HawkShack.com

As I listened to various NFL podcasts, there was a discussion regarding a reaction to Richard Sherman's TNF comments about Russ. We can go into a long wormhole conversation about the history that Russ and Sherm have but that is for another topic. However, on the show, Tony Gonzalez comments that he worried to see Russell Wilson may have played himself out of the Hall of Fame(those weren't his exact words, but that is the gist of what he said). Sherman followed up with Russell, having success because of the dynasty defense and Beastmode. Sort of piling on Russell, being that he is nothing without a defense and stellar running game.

Anyhow, fast forward to this week, there was a discussion about Bobby Wagner, and even after leaving the Seahawks, he is still playing at a high level. Then the question turned too, who gets in the Hall of Fame first, Bobby or Russell? Both are still playing at this time, and it will be some time before they are considered. I guess based on the continued play of Bobby Wagner, I would say he would get in well before Russ. I fear Russ has played himself out of the Hall of Fame.

4XPIPS wrote:As I listened to various NFL podcasts, there was a discussion regarding a reaction to Richard Sherman's TNF comments about Russ. We can go into a long wormhole conversation about the history that Russ and Sherm have but that is for another topic. However, on the show, Tony Gonzalez comments that he worried to see Russell Wilson may have played himself out of the Hall of Fame(those weren't his exact words, but that is the gist of what he said). Sherman followed up with Russell, having success because of the dynasty defense and Beastmode. Sort of piling on Russell, being that he is nothing without a defense and stellar running game.

Anyhow, fast forward to this week, there was a discussion about Bobby Wagner, and even after leaving the Seahawks, he is still playing at a high level. Then the question turned too, who gets in the Hall of Fame first, Bobby or Russell? Both are still playing at this time, and it will be some time before they are considered. I guess based on the continued play of Bobby Wagner, I would say he would get in well before Russ. I fear Russ has played himself out of the Hall of Fame.

Bobby's the only Hawk from that period of time that's a slam dunk. Beast Mode probably gets in, but maybe not right away. I dunno about Earl. His career absent all the extracurriculars was HOF worthy, but he had some behavioral issues, ie flipping off Pete, was seen as a locker room cancer in Baltimore, and had some domestic issues, all things that could influence various voters. Kam's career was too short. Sherm's resume is a little skimpy, 3 All Pros and 5 Pro Bowls. But he did make the All Decade team, so maybe.

IMO Russell was borderline HOF when he left here. He's never led the league in any statistical category, not top 10 in any of them for his career. For a quarterback, one of the prerequisites seems to be either a league MVP or SB MVP. Not only has Russ not won one of those awards, but he also hasn't gotten as much as a single vote for league MVP. Then the disastrous past 4 seasons with three teams. I don't think he has a snowball's chance in hell, but I've been wrong before.

Then there's Pete. Unless he gets the Raiders turned around, and they're currently 1-3, I don't think he gets in, either.

I guess time will tell. Russ has definitely not had a great ending to his career. At the same time he did revive the position for players of his height and that is something. No one thought he would make it at all in the NFL. He's had a good, long career with a Super Bowl win. He is I think the most accomplished of what was once considered a very strong QB class. But the end of his career has been a rather steep falloff and clear evidence that he needed his legs to play the position. He was still a pretty great QB in his prime. He is definitely the best QB Seattle has had. He was extremely exciting to watch and we won our first Super Bowl with him at QB. Sherm isn't wrong that Russ had the benefit of one of the greatest defenses in NFL history.

I imagine Hall of Fame time for Russ and they will measure his entire career rather than just the great parts. He may be found wanting or take a few tries to get in. I guess we'll see.

Bobby, Russ, Sherm, Earl and Beastmode will all make the Hall eventually. I still say Shaun should too, but maybe not.

Not so sure about Russ and Earl. Maybe Sherman, but Bobby for sure and probably Marshawn.
I hope I’m still around when Marshawn gives his speech. I think it could be epic.

NorthHawk wrote:Not so sure about Russ and Earl. Maybe Sherman, but Bobby for sure and probably Marshawn.
I hope I’m still around when Marshawn gives his speech. I think it could be epic.

Unless he says, "I'm just here so I won't get fined." Then puts the jacket on, grabs his nuts, and crowd surfs.

NorthHawk wrote:Not so sure about Russ and Earl. Maybe Sherman, but Bobby for sure and probably Marshawn.
I hope I’m still around when Marshawn gives his speech. I think it could be epic.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Unless he says, "I'm just here so I won't get fined." Then puts the jacket on, grabs his nuts, and crowd surfs.

Yeah, I can imagine Beast putting on his gold jacket then jumping backwards off the stage while grabbing his balls.

In all seriousness, that kind of unpredictability could keep Beast out. Voters kept an otherwise highly qualified Terrell Owens out for years due to his personality.

Lock: Bobby. If he's not in there on the first ballot, it'll be a crime.

