Watching the Injuries Pile Up

And, this time, not for the Seahawks.

With the Seahawks-Packers game coming up in two weeks, the Packers have been hit with the following:

• Al Harris has a ruptured spleen.  It's unclear whether or not his season is done, but he's definitely out for the Seahawks game, and that's huge, because the Seahawks receivers had a horrible time dealing with the Packers' physical corners.  Now they'll only have to deal with Woodson, and he's nursing an injury himself (though it wasn't bad enough to prevent him from returning an interception for a touchdown last week).
• A.J. Hawk, Nick Collins, and Jason Hunter all were unable to return to the game against the Buccs.  I'm not sure who Hunter is, but Hawk and Collins (especially with Atari Bigby hurt) are key defensive players.
• Cullen Jenkins is out for the year.  Here's what PFW had to say about him:
  

  The loss of Jenkins is a huge blow to the Packers’ defense. He had missed only two games in the four-plus years he had been with the Packers and was off to an exceptionally strong start this season with 2½ sacks, 10 QB pressures and four tackles for loss.
  

  The Packers use a rotation of Jenkins and Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila at the all-important right defensive end spot.  KGB was hurt going into the Buccs game, and he was more of a situational pass-rusher.  Jenkins got the majority of the playing time.  And who is third on the depth chart behind those two?  Jason Hunter.  This should be a huge blow to the Packers' pass rush.
• Lastly, Aaron Rodgers suffered some kind of shoulder injury.  It sounds like he's going to play, albeit with pain.  Rodgers has been shaky enough as is, and this injury can't help.  Even worse (for the Packers) is that their back-up QB is Matt Flynn, whose abilities the Packers seem to have little confidence in, as they brought in an injured Aaron Rodgers over Flynn for the potential game-winning drive.

The Seahawks injury situation hurt, but the initial wave may have passed.  Injuries are fairly random events that, in most cases, even out between teams over the season.  The Seahawks lost the 49ers game in large part because they had no receivers.  Perhaps they're due to pick up a win or two due to opposing injuries.

Early Game Halftime Thoughts

With the Seahawks not playing, this week is all about rooting against the Cardinals and Niners, and, of course, fantasy.

Currently, the Cardinals are getting beat down 34-0. Kurt Warner's line: 9-15, 99 yards, 0 TD, 2 Ints. Yep, same old Cardinals. In my Pick-'em league I originally picked the Cardinals, figuring that spending the week back east would somewhat negate the travel factor. The Jets also looked awful in their last two games. Then I saw that the Cardinals defense would be without Bertrand Berry and Adrian Wilson and I switched my pick. Will those two ever stay healthy? The Cardinals need both to be healthy for their defense to function. As you can see, it's not functioning today. (On a side note, my girlfriend has Laveranues Coles starting for her fantasy team today. She's quite happy).

The 49ers were keeping the game close for a while but it looks like the Saints have finally broken through and are up 21-6. O'Sullivan hasn't done much, nor has Frank Gore.

I'll grant that it's just halftime, and I may be counting my chickens before they hatch (moreso with the 49ers than the Cardinals), but as a Seahawk fan, these are exactly the kind of results I want to see from the other NFC West teams. Playoff teams win road games like these. Not-quite-playoff-teams don't. I'm not saying this means the Seahawks are obviously better. On the contrary, the Seahawks also lost their one road game, quite badly too, and have another tough road game coming up next week. However, what this does mean is that the Cardinals and 49ers (I guess I have to take them seriously as a division title threat) have yet to take that next step as a playoff-caliber team.

The game I'm watching right now is Green Bay-Tampa - convenient as the Seahawks will play both in upcoming weeks. Both look good, but neither looks dominant. Both have tough defenses that force turnovers. Aaron Rodgers looks a little mistake prone while Brian Griese is a bit more conservative. Tampa doesn't seem to have any gamebreaking talent on offense (Galloway is hurt, Cadillac Williams hasn't played a game yet this season), so I'm not entirely sure how they're scoring points. Isn't Warrick Dunn about 43 years old? Anyway, the games the Seahawks play against these teams should be close - both winnable, both losable.

