SB Nation - Steve Vallos

Seahawks Have 37 in 100 Chance of Winning

John Morgan — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 19:59:12 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

Aftermath.

Prime numbers do not make for good headline writing, I guess. Brian Burke projects Seattle as underdogs, but not decided underdogs on the road against Arizona. Seattle is as healthy as it's been in two seasons. Arizona is not.

It's not fashionable to rip Steve Vallos after he proved himself an able backup center, but DEAR GOD did you see how awful he was in week 6? With Seattle trailing after a bit-o' Arizona chicanery matched with Bruce Dehaven Dehavenry (a quantifiable seven point swing), Vallos single-handedly put the Cardinals on the Seattle 23 after Calais Campbell tore threw him for an instantaneous sack and forced fumble on Matt Hasselbeck. In football, points are only part of understanding who will win. Possession and field position have real, but intangible value. Seattle had three plays, the last ending in a fumble, to the Cardinals three possessions. That ended the game before it could start.

Arizona only scored ten points after that ruinous start for the Seahawks. The Seahawks were not blown out. They were ambushed. Any and every coach that is not 1000% prepared tomorrow, should update their resume. Feel free to call me a homer, but in light of the Seahawks health and the Cardinals injuries, Seattle has the talent advantage. They can win tomorrow. They will win tomorrow.

SEA!

HAWKS!

The Seattle Seahawks are Playing for 2010 in 2009

John Morgan — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:21:25 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

A new face may be under center next season, but most of today's roster reflects tomorrow's roster. Before the Seahawks can make a run, they first must show they can be good.

Browse more photos »

Back to business.

We are six games through the season but the combined forces of probability and fate and time has many of us convinced the season is over. Seattle is in the repugnant place for a franchise where April seems more optimistic than October. Optmistic, maybe. More important? Never.

As I detailed last Spring and insisted last Fall, bad teams rarely rebound to greatness or even respectability. Seattle was bad last season. Very bad. Niners bad. Injuries, the seeming bizarreness of their extent, and the ever hoped for return to health had many thinking this season would be different. Instead, Seattle suffered another wave of injuries and is again facing late October without a realistic shot at the playoffs.

Sunday is Seattle's get-healthy game. It matters the world.

Talent is interdependent in football. A hobbled Brandon Mebane slows the ends. Mebane is healthy. A rickshaw starting at left tackle grounds the run game. Seattle imported a healthy left tackle. A Steve Vallos mucks everything up. Rob Sims has been a full participant in practice.

Sunday is Seattle's get-healthy game. Whoever Seattle signs, cuts, draft, promotes, loses or restructures this offseason, and whomever does it, the team that takes the field this Sunday is nine-tenths the team that will start the season next September. Maybe Seattle lacks a realistic path to the playoffs this season, but a 7-9 team that breaks late, clobbering chumps and kicking pretenders out of the playoff race, is much more likely to be a contender next season.

Seattle can strike a blow for their future this Sunday. Over the next few days, I will preview every little thing that matters: Matchups, scheme and execution. One win moves Seattle to 3-4 and puts it a win away from last season's total. A win away from .500. It may not be enough to get back into the race this season, but it strikes a resounding blow for the future of the Seahawks.

Auditting the Seahawks Roster: Center

John Morgan — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:51:11 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

Max Unger is tall and wears his weight high. He was a center at Oregon, but Oregon runs an unorthodox offense. Unger does not have the ideal build of a center and Seattle has converted him to guard. But did Seattle select Unger to play guard, or is he a guard today out of deference for Chris Spencer?

Browse more photos »

Is it any wonder Tim Ruskell values center so highly?

Chris Spencer: Spencer is supposed to be that rare blend of build and athleticism that can play in any system, and maybe he can. His footwork and overall technique are a work in progress, but Spencer has shown progress. He improves every season. That is significant, because at 27 Spencer is not in the midst of his prime, but really just entering it. I do not know the specifics of it, I would guess it is a combination of knowledge, upper body strength and finding the right fit, but center peaks late. Waaay late.