Good shot, but could go either way: Sherman, Thomas, Lynch. They all made the 2010s all-decade team. From the 70s to the 2000s, every member of all-decade first team has made the Hall except FB Lorenzo Neal. About half of the second-team is in there, too. In the 2010s, a few who are already eligible haven't, including Lynch and Thomas, but it's still early. Based on that history, I think all three of these guys make it. Lynch's media persona and time have, I would guess, helped erase some of the bad memories that voters have. Same with the other two.

Very doubtful: Russ, Kam, Shaun. Between his post-Seattle years and the lack of the MVP vote, I don't see a case for Russ. Look, I loved Russ and supported him probably longer than I should have, and I don't think he deserves it. He belongs in the Hall of the Very Good and the Ring of Honor for sure. But not the HoF. As for Kam, it's a shame, because I'd actually put him on my personal Hawks Rushmore over Sherm and ETIII as the face of the LoB, but his career wasn't long enough. Maybe, way in the future, the seniors committee lets him in, but I'd be shocked if either he or Russ makes it within 10 years. I also think Shaun is in the same boat as Kam. Maybe the senior committee, but not before.

River Dog wrote:
Then there's Pete. Unless he gets the Raiders turned around, and they're currently 1-3, I don't think he gets in, either.

Pete has won a College Championship, which should hold no weight to getting into the HoF, and winning a Superbowl. But what if this run turns into a disaster with the Raiders? Let's just say he goes 15 - 36 for the next 3 seasons, including this one, and gets booted by the Raiders. Would Pete coach himself out of the NFL HoF?

River Dog wrote:
Then there's Pete. Unless he gets the Raiders turned around, and they're currently 1-3, I don't think he gets in, either.

4XPIPS wrote:Pete has won a College Championship, which should hold no weight to getting into the HoF, and winning a Superbowl. But what if this run turns into a disaster with the Raiders? Let's just say he goes 15 - 36 for the next 3 seasons, including this one, and gets booted by the Raiders. Would Pete coach himself out of the NFL HoF?

I don't think Pete is in now. He has one Lombardi and two NFC Championships. There's at least one HC that I can think of that is much more deserving of the HOF. Tom Coughlin has 30-year NFL coaching career with 3 Lombardi's, 2 as HC, a Coach of the Year award that Pete never received, and a better regular and post season winning percentage than Pete has. Pete is not perceived as being one of the top HC's in his era with guys like Belichick and Reid in front of him. But I also don't think Russell Wilson has ever been "in" the HOF even before his huge decline after leaving Seattle, either, so I might have a little higher standard than some of my friends.

And keep in mind that the college championship you referred to was stripped by the NCAA over the Reggie Bush scandal of which occurred on Pete's watch. I remember debating his being hired as the Hawks HC as he was leaving a sinking ship at USC when he took the Hawks job. He high tailed it out of Dodge before the hammer came down on the Trojans. His college career likely won't enter into the Pro HOF discussion, but if it did, it wouldn't look good.

River Dog wrote:I don't think Pete is in now. He has one Lombardi and two NFC Championships. There's at least one HC that I can think of that is much more deserving of the HOF. Tom Coughlin has 30-year NFL coaching career with 3 Lombardi's, 2 as HC, a Coach of the Year award that Pete never received, and a better regular and post season winning percentage than Pete has. Pete is not perceived as being one of the top HC's in his era with guys like Belichick and Reid in front of him. But I also don't think Russell Wilson has ever been "in" the HOF even before his huge decline after leaving Seattle, either, so I might have a little higher standard than some of my friends.

And keep in mind that the college championship you referred to was stripped by the NCAA over the Reggie Bush scandal of which occurred on Pete's watch. I remember debating his being hired as the Hawks HC as he was leaving a sinking ship at USC when he took the Hawks job. He high tailed it out of Dodge before the hammer came down on the Trojans. His college career likely won't enter into the Pro HOF discussion, but if it did, it wouldn't look good.

How much juice do you get for assembling an historically great defense? He was the architect of that defense. The Super Bowl he did win wasn't just a win, but a massacre of an historically great offense that put up some crazy numbers. Pete's defense absolutely destroyed Peyton and the Denver offense that up some crazy numbers. The Legion of Boom that Pete built from 5th rounders, a no name from the Canadian football league, and Earl, the only first round pick on the Legion, made Peyton and the Broncos look like one of the worst teams in the NFL. Peyton is a Hall of Fame QB. They made him look horrible. What kind of bonus do you get for that? Will the voters look at that year and that Super Bowl and Pete being the architect of one of the greatest defenses in NFL history that held the points allowed records for four years in a row, something even defenses like the Steel Curtain or Baltimore Ravens did not do. How does that add to his resume? He was one play away from taking a 2nd Super Bowl from the Patriots when Russ tossed that interception. Another item that hurts Russ, but not sure how it affects Pete.

That was such an amazing time in Seattle for NFL ball. Pete was the reason it all happened.