My Favorite Play of the Rams Game

Here comes a story that will seem totally unrelated to the title but does actually have a point:

For two years in high school I ran cross country.  After jogging through my first year, I ended up with a serious coach for my second. Example:  In my first year a workout my first year might have been to run six miles.  In my second year the warm-up and cool-down for the workout involved running three miles to the place where we would do the workout and three miles back when we were done.  It was crazy.  And this coach wasn't just about running hard.  He approached training from all angles.  One day, instead of our typical grueling workout he had us jog a couple of miles then had us watch Rudy for inspiration.  How awesome is that?

One of the most memorable things he did as a coach was talk about a race strategy (yes, there's more to cross country than one foot in front of the other) he called 'Will-Kill'.  The theory went like this:  There are certain times during a race (5k in my case) your opponents will be most psychologically-vulnerable to a sudden burst of effort, lasting maybe a minute or so in our 5k races.  By executing these will-kill efforts at the proper times you can drain your opponents of the mental energy it takes to win.

Pseudo-y?  Possibly.  Basically, what's being described is a way of manipulating that ethereal substance known as momentum.  When a runner performs their temporary burst, they want to do it at a time where their opponents think "damn, this guys isn't actually running hard now, is he?" rather than "good, I'm ready to take it up a notch too."

So, flash-back to the game against the Rams: 8:02 left in the first quarter, the Seahawks are up 3-0 and just came up short on a third and five from the Rams' 19.  The Seahawks have a choice: kick the (chip shot) field goal or take a chance on fourth and one.

The Seahawks went for it, got it, and two plays later Bumpus caught his first touchdown pass.  There are so many reasons why I love this call.

• I love Holmgren's aggressive play calling.  Worst-case scenario the Rams offense starts deep in their own territory, going against a jacked up Seattle defense supported by jacked-up Seattle fans.
  
• The Seahawks converted.  If the Seahawks are going to be a good team they have to know they can get a yard whenever they need to.  This is a great step in the right direction.
  
• After stalling in the red-zone on their first possession, coming away with only a field goal, a second defensive stop for the Rams (leading to a second field goal) could have been a momentum shifter.  I know the Rams went three-and-out on their next possession, but what if the Rams offense had taken the field thinking they'd dodged a bullet and knowing they could take the lead with a touchdown?  An inspired team could have driven the length of the field and taken a 7-6 lead, and the game would have been very different from there on.  Instead the Seahawks literally imposed their will through the running game, and figuratively kept their foot on the Rams' neck and didn't let them get up.  Will-kill.
  

Burress Out For Seahawk Game

Hot off the AP wire:

Super Bowl star Plaxico Burress was suspended for one game by the New York Giants on Wednesday for an undisclosed violation of team rules... The suspension takes effect immediately, meaning Burress will miss the Giants (3-0) game against the Seattle Seahawks on Oct. 5... The Giants did not specify why Burress was suspended. FoxSports.com said that Burress did not show up for work on Monday and did not telephone or answer phone messages to explain his absence.

Here's to hoping that this doesn't end up as an all-around misunderstanding, that everything ends up fine in Giant land, and the Plax is welcomed back for the Seahawk game with open arms.  Putting aside the obvious statement that I hope nothing serious has happened to Burress or someone around him, it would be huge if he doesn't play in the Seahawk game.  He's one of the most difficult receivers to defend and he's Manning's favorite target, one he has unmatched chemistry with.  With Burress out the Seahawks can focus more on stopping the Giants' massive running game without fear of being burned.  Stay tuned....

Willis Staying at RT?

What's up with these quotes?

Of Locklear, Holmgren said they are in a little bit of a conundrum. Now, with Pork Chop (who is OK) playing so well, they have three players for two spots, right guard and right tackle. He said they have not figured out whether to go (L to R) Willis and Locklear, Locklear and Willis or Pork Chop and Locklear. But he really likes what Willis has been doing at right tackle, and Chop has been good as well, certainly much better than Rob Sims. - Seahawks Insider

Obviously this is a better problem than not having enough talented offensive linemen, but more than that it's just weird. How much were we all fretting over the Seahawks' ability to resign Locklear after last year? A ton, that's how much. Locklear is generally considered (by Seahawk fans, at least) to be a top-10 right tackle in the NFL, and losing him, while not of Hutchinson-proportions, would have been a giant loss. Yet for week five, Holmgren is openly considering playing him at right guard while keeping Willis at right tackle. Never mind that of the two, Willis is the one who has taken reps at guard. I haven't heard Locklear do anything other than play right tackle since taking over the spot in 2005.