The player every Seahawks fan wants Spencer to be, Robbie Tobeck, was starting at left guard for the Atlanta Falcons when he turned 27.He was blocking for the much sacked Chris Chandler and Billy Joe Toliver, both were sacked on greater than 10% of all pass plays, and the then unknown Jamal Anderson. Anderson averaged 3.5 yards per carry that year.

Tobeck signed a free agent contract with Seattle in 2000. He was 30. The contract was for five-years, $6.8 million. As a six-year veteran, his pay was a little more than double the veteran minimum. Tobeck was not a highly sought free agent.

Nor is he a very fair comparison for Spencer or a standard for what Spencer should become, but he is a familiar example of a retread offensive line talent that seemed to peak late. Ruskell drafted Spencer while Tobeck was still starting. Spencer was not a longtime starter at Mississippi and was a bit unpolished entering the NFL. Ruskell must have known that though Spencer was talented enough to start in a pinch, his real value was locked in his potential.

So if Spencer is improving and entering the period we would assume to be his prime, why does it seem certain the Seahawks will not retain him?

Max Unger: Seattle avoided the inherent controversy created by drafting a center in the second round of the 2009 draft by quickly converting that center to a guard. It wasn't unthinkable that Unger could be a guard, but it wasn't exactly conventional wisdom either. Unger himself has said he is a center and wants to play center. Maybe five years from now that will be forgotten, but it seems important today.

Unger is playing right guard but it would not be a radical or retarding decision to switch him back to center following the 2009 season. He has extensive college experience at center and while 2009 may forever be a year of lost development for Unger the center, I assume he would pick it back up if needed and already be more developed at the position than he is guard.

There is something odd afoot and it leaves me unsure of Seattle's plans.

Whatever the plan, and maybe the plan is only to have options, Seattle is stacked at center. Spencer is quietly becoming a very good center, but his contract ends at the end of the season. An uncapped season would make him a restricted free agent, and I am sure Ruskell would take the chance to save money, but does he return Seattle's center of the future or a one year stopgap blocking a large investment?

Spencer has the center's build. He is between 6'2" and 6'3", carries his 309 throughout his body and over a strong lower half. He is an ideal matchup against the suddenly pervasive 3-4 nose tackle.

It was when watching Unger get blocked back against college level nose tackles that I first began seeing him as a guard. Unger is 6'5", and carries his weight on his shoulders and through his midsection. He is a technical blocker that doesn't overpower and may never matchup well against ever-larger 3-4 nose tackles. As a pass blocker, he is best using technique to ward off and slow rushers, using his reach and slide step to keep the defender ahead of him. He is weak against the bull rush and the bull rush is the primary weapon for most nose tackles.

Steve Vallos: When Spencer missed the first two games of the season, Vallos started at center ahead of Unger. Vallos started at left guard in week six, so Vallos did not start ahead of Unger because the team did not trust Vallos to play guard.

Vallos was okay at center. As I would expect, he was where he was supposed to be, but unlike I would expect, he wasn't there getting his face punched off. Zone blocking schemes are designed to protect players like Vallos, and though he can look almost puny at times, smaller players than Vallos have succeeded in the system. It seems odd to say it now, and I won't hesitate to say it might be premature (Vallos started against the Rams and 49ers) but Vallos looks like decent, extremely cheap center depth, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Seattle might be superabundant at center or it might be months away from looking for a new one. Spencer is a great physical talent and he could be a great zone blocking center, but his standing within the organization has always seemed shaky and his rookie contract is coming to an end. Unger could be his successor or already permanently converted to guard. That would make me happy, but maybe not Unger. The bare facts are that Seattle has invested tremendous resources into the position and acquired great talent and depth, but it's anyone's guess who plays center for the Seahawks in 2010.

Auditing the Seahawks Roster: Left Guard

John Morgan — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:05:22 -0000

Seattle needs better everything at guard. It is neither top heavy with talent nor deep with potential. It has one player with good potential that does not fit the scheme well and a host of generic offensive linemen and project players.