Aseahawkfan wrote:How much juice do you get for assembling an historically great defense? He was the architect of that defense. The Super Bowl he did win wasn't just a win, but a massacre of an historically great offense that put up some crazy numbers. Pete's defense absolutely destroyed Peyton and the Denver offense that up some crazy numbers. The Legion of Boom that Pete built from 5th rounders, a no name from the Canadian football league, and Earl, the only first round pick on the Legion, made Peyton and the Broncos look like one of the worst teams in the NFL. Peyton is a Hall of Fame QB. They made him look horrible. What kind of bonus do you get for that? Will the voters look at that year and that Super Bowl and Pete being the architect of one of the greatest defenses in NFL history that held the points allowed records for four years in a row, something even defenses like the Steel Curtain or Baltimore Ravens did not do. How does that add to his resume? He was one play away from taking a 2nd Super Bowl from the Patriots when Russ tossed that interception. Another item that hurts Russ, but not sure how it affects Pete.

That was such an amazing time in Seattle for NFL ball. Pete was the reason it all happened.

I feel that Pete will get less credit than he deserves. And I think any conversation about Pete in the HoF will bring up That Call, even though I think it's unfair as my memory is that Bevell made the call. Still, the buck stops at the top, so Pete has to own that loss. I'd bet that when they talk about that Pats game, it will be less "yeah, only one ring, but *thisclose* to a second" and more "he screwed up the dynasty by making the wrong call at the most important time."

To me, he's borderline because while his countable stats don't scream "clear HoF coach" he did have an impact on the game. He was relatively unique among successful coaches of the era in how much he let his guys be individuals, his embrace of mental health and sports psych principles, and his scheme which built from the back to front and trusted his players to execute with basic schemes. Even though Andy Reid is a more successful coach by any metric, I think Pete has influenced the game more than Reid, and some voters might find that appealing. I don't think he's done enough to get in, but I think he's borderline because of how some voters think about culture.

River Dog wrote:I don't think Pete is in now. He has one Lombardi and two NFC Championships. There's at least one HC that I can think of that is much more deserving of the HOF. Tom Coughlin has 30-year NFL coaching career with 3 Lombardi's, 2 as HC, a Coach of the Year award that Pete never received, and a better regular and post season winning percentage than Pete has. Pete is not perceived as being one of the top HC's in his era with guys like Belichick and Reid in front of him. But I also don't think Russell Wilson has ever been "in" the HOF even before his huge decline after leaving Seattle, either, so I might have a little higher standard than some of my friends.

And keep in mind that the college championship you referred to was stripped by the NCAA over the Reggie Bush scandal of which occurred on Pete's watch. I remember debating his being hired as the Hawks HC as he was leaving a sinking ship at USC when he took the Hawks job. He high tailed it out of Dodge before the hammer came down on the Trojans. His college career likely won't enter into the Pro HOF discussion, but if it did, it wouldn't look good.

Aseahawkfan wrote:How much juice do you get for assembling an historically great defense? He was the architect of that defense. The Super Bowl he did win wasn't just a win, but a massacre of an historically great offense that put up some crazy numbers. Pete's defense absolutely destroyed Peyton and the Denver offense that up some crazy numbers. The Legion of Boom that Pete built from 5th rounders, a no name from the Canadian football league, and Earl, the only first round pick on the Legion, made Peyton and the Broncos look like one of the worst teams in the NFL. Peyton is a Hall of Fame QB. They made him look horrible. What kind of bonus do you get for that? Will the voters look at that year and that Super Bowl and Pete being the architect of one of the greatest defenses in NFL history that held the points allowed records for four years in a row, something even defenses like the Steel Curtain or Baltimore Ravens did not do. How does that add to his resume? He was one play away from taking a 2nd Super Bowl from the Patriots when Russ tossed that interception. Another item that hurts Russ, but not sure how it affects Pete.

That was such an amazing time in Seattle for NFL ball. Pete was the reason it all happened.

If it were up to Seahawk fans like you and me, yes, he'd get in first ballot no problem. I'm just looking at it from an objective POV. How do you admit Pete before you admit Tom Coughlin?

IMO HOF voters don't generally use subjective things like "historically great defense" or "a massacre of a historically great offense", one play away from back-to-back, etc when weighing nominees. Most of them weren't as close to the Hawks as you and I were. They have a tendency to look at number of wins, Lombardi's, post season awards like MVP or Coach of the Year, winning percentages, playoff record, that kind of thing, and unfortunately, Pete comes up short when compared to other coaches in his era.

The other thing is that it depends on who else is nominated with him. If he's in a class with Reid and Belichick, probably not. But if we get a couple of Seahawk fans on the HOF committee 20 years from now, who knows.

Oly wrote:I feel that Pete will get less credit than he deserves. And I think any conversation about Pete in the HoF will bring up That Call, even though I think it's unfair as my memory is that Bevell made the call. Still, the buck stops at the top, so Pete has to own that loss. I'd bet that when they talk about that Pats game, it will be less "yeah, only one ring, but *thisclose* to a second" and more "he screwed up the dynasty by making the wrong call at the most important time."

