Feb 2, 2014; East Rutherford, NJ, USA; Seattle Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson (3) greets cornerback Richard Sherman (25) before Super Bowl XLVIII against the Denver Broncos at MetLife Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Anthony Gruppuso-USA TODAY Sports

The Seattle Seahawks Are Not Built For A Dynasty


I’m sure the firestorm to come from the 12th man will be brutal but I must forge on.  A lot of talk has already started on the idea of a Seattle Seahawks dynasty.  Here is why such an idea is false.

Russell Wilson is not Joe Montana or Tom Brady

First and foremost all the notable “dynasty” teams of the Super Bowl era had one thing in common:  a Hall of Fame quarterback.  Bart Starr commanded the Packers, Terry Bradshaw led the Steelers, Joe Montana guided the 49ers, Troy Aikman threw for the Cowboys and of course Tom Brady rose to prominence with the Patriots.  Obviously Seahawks fans will be quick proclaim Russell Wilson in that category, but is he?  He’s a gamer for certain, a terrific leader, athletic and elusive.  The fact he’s made two Pro Bowls hasn’t hurt his stock.  However, one must ask the inescapable question.  If he didn’t have Marshawn Lynch and that defense, would he be as good as he’s been?  Certainly the threat of “Beast Mode” allows Wilson to get creative with his runs and bootlegs, not to mention the always dangerous play action.  Yet his numbers in the grand scheme of things are good, but not great.  Even combined with his rushing totals he has yet to top 4,000 yards as a pro.  His fumbling problem has actually gotten worse, going up from six as a rookie to ten in 2013.  For all the magnificent plays he can make, he’s very inconsistent.

NFL history does not favor defensive teams

Seahawks players were eager to shout out comparisons after the domination of the Denver Broncos, proclaiming their defense was the best since the 1985 Bears.  Indeed the performance did offer glimpses of that all-time unit.  However, it’s also not a favorable comparison if one wants to think about a dynasty.  History shows that the greatest defensive teams to win the big game like the Bears, the 2000 Baltimore Ravens, the 1990 New York Giants and the 1969 Kansas City Chiefs dominated for a year and then suddenly faded away.  NFL Films eloquently called such types of teams like  “comets” that shine brilliantly for a year and then vanish.  Also, aside from the Ravens none of those other teams had to worry much about free agency, another problem the Seahawks can’t avoid in their dynasty bid.

San Francisco 49ers and NFC West shows zero signs of offering relief

One final road block standing in the way of that lofty goal for Seattle is their division.  From top to bottom the NFC West is packed with talented, young teams including their hated rival San Francisco 49ers.  Both they and the St. Louis Rams are loaded for bear in the 2014 NFL draft to infuse their already stacked depth charts with even more talent.  Not to mention the Arizona Cardinals dealt the Seahawks their first home defeat in years late in the season.  This division in not going to be a cakewalk for the foreseeable future, which is not conducive to dynasty thoughts.

Conclusion

Now before a riot ensues, understand I’m not saying the Seattle Seahawks won’t win another Super Bowl.  Their roster is certainly strong enough to make that happen over the next two or three years.  However, based on the way they’ve been built and the obstacles in their way, the dynasty talk has to stop.

Dick's Sporting Goods presents "Hell Week":

Tags: NFL Russell Wilson San Francisco 49ers Seattle Seahawks Tom Brady

  • drunken_bastard

    You can’t be serious – can you? Tom Brady and the Patriots won those 3 Super Bowls on the back on an elite defense. And those Super Bowls were won long before Tom Brady was throwing for elite yards and record-breaking touchdowns. In fact, Russell Wilson in his first two seasons easily eclipses Tom Brady’s production. We can look back now and say Tom Brady is an elite qb but if Wilson has already shown to play at a higher level than Brady did duing that SB run, then why is it so tough to think Wilson is something special? Use your brain.

    • Erik Lambert

      Oh, I have. Wilson has indeed been more productive than Brady in his first two years because Brady didn’t start as a rookie and didn’t start playing until the 2001 season was underway. Also, look at the facts. Wilson inherited a much more talented team than Brady did with better receivers, running backs and a better defense. Hypothetically, do you think 2001 Brady would’ve performed better with that Seahawks group while 2013 Wilson went to that Patriots team?

    • Erik Lambert

      Oh, I have. Wilson has indeed been more productive than Brady in his first two years because Brady didn’t start as a rookie and didn’t start playing until the 2001 season was underway. Also, look at the facts. Wilson inherited a much more talented team than Brady did with better receivers, running backs and a better defense. Hypothetically, do you think 2001 Brady would’ve performed better with that Seahawks group while 2013 Wilson went to that Patriots team?

      • drunken_bastard

        It’s obvious I was talking about Brady’s first two years as a starter. Simply from an efficiency standpoint there is no comparison between the two – and Wilson has an impressive resume of 4th quarter comeback (and a SB win) to show how well he deals with pressure situations. Looking back at Brady we tend to view his accomplishments early on as something greater because of the player he eventually became.