So, I've been reading around and listening to sports radio, trying to make sense of this, what all of this means as far as how good Willis is, how hurt Locklear is, and how the team is playing with the current line. Here's my best guess:

• The line has played well during the last two games and Holmgren has been impressed with how Willis has played at right tackle. I heard one of the KJR hosts (or one of their guests) specifically say that Willis brings something extra with his run blocking that Locklear doesn't. Maybe with the running game going so well and the passing game still up in the air, at least until Branch and Engram get a few games under their belt, Holmgren will want to milk the current running attack for all he can.
• Locklear isn't completely healthy, maybe 90-95%, so why rush him back?
• On a similar note, maybe Holmgren is uncertain about Womack's hamstring injury and is trying to plan around it.
  
• Womack simply can't be counted on, and if Locklear and Willis are two of your best five linemen you have to find some way to get them both on the field. If Womack goes down, and with Sims already out, next up would be either Vallos or Wrotto. Can you really justify sitting either Locklear or Willis while playing one of those two?

What amazes me is how Willis was never considered a viable replacement for Locklear when Locklear had yet to be resigned, and now he could keep him out of the starting lineup for another week. Two possibilities here at to how this happened:

1. The Seahawks underestimated Willis' potential. Given that Willis has been around for at least three, maybe four years, I find it hard to believe that this sudden development was merely overlooked talent
2. Willis has been coached up by the new line coaches, and with some solid game experience he's been able to blossom.

Mike Solari and Mike DeBorg are already paying dividends.

Bumpus

I grew up a WSU fan, so I was happy to see him catch a touchdown in Sunday's game. I hope it's not his last.

Every report I'm ready says that Engram and Branch will be back for the Giants game. So, after weathering the storm of injuries at receiver, the Seahawks will have the following receivers available for the week five game against the Giants:

• Branch - obviously kept on the roster, though probably with limited snaps initially, potentially requiring an extra active receiver. That, or a game plan that involves lots of two running back, one tight end sets.
• Engram - also on the roster, likely at full speed.
• Colbert - he cost the Seahawks at least a fifth-round pick, and he had (still has, hopefully) potential.
• Robinson - no way he's dropped after being back, and inactive, for a week. Right? Moreso than Colbert, there's a ton of potential once he's in game shape. Plus he can return kicks.
  
• Taylor - this guy has got to be on thin ice, right? He's already been demoted out of his starting job. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in a Taylor (re)evaluation meeting between Ruskell, Holmgren and the rest.
• Bumpus - with Engram coming back, his value as a slot receiver decreases significantly, but he still has value returning punts.
• McMullen - you like to root for the underdog, but this guy was signed off the street for a reason, right?

Believe it or not, we're right back in the same situation we were at the start of training camp - a couple of established starters and a bunch of reserves competing for a few spots. And one name I didn't list was Jordan Kent, who probably won't make an appearance on the 53-man roster but is guaranteed to stay on the practice squad. Would the Seahawks keep two receivers on the practice squad? Kent, Taylor, and Payne were all on the practice squad at points last year.

In recent years Holmgren has kept a total of 11 receivers and running backs. With Forsett gone to Indy the running backs are set at five. Babin was released, and I can't see any new defensive players being added, meaning six spots will definitely be available for receivers. Actually, a quick review of the current roster shows that all seven of the above receivers are on the 53-man roster, so the Seahawks don't have to cut one (or more) with Branch and Engram coming back. So... do we keep seven receivers just because we can? Hell, we're keeping two kickers. Maybe another linebacker to help with special teams.

Whatever the case, I hope to see Bumpus fielding punts as the season goes on. Just so long as he catches said punts.

Initial Game Thoughts

And just like that, the season is back on track.

There were a lot of good things to take away from this game, but I'll highlight two:

1. The Seahawks won.
2. The Seahawks won big.

I know it was against the Rams.  I know that.  Let me refresh your memory from last year:

• Saints 28, Seahawks 17
• Panthers 13, Seahawks 10
• Falcons 44, Seahawks 41

Yes, there are extenuating circumstances for each of those games.  So what?  Good teams don't squeak by (or lose to) bad teams.  Good teams pummel bad teams.

In the NFL, a win is a win is a win.  But when you're trying to project how your team will do in the upcoming weeks, a 24-point blowout is a hell of a lot more encouraging than a 6-point nail-biter.

I've got a bunch of specifics I'll get into over the next two weeks, but for now I'll simply say I feel pretty good about this team's chances.