To me, he's borderline because while his countable stats don't scream "clear HoF coach" he did have an impact on the game. He was relatively unique among successful coaches of the era in how much he let his guys be individuals, his embrace of mental health and sports psych principles, and his scheme which built from the back to front and trusted his players to execute with basic schemes. Even though Andy Reid is a more successful coach by any metric, I think Pete has influenced the game more than Reid, and some voters might find that appealing. I don't think he's done enough to get in, but I think he's borderline because of how some voters think about culture.

Yeah, that one call/pass could keep two Seahawks out of the HOF: Pete and Russell. Such is life.

Pete still has a chance to add to his resume. If he turns the Raiders around, gets them to the SB, then suddenly he's back in the conversation. Russell is likely toast.

River Dog wrote:If it were up to Seahawk fans like you and me, yes, he'd get in first ballot no problem. I'm just looking at it from an objective POV. How do you admit Pete before you admit Tom Coughlin?

IMO HOF voters don't generally use subjective things like "historically great defense" or "a massacre of a historically great offense", one play away from back-to-back, etc when weighing nominees. Most of them weren't as close to the Hawks as you and I were. They have a tendency to look at number of wins, Lombardi's, post season awards like MVP or Coach of the Year, winning percentages, playoff record, that kind of thing, and unfortunately, Pete comes up short when compared to other coaches in his era.

The other thing is that it depends on who else is nominated with him. If he's in a class with Reid and Belichick, probably not. But if we get a couple of Seahawk fans on the HOF committee 20 years from now, who knows.

Yes. It will depend on that. Pete's historically great defense is documented as a historically great defense. I'm not making the comment as a fan. The comment is backed up by statistical history. Not many defenses get a name, much less earn that name. The Purple People Eaters, The Steel Curtain, The Doomsday Defense. Event the Ravens great defense did not earn a name I can recall. The Legion of Boom was one of the few defenses that had a name and made that name legend by being one of the greatest defenses to ever take the field. Pete may have assembled the best secondary in NFL history. It wasn't just Seattle fans that thought this, but the entire NFL knew it. I can't even recall the last time I saw a special on a specific unit with a name, but there is a Legion of Boom NFL special because it wasn't some joke name. It was a real elite secondary unit that fueled one of the greatest defenses in NFL history. Pete put that together. I would think any voter doing their research would find that Pete Carroll put together one of the greatest NFL defenses of all time.

Andy Reid has more rings. So do a lot of coaches. Very few of those coaches put together a defense of the caliber Pete assembled.

Legion of Boom was so good, they have their own Wikipedia entry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_of_Boom_(Seattle_Seahawks)

That has to count in the voting. I can't see why it would not.

River Dog wrote:If it were up to Seahawk fans like you and me, yes, he'd get in first ballot no problem. I'm just looking at it from an objective POV. How do you admit Pete before you admit Tom Coughlin?

IMO HOF voters don't generally use subjective things like "historically great defense" or "a massacre of a historically great offense", one play away from back-to-back, etc when weighing nominees. Most of them weren't as close to the Hawks as you and I were. They have a tendency to look at number of wins, Lombardi's, post season awards like MVP or Coach of the Year, winning percentages, playoff record, that kind of thing, and unfortunately, Pete comes up short when compared to other coaches in his era.

The other thing is that it depends on who else is nominated with him. If he's in a class with Reid and Belichick, probably not. But if we get a couple of Seahawk fans on the HOF committee 20 years from now, who knows.

Aseahawkfan wrote:[es. It will depend on that. Pete's historically great defense is documented as a historically great defense. I'm not making the comment as a fan. The comment is backed up by statistical history. Not many defenses get a name, much less earn that name. The Purple People Eaters, The Steel Curtain, The Doomsday Defense. Event the Ravens great defense did not earn a name I can recall. The Legion of Boom was one of the few defenses that had a name and made that name legend by being one of the greatest defenses to ever take the field. Pete may have assembled the best secondary in NFL history. It wasn't just Seattle fans that thought this, but the entire NFL knew it. I can't even recall the last time I saw a special on a specific unit with a name, but there is a Legion of Boom NFL special because it wasn't some joke name. It was a real elite secondary unit that fueled one of the greatest defenses in NFL history. Pete put that together. I would think any voter doing their research would find that Pete Carroll put together one of the greatest NFL defenses of all time.

Andy Reid has more rings. So do a lot of coaches. Very few of those coaches put together a defense of the caliber Pete assembled.

Legion of Boom was so good, they have their own Wikipedia entry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_of_Boom_(Seattle_Seahawks)

That has to count in the voting. I can't see why it would not.

Catchy nicknames might resonate with fans, but I doubt that those voting for the HOF will take that into consideration.

Whenever they announce nominees or successful selections, with both players and coaches alike, they always talk about measurables: How many rings they have, post season awards, where they rank on all time lists, what their winning percentages were, and so on. None of us know exactly what criteria the HOF committee looks at, but it's a pretty good bet that they look at numbers, awards, etc. Intangibles like team nicknames and whether or not they were innovative likely take a back seat.