        As for receivers – what? For most of this year Wilson was throwing to guys who, at best, were 2nd and 3rd receivers on the depth chart and like Brady did, he made the most out of what he had around him. And this comparison is tougher than you think. A statue like Brady with the Seattle pass protection wouldn’t have been able to play as good was Wilson has. When Wilson has the time in the pocket that Brady had you will see comperable numbers to a normal Tom Brady season, only it will happen with less interceptions and a better completion percentage.

        I think if Tom Brady was the Seattle QB at the same age as Wilson, that team would be at best a 10-6 team this year. I think if Wilson was the QB of the 2001 Pats the outcome of that SB would have been the same.

        • Erik Lambert

          I respectfully disagree. Let’s not forget the x-factor in this discussion: Marshawn Lynch. Wilson has been able to lean on the stud running back whenever he’s struggled . Who did Tom Brady have? Antowain Smith? It’s also easy to say Wilson has worked with scrubs but let’s also remember they had four receivers top 300 yards or more on the year, five if you count Lynch. Brady had two in 2001.

          Then there are the rule changes. Wilson came into an offensive era where he can get away with a lot more of what he does than he would’ve ten years ago. So my opinion stands that while Wilson is very good, he is not elite.

        • Erik Lambert

          I respectfully disagree. Let’s not forget the x-factor in this discussion: Marshawn Lynch. Wilson has been able to lean on the stud running back whenever he’s struggled . Who did Tom Brady have? Antowain Smith? It’s also easy to say Wilson has worked with scrubs but let’s also remember they had four receivers top 300 yards or more on the year, five if you count Lynch. Brady had two in 2001.

          Then there are the rule changes. Wilson came into an offensive era where he can get away with a lot more of what he does than he would’ve ten years ago. So my opinion stands that while Wilson is very good, he is not elite.

          • drunken_bastard

            Smith was a thousand yard rusher with a 4ypc average. Lets not act like Brady didn’t have talent around him. People seem to think that if you’re not on ESPN nightly then you’re garbage. A good supporting cast doesn’t need to be well known. They just need to produce. Seattle and New Englad in 01 exemplify that.

            This isn’t about Wilson being elite. Tom Brady wasn’t elite a decade ago. This is about you not seeing something in Wilson that is so clearly there. You pick the tiniest things as evidence of him not being there. Fumbles. Something that can be fixed so easily.

            And don’t even use the different era cop out. Fact is man, Wilson has started his career better than almost every qb to ever play the game. Most wins, most passing touchdowns, best qbr, etc. Dude is poised to be something special and its a pity you can’t see it. When Lynch is gone and the inevitable free agent moves some talent away you’ll see what I’m talking about. Dude can play.

          • Erik Lambert

            Yes, he can play. But unlike a lot of people I don’t put as much stock in production as I do the “eye” test. Wilson no doubt has the leadership, legs and arm. My problem with him is his consistency. Too often he doesn’t just struggle but flat out disappears during games. Naturally that was covered up because of Lynch and the defense. He tends to hold the ball too long, trusting his mobility more often than he should which results in hits (which will catch up to him eventually). You say the fumbling problem is correctable but given his work ethic why hasn’t he corrected it already? Obviously these problems weren’t enough to derail the Hawks in 2013, but one thing that must be remembered is in order to become a dynasty a team needs talent, luck and sooner or later a quarterback who can win games by himself. I don’t feel Wilson is that kind of player.

          • drunken_bastard

            He’s a second year player. Of course he isn’t perfect. Was Brady perfect his second year? Not even close.

            Wilson doesn’t rely on his mobility either. His offensive line breaks down and he has to move out of thebpoxket. And when you dint have receivers that can consistently beat man coverage you end up not having good reads. Look what happened in the Super Bowl when he had time, had Harvin to keep the defense honest. He played lights out.

            And disappeared? You realize even Brady struggled at times his first few seasons.

            If you dint see something special about Wilson you’re missing out. Nobody is perfect. But he’s about as close as you get when talking about second year quarterbacks.

      • RegisHawk

        All that means is that Brady had the added advantage of learning the playbook and studying film for years, while Wilson came in and succeeded from the start. Not only that, he competed for the job and won it, which it appears Brady was unable to do as a rookie.

        Finally, Brady’s post-season wins came in years where the Pats’ defense was better. They haven’t won the big game since their decline (circa 2007), Yeah, they always get there, but any team that got 4-6 free wins from a weak division would do as well. So he looks good and posts nice stats, but when it’s on the line, he can’t deliver any more.

  • Monzell Lamar Lewis

    Haters!!!

    • Erik Lambert

      Realist!