Rob Sims: Once upon a time, Rob Sims was probably the worst player you heard too much of. Mike Holmgren was never satisfied with Sims. Maybe it was holdover hostility for Ruskell losing Steve Hutchinson. Maybe Sims wasn't matched for Holmgren's demanding system of pull blocks. Maybe Sims was a more convenient target than Shaun Alexander. It seems almost implausible now, but many who followed the Seahawks, perhaps Holmgren believed it too, thought Sims was holding back Alexander in 2007.

I may have gotten too caught up defending Sims. I do not think I ever overstated his abilities, but rather I might have been too conservative for fear I would rile the Alexander partisans. You don't want to fight a battle on multiple fronts if you can avoid it, and to me defending Sims was auxiliary to identifying how awful Alexander had become.

Then Sims lost all of 2008. The debate was shelved. Talk ran to whether Julius Jones was fair, middling, mediocre or average. Mike Wahle showed us what good feet, good experience and a pair of arms hanging from zip ties could do - and could not do.

So it was with a bit of surprise that I saw Sims not just returning, returning to form or developing this season, but actually kicking ass. Sims was beginning to pair the steadiness and forgetability he had displayed as a pass blocker with mobility, lock down ability and dominance as a run blocker.

Then he got hurt again.

Sims is a restricted free agent this offseason. It could or should be a no brainer to retain him, but I am not sure it will be. Though Sims played tackle for part of his college career, and though Sims has good in-line quickness and straight line speed, he is not the prototypical, athletic-but-undersized zone lineman. He isn't tripping over his own feet anymore like he did in 2007, but he's not pulling out and commanding a position the way Wahle did in 2008, either.

This is a position Seattle can get better at. I've often thought of Sims as a right guard, regardless of where he played at Ohio State. But this isn't a position Seattle must upgrade to succeed. Sims is young, developing, a good pass blocker and, for at least one more season, cheap.

Mansfield Wrotto: Steve Vallos started over Wrotto last Sunday. Mr. Wrotto, say hello to Mr. Atkins.

Steve Vallos: Vallos has earned his stripes as the utility offensive lineman fans absolutely cringe at, "real" fans speak of in glowing coach speak, and real fans know is an interchangeable company man that will be cut and promoted to line coach the day he gets hurt, expensive or says "No."

"Vallos! Grab me that ShamWow, Matt needs to put his helmet on and it's sticking."

Auditing the Seahawks Roster: Left Tackle

John Morgan — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:19:47 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

I assume this is an optical illusion and Matt Hasselbeck doesn't really dwarf Kurt Warner. Warner is all smiles. Hasselbeck has the wan smile of a man with tenderized insides. Flipping the two expressions starts with improving the offensive line. Improving the offensive line starts with a starting caliber left tackle.

Browse more photos »

Seattle has assembled quite a motley crew at left tackle. The bye week is a good time to determine the future of the position and how Seattle should get there.

Walter Jones: Here's my hope: Jones does not return to the Seahawks this season. With his time off stretching well over a year, Jones begins recapturing the joy of not playing. He realizes he has nothing left to prove to the league, no need for the remainder of his contract, and a long life ahead of him, knees, shoulders and brain intact. Walter Jones announces his retirement and Seahawks fans everywhere can begin what will be a lifelong tribute to the greatest Seahawk to ever put on Blue.

Sean Locklear: Seattle signed Sean Locklear to a five-year, $32 million contract in 2008. That contract contained escalators if Locklear eventually took over at left tackle. He started this season as Seattle's starting left tackle, but wasn't there long before being sidelined with yet another injury. Injuries have become a major problem for Lock. He is not a superstar and does not play a position Seattle needs a superstar, but he doesn't become a good target for release until the offseason of 2011. He is guaranteed $12 million and, to my knowledge, has only been paid a hair more than $6 million.