A good example is Don Coryell. He never won a SB, his teams had a measly 3-6 playoff record, and his regular season winning percentage was .561, about the same as Pete's .581 (Andy Reid's regular season percentage is .650, Belichick .647). Coryell was one of the most influential innovators of his time whose offenses had a catchy, LOB-like nickname, ie Air Coryell. Many teams adapted his offensive philosophy. But it was only decades in retrospect that they took his intangibles, ie an offensive innovator who changed the game, into consideration. Coryell wasn't elected to the HOF until 2023, 37 years after he coached his last NFL game.

Another thing that could make a difference is how they end their careers. If they ride off into the sunset on top of the world, that's the image they're going to leave with fans and voters alike and could make a difference on a borderline candidate. Ending their career with a belly flop won't hurt someone like Aaron Rodgers or Bill Belichick who are slam dunks, but those that are on the bubble, like Russell Wilson, ending their career with a thud probably seals their fate. Pete needs to at least get the Raiders into a competitive position.

It's extremely hard to predict how the HOF will select their inductees. The committee is composed of two voters from each NFL city in an effort to establish credibility and prevent homerism, but it still occurs. The Seahawks aren't a franchise with a storied history like the Cowboys, Steelers, Niners, or Packers are. I never thought that Kenny Stabler was anywhere close to HOF material, but he played for the Raiders and got voted in.

Yesterday didn't do anything to advance Pete's HOF resume:

Pete Carroll says he's processing Raiders' 1-4 start 'poorly'

Pete Carroll's upbeat spirit began to show cracks Sunday afternoon.

The Las Vegas Raiders were handed a 40-6 drubbing by the Colts at Lucas Oil Stadium, marking the team's fourth straight loss and the largest margin of defeat since its 48-9 loss at Kansas City in 2021.

The Raiders' performance over the past four weeks has been the opposite of what Carroll hoped for in his first season as the coach. During the first day of training camp in July, he stood proudly in front of reporters and said, "We are going to win a bunch, and I don't care who hears that."

"I'm processing it poorly to tell you the truth because I did expect to win right out of the chutes," Carroll said after enduring his second-largest margin of defeat as a coach -- including NFL and college.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/465 ... art-poorly

This is the exact same problem that Pete had here during the last 7-8 years of his tenure, that he's in denial, can't see the fact that his teams are mediocre at best. It explains why we made so many poor strategic decisions, like selling the farm for Jamal Adams. Pete kept thinking that he was just a player or two away from a Lombardi when the reality was that his teams were mediocre at best. I think he believes in his mottos a little too much: "Win Forever!" Yeah, right.

Don't get me wrong, I love Pete and will be forever grateful to him for bringing us the best period of football in franchise history. But his days are clearly over, and I wonder if he isn't afraid to retire as it's a sign that death is on your doorstep. I remember Bobby Bowden, legendary FSU coach, when pressed by reporters why he was working well past normal retirement saying "When you retire, there's just one more big event in your life, and I'm not looking forward to that."

River Dog wrote:Catchy nicknames might resonate with fans, but I doubt that those voting for the HOF will take that into consideration.

Whenever they announce nominees or successful selections, with both players and coaches alike, they always talk about measurables: How many rings they have, post season awards, where they rank on all time lists, what their winning percentages were, and so on. None of us know exactly what criteria the HOF committee looks at, but it's a pretty good bet that they look at numbers, awards, etc. Intangibles like team nicknames and whether or not they were innovative likely take a back seat.

A good example is Don Coryell. He never won a SB, his teams had a measly 3-6 playoff record, and his regular season winning percentage was .561, about the same as Pete's .581 (Andy Reid's regular season percentage is .650, Belichick .647). Coryell was one of the most influential innovators of his time whose offenses had a catchy, LOB-like nickname, ie Air Coryell. Many teams adapted his offensive philosophy. But it was only decades in retrospect that they took his intangibles, ie an offensive innovator who changed the game, into consideration. Coryell wasn't elected to the HOF until 2023, 37 years after he coached his last NFL game.

Another thing that could make a difference is how they end their careers. If they ride off into the sunset on top of the world, that's the image they're going to leave with fans and voters alike and could make a difference on a borderline candidate. Ending their career with a belly flop won't hurt someone like Aaron Rodgers or Bill Belichick who are slam dunks, but those that are on the bubble, like Russell Wilson, ending their career with a thud probably seals their fate. Pete needs to at least get the Raiders into a competitive position.

It's extremely hard to predict how the HOF will select their inductees. The committee is composed of two voters from each NFL city in an effort to establish credibility and prevent homerism, but it still occurs. The Seahawks aren't a franchise with a storied history like the Cowboys, Steelers, Niners, or Packers are. I never thought that Kenny Stabler was anywhere close to HOF material, but he played for the Raiders and got voted in.

What are you talking about? Catchy nicknames? It was one of the most elite defenses in NFL history. It was arguably the best secondary in NFL history. Nicknames mean nothing unless you earn them.

Pete did win a Super Bowl. He went to a second one. It wasn't just a win, it was an absolutely crushing of one of the historically best offenses of all time led by a Hall of Fame QB Peyton Manning. A 43-8 demolishing of the Denver Broncos that was never close after Peyton threw for 55 TDs and had historically great numbers on offense.