  • Ademi Smith

    They can’t afford to keep all the talent they have

    • Michael Stenger

      This is key! Lambert mentioned free agency, which is significantly tied to the salary cap. Here in 1-2 years when all these “no-names” contracts are nearing the end, most players will leave for other teams. These players will be asking for HUGE contracts after their performances. The Seahawks absolutely will NOT have the cap room. You really think Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor, Wagner, Smith, Wilson (this is only half of them) aren’t going to demand high dollar contracts? Seahawks will be lucky if they keep half. Don’t forget the veterans like Avril and Bennett only getting short term contracts. They’ll all move on to other teams able and willing to pay them. The only way Seattle will continue its dominance is to hit another gold streak in the draft. If they don’t win it next year, the run for a dynasty is over. If you #12′s can’t see this, your blind and/or brainless.

      Btw, enough with the Wilson hype. He’s good, most people understand this. He’s far from great. Other than his age, his numbers aren’t spectacular, record breaking numbers. You take away Beast Mode, that offense is nothing. Where did Seattle’s passing rank this year? 22 or 23, maybe worse? Not worth taking a second look. Now look at the run game…..ranked 2nd. The only reason Wilson QB rating is so high is due to the fact he only throws 10 passes per game. The rest of the time, he’s scrambling (because your O-line can’t protect without holding) and intentionally grounding the ball (which never gets flagged). He’s mediocre at best.

      • Michael Stenger

        FYI, I’m not a 9ers fan…

      • drunken_bastard

        Seattle was built through superior scouting and drafting, intelligent free agency moves. Teams like this stay at the top of the heap for awhile.

        • Michael Stenger

          Where was this superior scouting and drafting in 2013?

          • drunken_bastard

            Give it time. Sherman wasn’t even known until his second year and Byron Maxwell didn’t come to until his 3rd. Thebeookie class of 2013 will mature. Can’t have a Wilson, Wagner ans Irvin every draft.

  • CousinVinny75

    Russell Wilson is #2 all-time in passing TDs, #3 all time in total touchdowns for a QB their first two years in the league. The notion that he can’t be Tom Brady is not even close to backed by facts.
    You want to talk about production, Tom Brady didn’t even account for 30 total touchdowns in a single season until his SEVENTH year in the league. Russell Wilson accounted for 30 TDs his Rookie NFL season.
    The hate for Russell Wilson is amazing when his production at this point of his career is decisively better than Ben Roethlisberger and Tom Brady who have 5 Super Bowl rings between them. All of which came with an elite defense at their disposal.

  • Jonathan Visser

    All this noise coming from yet another commentator who is running out of things the Seahawks can’t/won’t do…

    I.E. Seahawks won’t beat the 49ers in the opening matchup, uh 29-3 beat down.

    Then ‘they wont beat the saints’… Beat down.

    ‘Well they won’t beat the saints in the playoffs, you can’t expect they won’t adjust’. Beat down.

    ‘…uh, well the 49ers are white-hot right now, Seattle won’t keep up with them in the NFC championship’ Beat them by ‘an inch’

    Oh my God, Peyton manning is the greatest QB of all time and the seahawks haven’t ever seen anything like the Broncos offense which is the BEST EVER…blah blah blah. DECIMATED.

    So can anyone blame these commentators now? Saying we won’t be a dynasty is all they’ve got left…

    UNTIL NEXT YEAR.

    All those ‘defensive teams’ you sighted, yea they were all dismantled in some fashion the follow years, losing a huge member of the coaching staff or key personnel.

    And as far as Russell Wilson being a franchise quarterback, you’re probably right, if we didn’t have the defense, he wouldn’t be as good. He wouldn’t be practicing against the best defense every week. So yea, he wouldn’t be as prepared as he is, or as successful as he is.

    But go ahead and keep predicting what the seahawks won’t do, it makes you look really smart to be constantly wrong. Put it on the internet too, cause it doesn’t last FOREVER.

  • RegisHawk

    The NFC West may be the toughest division to come out of successfully, but by the same token, once you do, the rest is all downhill. See Richard Sherman’s quote regarding the real SB being the NFC CG. Once you’ve put down the 49ers, Rams & Cards, teams like the Broncos are a cakewalk – and before you go trying to denounce that, take another look at that scoreboard from 2/2/2014.

    • Erik Lambert

      I don’t think you would call the Colts a cakewalk. The Texans had them dead to rights before throwing it away, as did the Buccaneers. Seattle went through half a dozen instances in 2013 where they should’ve been beaten and beaten badly outside the NFC West.

      • RegisHawk

        Coulda-woulda-shoulda are undefeated. They also didn’t occur. Seattle lost to the Colts by 7 (the greatest differential they’ve had in 2 years), beat the other teams and went on to win the Super Bowl, so using fantasy scenarios is specious reasoning. If we apply imaginary “should’ves” to Seattle, we need to apply them to all the other teams, in which case, all things are equal again and you still have Seattle winning the Super Bowl.

  • Paul Balzotti

    The Hawks are the 2nd youngest team to ever win a Super Bowl, and most of the key pieces of the team are under contract, and they surely will re-sign or extend MOST of the rest of the players over the next 2 years. They may lose a Golden Tate, or Michael Bennett, but 90% of the team should be the same for at least the next 2 to 3 years. Players like Earl Thomas, Cam Chancellor, