsy, or stop Allen and Diggs. Its an Offensive league! This is why the ONLY defensive coach to get to the playoffs was Vrable, and they were out early. Guys like Carroll, Billichek, and Zimmer are DINOSAURS. Brady really, come on, he finally had real WR's and weapons. With all the rule changes Offenses rule, Defenses drool. All you have to have like the Bengals is a killer qb and a middle of the pack defense.

obiken wrote:No it doesnt, Offense wins Championships now, period. Did you bother to watch the AFC Playoffs? There is no defense that can stop Hill, Mahomy, or Kelsy, or stop Allen and Diggs. Its an Offensive league! This is why the ONLY defensive coach to get to the playoffs was Vrable, and they were out early. Guys like Carroll, Billichek, and Zimmer are DINOSAURS. Brady really, come on, he finally had real WR's and weapons. With all the rule changes Offenses rule, Defenses drool. All you have to have like the Bengals is a killer qb and a middle of the pack defense.

Then why did the Super Bowl winner with the better defense win? Aaron Donald was a key in the win. Why was the final score 23-20? Looks more like a defensive Super Bowl to me.

Vrabel don't have a QB and his star RB was coming back from a severe injury.

You love offense, but don't mean a great defense won't still win. I hear this crap every time they make changes, then some new great defense comes along and proves it wrong. Balanced teams win the most. You can't be weak in the NFL.

Then why did the Super Bowl winner with the better defense win? Aaron Donald was a key in the win. Why was the final score 23-20? Looks more like a defensive Super Bowl to me.

Vrabel don't have a QB and his star RB was coming back from a severe injury.

You love offense, but don't mean a great defense won't still win. I hear this crap every time they make changes, then some new great defense comes along and proves it wrong. Balanced teams win the most. You can't be weak in the NFL.

Oh really, your forgetting they have Cooper, OBJ, a RB by committee a killer OLine, and a QB that was vastly underrated coming out of Detroit. IT should not have been close, when OBJ went out the dynamics of the game changed, and it became close, they went out and got another one just in case. Moreover, Donald really, I am 66, been watching FB since I was 13, Aaron Donald is the best DLineman of all time, period, and yeah he fought of double and triple teams at the end of the game to stop them. The Rams have just too many weapons for defenses to stop if they are all healthy. OBTW, I love defense and Running games way more, its just not going to get it done anymore.

obiken wrote:Oh really, your forgetting they have Cooper, OBJ, a RB by committee a killer OLine, and a QB that was vastly underrated coming out of Detroit. IT should not have been close, when OBJ went out the dynamics of the game changed, and it became close, they went out and got another one just in case. Moreover, Donald really, I am 66, been watching FB since I was 13, Aaron Donald is the best DLineman of all time, period, and yeah he fought of double and triple teams at the end of the game to stop them. The Rams have just too many weapons for defenses to stop if they are all healthy. OBTW, I love defense and Running games way more, its just not going to get it done anymore.

Yeah, really. With all those weapons the Rams put up 23 points and Cinci 20. I guarantee you 10000000% if the Rams of last year went against the Legion of Boom, they don't even put up 23.

If you think Aaron Donald is the best lineman ever, you forget Tez and Reggie White. I've watched Donald too. I think he's among the best, but Reggie White, Tez, and quite a few others could match him. People just forget because they always get recency bias with the current flavor of the week.

You're flat out wrong, period. Games shift. Defense is still very required. A great defense can shut down a great offense and has many, many, many times and will many times again.

You're overblowing things again. If you've watched football since you were 13, then you'd know it. I've done the same. I know for a fact that tons of different teams have won with different styles across all eras. It's just the way of the game. You even watched an offense that put up 55 TDs with Peyton Manning leading them and a bunch of weapons get absolutely obliterated by a Seattle defense missing Brandon Browner, one of their key pieces. That was only 8 Super Bowls ago.

You still need to be able to play defense. If you have an amazing defense with a middle of the pack offense, you'll still be able to win a Super bowl. No one has won more in the modern era than Belichick. You're suddenly calling the guy with six rings a dinosaur? Crazy. Football hasn't changed that much in the last five years when Bill B won.

None of those coaches you named are close to Bill B. Reid and Holmgren got as many rings as Pete as offensive coaches. Same as Sean Payton. Tom Coughlin is the only other one with two. So no use pretending there has been some major change that caused some shift in the NFL. Main reason for winning will always come down to talent versus talent regardless of scheme or whether the focus is offense or defense. That's how it works. That's how it will always work.

Aseahawkfan wrote: Yeah, really. With all those weapons the Rams put up 23 points and Cinci 20. I guarantee you 10000000% if the Rams of last year went against the Legion of Boom, they don't even put up 23.

If you think Aaron Donald is the best lineman ever, you forget Tez and Reggie White. I've watched Donald too. I think he's among the best, but Reggie White, Tez, and quite a few others could match him. People just forget because they always get recency bias with the current flavor of the week.

You're flat out wrong, period. Games shift. Defense is still very required. A great defense can shut down a great offense and has many, many, many times and will many times again.

You're overblowing things again. If you've watched football since you were 13, then you'd know it. I've done the same. I know for a fact that tons of different teams have won with different styles across all eras. It's just the way of the game. You even watched an offense that put up 55 TDs with Peyton Manning leading them and a bunch of weapons get absolutely obliterated by a Seattle defense missing Brandon Browner, one of their key pieces. That was only 8 Super Bowls ago.

You still need to be able to play defense. If you have an amazing defense with a middle of the pack offense, you'll still be able to win a Super bowl. No one has won more in the modern era than Belichick. You're suddenly calling the guy with six rings a dinosaur? Crazy. Football hasn't changed that much in the last five years when Bill B won.

None of those coaches you named are close to Bill B. Reid and Holmgren got as many rings as Pete as offensive coaches. Same as Sean Payton. Tom Coughlin is the only other one with two. So no use pretending there has been some major change that caused some shift in the NFL. Main reason for winning will always come down to talent versus talent regardless of scheme or whether the focus is offense or defense. That's how it works. That's how it will always work.

But what did Bill B do before the Cap and Tommy? NOTHING! IF OBJ had not gone down, OBJ would have been the MVP because they could not cover him and CC. Come on man, your not Hawk talk, your a smart guy, you know as well as I do that covering two great WR's, is way way harder than just one. Bilichick is a dinosaur period, his winning days are over. I never loved Bil or hated him, he was THE coach for the cap era. There is nothing innovative about Bill, nothing special about his management style, or play calling. Lets fact it, was all about cap management, drafting smart, and Tommy Terrific that's it!

Aseahawkfan wrote:Then why did the Super Bowl winner with the better defense win? Aaron Donald was a key in the win. Why was the final score 23-20? Looks more like a defensive Super Bowl to me.

Vrabel don't have a QB and his star RB was coming back from a severe injury.

You love offense, but don't mean a great defense won't still win. I hear this crap every time they make changes, then some new great defense comes along and proves it wrong. Balanced teams win the most. You can't be weak in the NFL.

The average points per game per team in the NFL in 2021 was 18.3, so you can hardly argue that the Super Bowl was a defensive struggle when both teams scored more than the league average. It was a well balanced, with neither the offense or the defense dominating the game. FYI in the regular season, the Rams ranked 8th in scoring, the Bengals 7th.

The Rams defense was just so-so in 2021. They were ranked 15th in scoring defense, 17th in total yards surrendered. The Bengals' defensive performance was almost identical, middle of the road. Heck, our Seahawk defense surrendered fewer points per game than either the Rams or the Bengals.

The facts do not support your theory. If anything, they contradict it.

Aseahawkfan wrote:No it doesnt, Offense wins Championships now, period. Did you bother to watch the AFC Playoffs? There is no defense that can stop Hill, Mahomy, or Kelsy, or stop Allen and Diggs. Its an Offensive league! This is why the ONLY defensive coach to get to the playoffs was Vrable, and they were out early. Guys like Carroll, Billichek, and Zimmer are DINOSAURS. Brady really, come on, he finally had real WR's and weapons. With all the rule changes Offenses rule, Defenses drool. All you have to have like the Bengals is a killer qb and a middle of the pack defense.

Then why did the Super Bowl winner with the better defense win? Aaron Donald was a key in the win. Why was the final score 23-20? Looks more like a defensive Super Bowl to me.

Vrabel don't have a QB and his star RB was coming back from a severe injury.

You love offense, but don't mean a great defense won't still win. I hear this crap every time they make changes, then some new great defense comes along and proves it wrong. Balanced teams win the most. You can't be weak in the NFL.

A few things here . For one the Cincy defense played some great timely situational defense such as 3 picks of Tannehill and 2 of Mahomes or Burrow doesn’t have the ball for his last second heroics . And Asea is 100% correct about last Super Bowl . Aaron Donald should have been MVP. After the Bengals had driven to midfield he made the last 3 plays of a 4 and out disrupting a certain game winning TD pass to young on 4th down . Donald got there first . Offense sells tickets . Defense wins championships . Even bad defensive teams who won played best in the playoffs .

RiverDog wrote:The average points per game per team in the NFL in 2021 was 18.3, so you can hardly argue that the Super Bowl was a defensive struggle when both teams scored more than the league average. It was a well balanced, with neither the offense or the defense dominating the game. FYI in the regular season, the Rams ranked 8th in scoring, the Bengals 7th.

The Rams defense was just so-so in 2021. They were ranked 15th in scoring defense, 17th in total yards surrendered. The Bengals' defensive performance was almost identical, middle of the road. Heck, our Seahawk defense surrendered fewer points per game than either the Rams or the Bengals.

The facts do not support your theory. If anything, they contradict it.

What are you talking about? This isn't a theory.

You all need to stop pretending he league has changed so much defense doesn't matter. It's ridiculous.

The league is wide open right now. Patriots dominance is over. We can win with a strong defense, strong offense, or any mix in between. I get real tired of hearing total BS like "Defense is over. We need to go all in on offense" because someone likes offense better than defense. It's horsecrap.

What are you talking about? This isn't a theory.

You all need to stop pretending he league has changed so much defense doesn't matter. It's ridiculous.

The league is wide open right now. Patriots dominance is over. We can win with a strong defense, strong offense, or any mix in between. I get real tired of hearing total BS like "Defense is over. We need to go all in on offense" because someone likes offense better than defense. It's horsecrap.

NObody said defenses dont matter they do. But you dont have to have a top 10 defense to get to the SB anymore. Moreover, you dont shell out huge chunks of your cap space to try and build a killer defense, it just doesnt pay. You pay for an edge pass rusher and a Corner to cover till the edge pass rushers to get there. The days of winning with a Legion of Boom are over, Seattle forking out for KC then not paying Earl proved that.

RiverDog wrote:The average points per game per team in the NFL in 2021 was 18.3, so you can hardly argue that the Super Bowl was a defensive struggle when both teams scored more than the league average. It was a well balanced, with neither the offense or the defense dominating the game. FYI in the regular season, the Rams ranked 8th in scoring, the Bengals 7th.

The Rams defense was just so-so in 2021. They were ranked 15th in scoring defense, 17th in total yards surrendered. The Bengals' defensive performance was almost identical, middle of the road. Heck, our Seahawk defense surrendered fewer points per game than either the Rams or the Bengals.

The facts do not support your theory. If anything, they contradict it.

I am off work. I don't get to relax like Mr. Retired Guy. I still gotta eat that work cheese.

First, you know league average points per game don't work like that. It was a defensive struggle. Rams were losing with that vaunted offense 16 to 20 going into the 4th quarter. The Rams scored a TD with 4:48 to play. Then Aaron Donald and the Rams defense did their job for that final drive.

The Rams scored 27.1 points per game during the regular season. The Bengals also scored 27.1 points per game during the regular season. So both teams were held below their normal game totals. You go by team average points per game, not league. The game came down to the final five minutes in the fourth quarter. The Rams defense held the Bengals to 20 points in the biggest game per year, 7 points below their average per game. So both teams defenses held the opposing offense to below their season game totals. Thus a defensive struggle. At the end of the game, the Rams defense came up with the stop to win while the Bengals offense got another shot to take the lead or tie and were stopped by the Rams defense.

I wasn't really theorizing. My main point is Ive seen amazing offenses like the Greatest Show on Turf who were the number one offense putting up incredible numbers won a Super Bowl and lose a Super Bowl. Baltimore Ravens won with a fairly crap offense as did the Tampa Bay Bucs. Eagles won with a QB who isn't even starting now in Nick Foles and a strong defense.

There' a lot of ways to win a Super Bowl with a lot different team configurations. Main thing you gotta do is get a lot of talent and get hot and stay healthy at the same time. Formula has changed some, but not enough to change that defense can still win championships.

RiverDog wrote:The average points per game per team in the NFL in 2021 was 18.3, so you can hardly argue that the Super Bowl was a defensive struggle when both teams scored more than the league average. It was a well balanced, with neither the offense or the defense dominating the game. FYI in the regular season, the Rams ranked 8th in scoring, the Bengals 7th.

The Rams defense was just so-so in 2021. They were ranked 15th in scoring defense, 17th in total yards surrendered. The Bengals' defensive performance was almost identical, middle of the road. Heck, our Seahawk defense surrendered fewer points per game than either the Rams or the Bengals.

The facts do not support your theory. If anything, they contradict it.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I am off work. I don't get to relax like Mr. Retired Guy. I still gotta eat that work cheese.

First, you know league average points per game don't work like that. It was a defensive struggle. Rams were losing with that vaunted offense 16 to 20 going into the 4th quarter. The Rams scored a TD with 4:48 to play. Then Aaron Donald and the Rams defense did their job for that final drive.

The Rams scored 27.1 points per game during the regular season. The Bengals also scored 27.1 points per game during the regular season. So both teams were held below their normal game totals. You go by team average points per game, not league. The game came down to the final five minutes in the fourth quarter. The Rams defense held the Bengals to 20 points in the biggest game per year, 7 points below their average per game. So both teams defenses held the opposing offense to below their season game totals. Thus a defensive struggle. At the end of the game, the Rams defense came up with the stop to win while the Bengals offense got another shot to take the lead or tie and were stopped by the Rams defense.

I wasn't really theorizing. My main point is Ive seen amazing offenses like the Greatest Show on Turf who were the number one offense putting up incredible numbers won a Super Bowl and lose a Super Bowl. Baltimore Ravens won with a fairly crap offense as did the Tampa Bay Bucs. Eagles won with a QB who isn't even starting now in Nick Foles and a strong defense.

There' a lot of ways to win a Super Bowl with a lot different team configurations. Main thing you gotta do is get a lot of talent and get hot and stay healthy at the same time. Formula has changed some, but not enough to change that defense can still win championships.

The fact that both offenses scored under their season averages is irrelevant. What is relevant is how it compared to the typical NFL game that season. Defensive struggles end with a combined score of under 30 offensive points. The 49'ers' 13-10 wild card win over the Packers is a game in which one could describe as a defensive struggle.

Having said that, the Super Bowl was not an offensive pinball machine, either. It was a well balanced, well played game very typical of the vast majority of NFL games that season. There were just two turnovers, both by the Rams. The Rams committed just 2 penalties, the Bengals 4. There were no defensive or special teams scoring. As well as Aaron Donald played, he was not the MVP. They gave it, as they usually do, to the offensive player, meaning that the perception was that it wasn't a defensive game.

You're right, it wasn't the Greatest Show on Turf that won the day. If you want to argue that you can win a Lombardi in a number of different ways, I'll agree with you. But you were making the Rams defense sound like the Legion of Boom. They were not. The 2021 Rams were a very well balanced team with neither unit overshadowing the other.

The consistently best teams have a balance of both Offense and Defense.
The Pats won all of those SBs because when the Offense wasn't as good, the Defense was and vice versa.
By focusing on one side of the ball it limits the teams ability to make up for one side or the others shortcomings.
And that might be our problem without a top QB going forward - namely we won't be able to step up on Offense when needed, and that's not even discussing the conservative nature of Pete's Offense.

NorthHawk wrote:The consistently best teams have a balance of both Offense and Defense.
The Pats won all of those SBs because when the Offense wasn't as good, the Defense was and vice versa.
By focusing on one side of the ball it limits the teams ability to make up for one side or the others shortcomings.
And that might be our problem without a top QB going forward - namely we won't be able to step up on Offense when needed, and that's not even discussing the conservative nature of Pete's Offense.

Previous dude wasn’t cutting it either . He was 0-3 in game end situations . Titans , commanders , bears . Couldn’t bring us back . He always did before .

Our offense will be solid . It will be a better balance then 3 or 4 3 and outs sandwiched around some long bombs . Watch and see .

RiverDog wrote:The fact that both offenses scored under their season averages is irrelevant. What is relevant is how it compared to the typical NFL game that season. Defensive struggles end with a combined score of under 30 offensive points. The 49'ers' 13-10 wild card win over the Packers is a game in which one could describe as a defensive struggle.

You go by the scoring averages of the teams involved, not the league average. The fact both offenses scored below their averages is extremely, extremely relevant. You go by the averages of the teams involved, not some league scoring average.

Having said that, the Super Bowl was not an offensive pinball machine, either. It was a well balanced, well played game very typical of the vast majority of NFL games that season. There were just two turnovers, both by the Rams. The Rams committed just 2 penalties, the Bengals 4. There were no defensive or special teams scoring. As well as Aaron Donald played, he was not the MVP. They gave it, as they usually do, to the offensive player, meaning that the perception was that it wasn't a defensive game.

You're right, it wasn't the Greatest Show on Turf that won the day. If you want to argue that you can win a Lombardi in a number of different ways, I'll agree with you. But you were making the Rams defense sound like the Legion of Boom. They were not. The 2021 Rams were a very well balanced team with neither unit overshadowing the other.

I had no intention of making the Rams seem like the LoB. I'm saying that the Super Bowl was more of a defensive Super Bowl where both teams held each other below their usual output. The Rams defense got the stop in the final five minutes. The Berngals offense failed.

Sure, it was a balanced enough performance. I just don't get why people get too caught up thinking one side of the ball or the other is more important. You need both and a decent special teams. Even an incompetent and weak special teams can cost you a game at the wrong time.

It's ironic, as this morning, without my usual weekday local morning news to occupy me at 3:30 am, I watched the replay of the Bengals/Rams Super Bowl on NFL Network. Sorry, man, it was not a 'defensive' game. Good defense, yes, especially at the end by the Rams when the game was on the line and their pass rush finally began to wear down the Bengals' overmatch offensive line. But that was AFTER the Rams' offense had gone 79 yards in 15 plays and trailing by 4 to score the winning TD with 85 seconds left in the game.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.