It's hard to believe a fan of the Seahawks cannot see what Pete accomplished in Seattle was extraordinary, like way above what other coaches do. When you're talking about a defense that did something the Steel Curtain hadn't done, that's historically good.

This defense was about to crush Tom Brady, but Brady and Bill got their usual dose of luck and Cliff Avril got hurt. With the pass rush pressure gone and a stupid call, well you know what happened.

I will have a hard time believing Hall of Fame voters won't take into account Carroll having built a legendary, historically great defense that demolished a Hall of Fame QB that had the best season of his career. That was quite the accomplishment.

Aseahawkfan wrote:What are you talking about? Catchy nicknames? It was one of the most elite defenses in NFL history. It was arguably the best secondary in NFL history. Nicknames mean nothing unless you earn them.

Pete did win a Super Bowl. He went to a second one. It wasn't just a win, it was an absolutely crushing of one of the historically best offenses of all time led by a Hall of Fame QB Peyton Manning. A 43-8 demolishing of the Denver Broncos that was never close after Peyton threw for 55 TDs and had historically great numbers on offense.

It's hard to believe a fan of the Seahawks cannot see what Pete accomplished in Seattle was extraordinary, like way above what other coaches do. When you're talking about a defense that did something the Steel Curtain hadn't done, that's historically good.

This defense was about to crush Tom Brady, but Brady and Bill got their usual dose of luck and Cliff Avril got hurt. With the pass rush pressure gone and a stupid call, well you know what happened.

I will have a hard time believing Hall of Fame voters won't take into account Carroll having built a legendary, historically great defense that demolished a Hall of Fame QB that had the best season of his career. That was quite the accomplishment.

We're going around in circles. There's no way for either of us to win this argument. But I will say that I tend to have a higher bar than most when it comes to HOF credentials. I never thought that Kenny Easley would get in because his career was too short and he never went to a SB, but he did. So, who knows.

The Raiders fan base is beside itself, calling on Pete to bench Geno, who has now thrown 9 interceptions in 5 games, leading the league in that category. Sunday's loss was the worst Raider loss since 2021, and the 2nd worst in Pete's entire head coaching career, including college. It will be interesting to see if Pete benches Geno or if he continues to trot him out there. He has a viable option in Kenny Pickett, a 3 year veteran with starter experience.

River Dog wrote:We're going around in circles. There's no way for either of us to win this argument. But I will say that I tend to have a higher bar than most when it comes to HOF credentials. I never thought that Kenny Easley would get in because his career was too short and he never went to a SB, but he did. So, who knows.

The Raiders fan base is beside itself, calling on Pete to bench Geno, who has now thrown 9 interceptions in 5 games, leading the league in that category. Sunday's loss was the worst Raider loss since 2021, and the 2nd worst in Pete's entire head coaching career, including college. It will be interesting to see if Pete benches Geno or if he continues to trot him out there. He has a viable option in Kenny Pickett, a 3 year veteran with starter experience.

I'm wondering why you're not acknowledging that the defense Pete built here was one of the greatest of all time. It's like we're going in circles for you to avoid giving Pete his due. What he built here in Seattle has never been seen in Seattle before and honestly is unlikely to ever occur in Seattle again. It is likely that you have seen Seattle's greatest era of football in your lifetime and Pete Carroll brought that to the fan base. I doubt you will ever see a defense in Seattle better than the one you watched. It was the league's best defense for a good four years. Dominance that we haven't seen matched by any Seattle team.

As far as the Raiders, yeah, that may count against him. He's in year 1 and a team wasn't rebuilt in a day. Raiders have been pretty bad for pretty long. I hope they give Pete some time, though at his age they may not.

You already know what I think of Geno. I guess he gave Pete a Tarvaris stand in until he finds his guy, which he might be able to do if the Raiders season continues to do poorly. He'll have a night high draft pick to find his guy.

I guess we'll see in time. I for one am giving Pete his due. What he did in Seattle was downright amazing. I'm glad I was able to watch it. I always wanted a historically great defense in Seattle. We got our own defense with a cool nickname they earned. They dominated for four years. All Seattle fans could feel confident that when they took the field, the other team was in for a hard night moving the ball. The highlight reels from that group are great to watch on Youtube with Kam and the boys putting the smash on opponents.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I'm wondering why you're not acknowledging that the defense Pete built here was one of the greatest of all time. It's like we're going in circles for you to avoid giving Pete his due. What he built here in Seattle has never been seen in Seattle before and honestly is unlikely to ever occur in Seattle again. It is likely that you have seen Seattle's greatest era of football in your lifetime and Pete Carroll brought that to the fan base. I doubt you will ever see a defense in Seattle better than the one you watched. It was the league's best defense for a good four years. Dominance that we haven't seen matched by any Seattle team.

As far as the Raiders, yeah, that may count against him. He's in year 1 and a team wasn't rebuilt in a day. Raiders have been pretty bad for pretty long. I hope they give Pete some time, though at his age they may not.

You already know what I think of Geno. I guess he gave Pete a Tarvaris stand in until he finds his guy, which he might be able to do if the Raiders season continues to do poorly. He'll have a night high draft pick to find his guy.

I guess we'll see in time. I for one am giving Pete his due. What he did in Seattle was downright amazing. I'm glad I was able to watch it. I always wanted a historically great defense in Seattle. We got our own defense with a cool nickname they earned. They dominated for four years. All Seattle fans could feel confident that when they took the field, the other team was in for a hard night moving the ball. The highlight reels from that group are great to watch on Youtube with Kam and the boys putting the smash on opponents.

I'm stopping short of using the term "all time." I don't like comparing teams, players, or coaches from different eras because the game and times change so much making it apples vs. oranges. There's been a lot of great defenses, from the No Name Defense, Doomsday, the Purple People Eaters, the Steel Curtain, et al, and certainly the LOB deserves to be in that conversation. Pete put together one of if not the best defenses for his era, ie the 2000's. Also in the conversation during that period of time are Tampa Bay's and Baltimore's defenses.

I just don't think that assembling a great defense and keeping them together for a few years is good enough to get into the HOF. Once that initial 4-5 years was up, Pete was very mediocre, even with his defenses. 2016 was the last season that Pete put out a top 10 defense. And in his later years, some of those defenses were downright awful. In Pete's last three years, we ranked 27th, 26th, and 30th in the league in defense by total yards. That's not the mark of a defensive genius. And now, he's following that up with a very rocky start in his new gig in Las Vegas.

I'm giving Pete plenty of props. He was by far the best head coach we've had in the 50 years the Hawks have been in existence. You didn't even have to be in the stadium to feel the magic during that period of time, and it's something I'll never forget as long as I live. I was in Buffalo Wild Wings in Kennewick for MNF during our Lombardi season when Michael Bennett returned a strip sack fumble for a TD vs. the Saints and that place was electric. If I'm in the stadium when Pete's inducted into the Ring of Honor, I'll cheer my fool head off.

College success shouldn't be a factor (even though it probably does shade some voters) because it's the Pro Football HoF.
So what is his career NFL accomplishments? Basically it boils down to winning 1 Super Bowl, going to 2 consecutive SB's (losing the 2nd) and having a legendary Defense for about 4 or 5 years.
Clearly that's not enough to be enshrined in the HoF.

NorthHawk wrote:College success shouldn't be a factor (even though it probably does shade some voters) because it's the Pro Football HoF.
So what is his career NFL accomplishments? Basically it boils down to winning 1 Super Bowl, going to 2 consecutive SB's (losing the 2nd) and having a legendary Defense for about 4 or 5 years.
Clearly that's not enough to be enshrined in the HoF.

Just for the helluva it, I decided to take a peek at the all-time NFL coaching wins. Pete ranks 18th behind 4 active coaches: Mike Reid, Sean Payton, Mike Tomlin, and John Harbaugh. All of those guys have at least one ring. If you sort the table for winning percentage, Pete drops way down to #49 with a .579 winning percentage. All 4 of the aforementioned active coaches rank well above Pete in that category with winning percentages well over .600. Tom Coughlin, the guy with two SB rings and not currently in the HOF, has a winning percentage of .632.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/

The other thing here is that Pete has never won a Coach of the Year award. If those defenses were so awesome and Pete such an innovator, you would think that he would have won it at least once during that 4-5 year stretch.

Like I said earlier, none of us know exactly what the committee looks at when evaluating nominees for the HOF. But I have to believe that they'll look at a coaches' entire body of work and not just a 4- or 5-year stretch.

I contend that if Pete had had this success in the East he would have won a Coach of the Year award.
Eastern media just don't pay much attention to the West Coast. You can see it now with how heavy the media concentrates on Dallas, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, both NY teams and for the most part ignores the West coast teams except for a few mentions about SF, LA (both teams) and Seattle. A couple of times I've heard commentators say something to the effect that we really should talk about Seattle more then go on to rehash comments about Dallas and Philadelphia.
It's just the way it is.

River Dog wrote:Just for the helluva it, I decided to take a peek at the all-time NFL coaching wins. Pete ranks 18th behind 4 active coaches: Mike Reid, Sean Payton, Mike Tomlin, and John Harbaugh. All of those guys have at least one ring. If you sort the table for winning percentage, Pete drops way down to #49 with a .579 winning percentage. All 4 of the aforementioned active coaches rank well above Pete in that category with winning percentages well over .600. Tom Coughlin, the guy with two SB rings and not currently in the HOF, has a winning percentage of .632.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/

The other thing here is that Pete has never won a Coach of the Year award. If those defenses were so awesome and Pete such an innovator, you would think that he would have won it at least once during that 4-5 year stretch.

Like I said earlier, none of us know exactly what the committee looks at when evaluating nominees for the HOF. But I have to believe that they'll look at a coaches' entire body of work and not just a 4- or 5-year stretch.

I don't know if he'll make the Hall of Fame. He has some unique credentials. I think Coughlin probably makes the Hall at some point. His team stopped the undefeated Patriots.