Locklear has the skills to be what Seattle needs in a left tackle. He is good in pass pro and a good fit for a zone blocking scheme. He has good footwork, takes good angles and knows how to pull out, cut and block on the move. His most recent injury is another in a line of disconnected, fluke injuries that have plagued him. Perhaps Locklear lacks the ability to protect his body, but that is such a hard thing to know. Locklear's injuries are not the degenerative kind. He does not have the weakened shoulder joints or bollocksed up knees of a player in premature decline. He hasn't shown lingering effects from his injuries and Malcolm Gladwell does not weep for his brain.

Locklear gives Seattle freedom to approach the draft and offseason with options. The team might add a better talent at left tackle and move Locklear back to right tackle. It might think there is better talent at guard or right tackle, and decide to keep on Locklear and hope he develops. It could move Locklear to guard. His injuries have hurt his value, and he is no longer cheap, but his contract is not burdensome. Locklear has a place within this organization for now, be it starting at left tackle, starting at right tackle, starting at guard, insuring a draft pick, providing depth or just being a bridge until a better player can take over.

Brandon Frye: Frye got thrown in the deep end and couldn't learn to swim before he had to be dragged out, gasping. For a little while, he flailed his arms and kept his head above water. Then the big kids jumped in and pulled off his shorts. Dwight Freeney did to Frye what Jay Ratliff did to Steve Vallos. Vallos returned the next season and proved he could provide depth at center. Frye could return next season and start.

I like Ray Willis a lot, but he is not matched to Seattle's scheme. It's hard watching a big man move so well and yet clearly not well enough to do what is asked of him. Watch Willis attempt to pull across the front of the line and engage an opposite field linebacker and you'll see for all his open-field blocking ability and big-man quicks, he is simply not quick enough to arrive in time. Frye is. Frye is the type of player a zone blocking scheme should have. He isn't huge and he doesn't eat small countries for breakfast like a Philly right tackle, but he has decent size, good versatility and very good athleticism. He isn't a mauler, but can maul when he has the angle or an assist. Most importantly, he can get out and cut that opposite field linebacker to spring C.J. Spiller for a 93 yard run off left tackle.

Kyle Williams: When Williams practice squad eligibility expires, so does his usefulness to Seattle. It's not your fault, guy, blame Vallos. I know I do. For everything. As Maggie Simpson so eloquently put it: "You're the reason I can't talk."

The Offensive Line Part 4: A Failure Not Earned

John Morgan — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:00:42 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

It's hard not to be mad after yesterday's travesty, but class, and the ability to direct one's anger where it belongs, separates the losers of yesterday and the losers of tomorrow.

Browse more photos »

Offensive line, right? It's a joke made thousands of times since 2005. From what little I saw of yesterday's game, the line was bad enough to kill the offense itself. The Seahawks week six line, Kyle Williams - Steve Vallos - Chris Spencer - Max Unger - Ray Willis, is the worst line Seattle has started since Tim Ruskell took over. Williams and Vallos are essentially replacement level talent, and Spencer to Willis is not the kind of intimidating right side that can hide a piecemeal left.

Seattle was poorly built but lucky in 2007 and as things turn out, it has been well built but unlucky in 2009. Kyle Williams was never meant to start. Seattle imported a player from across the country to keep Williams on its practice squad. Williams was buried behind Sean Locklear, Brandon Frye and theoretically Walter Jones.

Let's blow up the Jones situation again. Jones underwent microfracture knee surgery last fall. I thought that might be the end of his career, but I was in error. It might still be the end of his playing career, but Jones is very much a Seahawk and very much on the Seahawks roster. He cost $8.6 million against the cap each of the last two seasons and I believe costs even more than that this season. Maybe Jones is never going to play again, but in Ruskell's world, Jones is an investment and a failing one Seattle can't shake.

Before training camp, Jones passed his physicals. His microfracture surgery was a success. The rub is that the procedure is not likely to preserve Jones career and its short term consequences have left Jones unable to play. So the greatest player in Seahawks history, through no fault of his own or others, has become a big, fat boondoggle.

Seattle did invest into its tackle position. It signed Locklear to a contract with incentives if he stuck at left tackle. Locklear has been reasonably healthy and had shown some skills that could translate. The team was not relying on Locklear for its future, but with the entire tackle situation queered by Jones health, Locklear represented a cheap, low-downside bridge from the Jones era to whatever followed. Seattle re-signed Ray Willis to a two-year, inexpensive contract. Willis seems like a steal now that his early-career health problems are behind him. Funny how unpredictable injuries are.

Seattle's success kept it just outside 2008's historic offensive tackle class and it's hard to discredit Seattle for selecting Aaron Curry fourth overall in 2009. Linebacker is not typically a foundational position, but Stafford was gone, Sanchez was iffy, the tackle class overblown -- its best talent taken at two and its second best talent Andre Smith. Eugene Monroe is tossed around, but Monroe had serious injury concerns. He started the season for Jacksonville but has since been benched. If you saw the solution to Seattle's offensive line woes on October 11, you weren't sitting in Qwest Field.

At the time and in the short term, Curry appears to be the right pick. Seattle then traded its second round pick for the 2010 first round pick of the Denver Broncos. It was team with a rookie coach, Kyle Orton at quarterback and one of the worst defenses in the NFL in 2008. It was a smart decision then and whatever has happened since doesn't change that.

Unless it wasn't a smart decision. Eben Britton was available. He is playing right tackle now and may forever play right tackle. Seattle could have selected Andy Levitre, though Levitre is a guard. It could have drafted William Beatty, but neither player has done much for their respective teams. Instead it traded that pick for a better pick and traded back into the second to draft Max Unger. Unger has started all season and seems mostly competent for a rookie right guard.

So it was a smart decision. And yet Seattle's offensive line is in ruins. That is a microcosm for this entire debate. Tim Ruskell has made many smart decisions, but the Seahawks are not winning games. A general manager's job is to build a winning football team. Seattle is 6-20 over the last two seasons. It has clear and recognizable weaknesses at offensive line and in the secondary. Both are units Ruskell has invested in.

Ruskell drafted Ray Willis and he starts. He drafted Chris Spencer and Spencer starts, but has missed time because of injury. He draft Rob Sims and Sims starts, but has missed time because of injury. He drafted Unger, the rookie. He signed Sean Locklear as a low-downside stop-gap until the team could know what to do with Walter Jones, and Locklear's injury has been felt worst of all. He drafted Steve Vallos and Mansfield Wrotto, but Vallos has shifted around and started bad. Wrotto can't seem to impress Seattle's coaches. He got Brandon Frye for nothing, but Frye went down, and Williams for nothing, his asking price, and Damion McIntosh for almost nothing, but maybe a week too late.

Ruskell built his line through the draft and without great expenditure. His picks have been mostly mild to moderate successes. He may not envision an elite line or maybe just never saw value when Seattle was on the clock. That might be arguable, but it isn't indefensible.

So how did the offensive line become offensive? Injuries, age and one very bad decision, it would seem. Steve Hutchinson hangs over Ruskell. Walter Jones, Robbie Tobeck and Chris Gray got old. Jones, through not fault of anyone, has become a burden. Locklear, the young tackle many were gushing about in 2005 has suffered a rash of disconnected injuries. Sims, the young guard many were gushing about in 2006 has suffered a rash of disconnected injuries. Kris Dielman said "no". Unger is a rookie. Spencer has been competent and not too long ago was a steady, established starter. Mike Wahle filled in for a season before his body broke down. Tom Ashworth was expunged. No one Ruskell inherited from 2004 except Hutchinson who was worth retaining wasn't retained.

Revisiting Ruskell's decisions when they were made does not reveal great missed opportunities, but missed opportunities. It does not reveal a general manager that ran a historically great line into the ground, but instead one crucial mistake and the irrepressible destructiveness of time. It does not reveal a man who ignored the line, but added good talent to it, good overall, good respective to the available players and good respective to their cost. It reveals that yesterday's game, awful as it was, is the kind of game every franchise endures. Ozzie Newsome saw it week one of 2007. Bill Polian saw it in week three of 1987.

They saw, we saw, an everyday, frustrating as hell, meltdown -- The kind that happens every Sunday. But there's no heads to call for and no easy answers to rebuilding.

The Offensive Line Part 3: The Healthy Year

John Morgan — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:51:01 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

Players like Matt Hasselbeck make but also create hard decisions. He has been undoubtedly Seattle's greatest quarterback ever, but when is too soon to prepare for the future? And how can you win when you know the player you acquire is not likely better than Hasselbeck's past?

Browse more photos »

Steve Hutchinson is an amazing talent. Seattle wasn't building a line of amazing talents. Chris Gray was sagging, Walter Jones in decline, Sean Locklear as serviceable as ever and Chris Spencer and Rob Sims still getting their feet wet. But it had a healthy line. Jones missed one game, the only game missed by Seattle's starting five, and he missed that game as a precaution. It's not well remembered today, but Seattle's 2007 offense was good, even with Shaun Alexander. It was a twelth ranked offense and a 9^th ranked passing offense. The run game was solid outside of Alexander. Maurice Morris had his best season as a pro.

Seattle was healthy in 2007 and other than right guard, it did not seem to have pressing needs at offensive line. Jones was writing the book on modern dominance at left tackle and his historic peers at the position commonly played into their mid- to late-thirties. Sims and Spencer were the subject of Mike Holmgen's scorn, but neither player played that bad, and both were still very young at a position that historically peaks late.

The big flub happened in 2006 and hurt Seattle in the 2007 draft. Tim Ruskell traded the Seahawks first round pick for Deion Branch and then signed him to a six-year, $39 million. He desperately wanted out from Darrell Jacksons's contract, could not retain Joe Jurevicius after Vicious signed for less to play for his hometown Browns, had no interest in keeping Jeremy Stevens, was about to lose Bobby Engram to Graves Disease, and had signed Nate Burleson as a inexpensive project wide receiver and return man. Burleson has fulfilled both roles well. He has cost Seattle $2, $3.5 and $4 million against the cap his first three seasons.

Ruskell saw the Seahawks a contender and didn't see a better opportunity to add a wide receiver. He may have reached a bit, but the enormity of his decision is overblown. Late first round picks are seldom superstars and often outright busts. Had Seattle switched Branch for a generic, late-first round receiver, that receiver would have underperformed the disappointing Branch. It could have used that pick elsewhere however. It could have drafted Ben Grubbs, Arron Sears or Justin Blalock. All three have been solid, though Sears career may be over after a frightening concussion.

This marks the point where we can first say Ruskell was deemphasizing the offensive line. He didn't add significant talent in a significantly talented class, opting instead to draft project player, Mansfield Wrotto, in the fourth. The team made a run at Kris Dielman, but when Dielman frowned at Seattle's weather and went home to San Diego to sign for less, the Seahawks didn't have a plan ‘B'. Its good health at offensive line may have hidden a rotting foundation. Chris Gray started 16 but arguably shouldn't have started one. Excepting Jones, it wasn't very talented, and the youth movement Ruskell started with Spencer, Willis and Sims, was not added to or challenged. Tom Ashworth and Floyd Womack were still primary depth and the most promising successor to Jones was Locklear.

The year that Ruskell's plan was its most effective was also the year Ruskell's plan looked most ominous. Seattle didn't land one of that free agent class's big name guards and didn't acquire talent that could start in a pinch. Had the same injuries occurred that year as have this, Seattle was thinner and weaker and more likely to collapse with Tom Ashworth, Mansfield Wrotto and Steve Vallos thrust into action than even Kyle Williams, modern Wrotto and modern Vallos.

But it didn't and line depth didn't seem like such an awful big deal in 2007. What line could look good blocking Shaun Alexander? It had young parts, an ageless veteran and a defense that was starting to look like the future of the team.

The Offensive Line Part 1: Ruskell the Rookie

John Morgan — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:41:21 -0000

More photos » by Elaine Thompson - AP

Seahawks fans are eager for a fall guy after watching their guy fall, but sometimes things go bad without an easy enemy to blame.

Browse more photos »

Normally I take this time to rewatch the game a few times and decide my storylines for the week. I have still yet to see the game. The bye week is on its way and there's plenty to discuss, but actual tape analysis might be a little slow coming.

I didn't need to see it to know that starting Kyle Williams beside Steve Vallos was going to be a problem. It was a not so subtle and not so brief reminder that football coaches can overvalue intelligence and intangibles. Vallos chemistry with Williams didn't make it off the practice field. The more important matter is how did Seattle's line get so bad? Could it be significantly better? And is there still hope for improvement?

From Caviar to Cat Food

Seattle started two future Hall of Fame talents on its Super Bowl bound 2005 team. Walter Jones was the best tackle of a historic class. The best tackle in the history of the NFL, according to some. No one currently associated with the Seahawks deserves credit for Jones success or Jones eventual decline. Three fifths of that historic 2005 line are retired or nearly so. The remaining two are paving the way to Canton for another back and injured, respectively. Knowing that so much of that talented line simply got old is cold comfort, but comfort.

Tim Ruskell bears some responsibility for the Seahawks losing Steve Hutchinson. As we know his style better, his fingerprints appear all over that botched attempt to save fifty bucks. The actual mistake was minor compared to the outcome. Ruskell was blindsided by a poison pill clause that introduced the world to the phrase "poison pill clause". He was backdoored by a wily GM and a guard that wanted out. If we can't ever fully excuse Ruskell from that mistake, I think we should at least maintain perspective.

The Seahawks line was in need of new blood as soon as Ruskell took over. The interior was comprised of two journeymen soon to retire and a free agent. The 2004 team, the team I affectionately call the Trader Bob Superfund, was bereft of promising offensive line talent. It was the principles, Chris Terry, Floyd Womack, Jerry Wunch and Wayne the Pain Hunter.

As has been Ruskell's lot, he was fixing the team at multiple positions during the offseason. He drafted Chris Spencer in the first, Ray Willis in the fourth and Doug Nienhuis in the seventh in a linemen- and linebacker-centric draft. Neinhuis was a pure bust, but Willis has developed into a cheap, talented right tackle. Seattle re-signed Willis this offseason and he's been a rock on an otherwise chalk line.

Spencer is a bit more controversial. He hasn't excelled and he hasn't been awful. He hasn't been healthy and he hasn't been wracked with injury. Spencer is only 27 and his potential is still strong, a potential that could mean eight more years of productive football, but he's a free agent or restricted free agent after this season and might not be worth his open market value.

Ruskell did invest in the offensive line. He did it at the right time and with some success. Willis was the first lineman selected in the fourth round and he has been the second most successful. I will give Jason Brown the benefit of the doubt, though I am not sure Brown is in fact more valuable than Willis. Seattle could have selected Logan Mankins or Michael Roos with its Spencer pick, but it didn't. Roos is a pure tackle and could have perhaps played right tackle for Seattle, allowing Locklear to move inside, but Seattle didn't see offensive tackle as a pressing need, or guard for that matter. Value for value, Willis has been a similar find to Roos. It's also notable that Chris Gray would play three more serviceable seasons at right guard, but Robbie Tobeck was out of the league the very next season. Ruskell added starter caliber talent at the right positions at the right time in his very first draft as a GM.

Matchups: Chris Spencer, Max Unger and Steve Vallos/Mansfield Wrotto V. Bryan Robinson, Alan Branch, Darnell Dockett and Gabe Watson

John Morgan — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 01:35:13 -0000

More photos » by Ross D. Franklin - AP

Arizona had trouble rushing against Arizona. Alan Branch (78) is on the back just as he receives the hand off.

Browse more photos »

With the stages of execution described, we can now explore the matchups that will determine if that execution is successful. The many individual matchups that must be won explain why teams do not break long runs on every attempt. In a way, the stages help determine the -1 to 2 yards, 0 to 5 yards, and 5 to n yards of the run.

Chris Spencer, Max Unger and Steve Vallos/Mansfield Wrotto versus Bryan Robinson, Darnell Dockett, Alan Branch and Gabe Watson: Dockett is the most talented of the group, but as a one-gap player, I do not think he is likely to play nose against a two tight end front. If Dockett is in, the play will turn less on if Seattle can move Dockett, Unger and Spencer should be able to, but more if Dockett can tie up Spencer or, more likely, break Unger's single block and get back into the play. When Dockett is in, Julius Jones should be cutting back inside to help neutralize his speed and perhaps take advantage of over-pursuit.

Robinson is the starter and he rotates with Branch. This is the matchup that will do much to determine if Seattle can run. A giant among giants, Branch was once dubbed a top ten overall selection, but very real concerns about his effort dropped him into the second round. He hasn't done much for Arizona since being drafted, but he's only 24. Branch has begun to establish himself this season.

Whoever the nose, and Arizona sometimes plays a double nose and a 2-4 in nickel situations, the Cardinals have a young, powerful and huge defensive line that is difficult to move. Indianapolis had some success running delays to the outside. Whatever the play call, outside is the destination.

Seattle's interior may wish only to battle to a stalemate. Branch and Robinson move well off the line and both are athletic within their space. The two make it difficult to disengage and move into the second level. Branch's power off threatens an interior collapse on every snap and rushers can have trouble receiving the hand off without defenders in their face.

That is why you draft Chris Spencer. Once a upon a time, he could move out and wall off nose tackles with ease. There wasn't a nose tackle in football short of Vince Wilfork I would bet against Spencer. But it's been a long time since we've seen that power, even as his technique has begun to catch up with his athleticism. Seattle's mishmash of guards matter, but a fraction as much as Spencer. If Spencer can stagger the nose off the snap, Unger or Vallos can exploit the momentum enough for Spencer to release. If he can't, Jones will miss essential second level blocking. If Spencer cannot even control Branch or Robinson off the snap, Jones will be facing a pile upon receiving the hand off.

Step One: Chris Spencer and Max Unger's Vital Role

John Morgan — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 21:19:27 -0000

This is where we start. Seattle is two tight ends. This is a common formation for Seattle and one likely employed with strained depth at tackle. Arizona is in a normal, gap-contain 3-4.

I will go step by step and show how missed execution at any one step can cause the play to break down. Let's start where almost any zone rushing play starts, by moving the defensive line. We'll assume Seattle is stretch left. Arizona is weakest against runs off left end, but Seattle is also the worst team in football at rushing off left end. That's little wonder with the revolving door at left tackle. This is one instance Seattle might be better starting Damion McIntosh at left tackle. We'll revisit that later.

At the snap, Chris Spencer and Max Unger will attempt to move the Cardinals nose tackle hard left. The goal is to jam the middle and stop the Cardinals inside linebackers from having inside lanes of pursuit. Spencer and Unger will attempt to double Bryan Robinson, the nose tackle that sees the most snaps at nose tackle. The goal is to get sufficient push that Unger can then single-block Robinson and Spencer can release into the second level and block the right inside linebacker.

Two things can go wrong. The less likely mistake is that Spencer and Unger cannot get initial push off the line and an inside linebacker is able to penetrate and tackle or reroute Jones. (Note, both inside linebackers are not likely to penetrate, the above is only an illustration on how either can.)

The more likely mistake is that Spencer and Unger do not achieve sufficient push on Robinson for Spencer to pull into the second level and block out the right inside linebacker. With that linebacker free to seal off the outside, Jones is blocked from running outside and sealed off from cutting back by the left inside linebacker. This mistake has beset Seattle this year, but Spencer is an upgrade over Steve Vallos both athletically and at powering the tackle off the line. Robinson can succeed either by pushing back Unger and Spencer, or by disrupting Spencer enough to stop him from reaching or getting a good block on the opposing inside linebacker.