I don't know why you're stopping short of "one of the all time" great defenses. Both Tampa and Baltimore never had top points allowed defense four years in a row. Not just four years spread out, but in a row. From 2011 to 2016, they were ranked points allowed 7, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3. That is six years of insane dominance. They were the best defense of the 2010s and one of the best of all time.

Look at the Ravens. Even that great 2000 Ravens defense did not maintain the dominance that Seattle had. Not even close. Their rankings were all over the place after that year.

Tampa Bay Bucs great defense. Same thing. Rankings all over the place.

You know what team had that kind of statistical dominance? The Steel Curtain back in the 70s. Or the 70s Cowboys.Or Frisco in the 80s.

That's how good the Legion of Boom was. They were an anomaly, a throwback to the dynasty era of football with no salary cap and very few rules. These guys did that dominant a performance in the 2010s with all the rules for offense in place and protection against QBs.

It was an incredible display of defensive dominance. Even Marshawn was a throwback to those old teams. Pete basically built a 70s or 80s team in the 2010s. If the offense had been a bit better, we wouldn't even be having this debate. That was one of the things Pete never did manage to get in Seattle while the god mode defense was in its prime was great wide receivers.

It's always amazing to me that a fan can't acknowledge that Seattle had a defense that was one of the greatest of all time. It was one of the greatest defenses in NFL history. Better than the Ravens and better than Tampa Bay. They were in the conversation with The Steel Curtain and The Doomsday Defense. That is where they are. Statistical dominance of a rare sort seen mostly in the elder days of football dynasties. Give the Legion of Boom of their credit.

River Dog wrote:Just for the helluva it, I decided to take a peek at the all-time NFL coaching wins. Pete ranks 18th behind 4 active coaches: Mike Reid, Sean Payton, Mike Tomlin, and John Harbaugh. All of those guys have at least one ring. If you sort the table for winning percentage, Pete drops way down to #49 with a .579 winning percentage. All 4 of the aforementioned active coaches rank well above Pete in that category with winning percentages well over .600. Tom Coughlin, the guy with two SB rings and not currently in the HOF, has a winning percentage of .632.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/

The other thing here is that Pete has never won a Coach of the Year award. If those defenses were so awesome and Pete such an innovator, you would think that he would have won it at least once during that 4-5 year stretch.

Like I said earlier, none of us know exactly what the committee looks at when evaluating nominees for the HOF. But I have to believe that they'll look at a coaches' entire body of work and not just a 4- or 5-year stretch.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I don't know if he'll make the Hall of Fame. He has some unique credentials. I think Coughlin probably makes the Hall at some point. His team stopped the undefeated Patriots.

I don't know why you're stopping short of "one of the all time" great defenses. Both Tampa and Baltimore never had top points allowed defense four years in a row. Not just four years spread out, but in a row. From 2011 to 2016, they were ranked points allowed 7, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3. That is six years of insane dominance. They were the best defense of the 2010s and one of the best of all time.

Look at the Ravens. Even that great 2000 Ravens defense did not maintain the dominance that Seattle had. Not even close. Their rankings were all over the place after that year.

Tampa Bay Bucs great defense. Same thing. Rankings all over the place.

You know what team had that kind of statistical dominance? The Steel Curtain back in the 70s. Or the 70s Cowboys.Or Frisco in the 80s.

That's how good the Legion of Boom was. They were an anomaly, a throwback to the dynasty era of football with no salary cap and very few rules. These guys did that dominant a performance in the 2010s with all the rules for offense in place and protection against QBs.

It was an incredible display of defensive dominance. Even Marshawn was a throwback to those old teams. Pete basically built a 70s or 80s team in the 2010s. If the offense had been a bit better, we wouldn't even be having this debate. That was one of the things Pete never did manage to get in Seattle while the god mode defense was in its prime was great wide receivers.

It's always amazing to me that a fan can't acknowledge that Seattle had a defense that was one of the greatest of all time. It was one of the greatest defenses in NFL history. Better than the Ravens and better than Tampa Bay. They were in the conversation with The Steel Curtain and The Doomsday Defense. That is where they are. Statistical dominance of a rare sort seen mostly in the elder days of football dynasties. Give the Legion of Boom of their credit.

OK, I'll concede that the LOB was "one" of the greatest defenses. What ruffles my feathers is when someone claims that they were "the" greatest, the GOAT, etc. We can't compare coaches, players, teams, et al from different eras because the game and the times change too much.

And once again, I'm not diminishing that period of time. It was fantastic, the best in Seahawk history and the best time I've had as a sports fan in my life. I simply do not think that the relatively short period of time alone is enough to get Pete into the HOF. You have to look at his entire body of work then compare it to that of his contemporaries.

I, too, think that Tom Coughlin deserves to be in the HOF. He put two SB winning teams together, one that pulled off one of the biggest upsets in SB history, in the conversation with Joe Namath's Jets beating the Colts in SB3.

But both men have two slam dunk candidates in Belichick and Reid that are heads and shoulders above them and who they'll inevitably be compared to. And in Pete's case, he's making it worse. I don't think either of them make it.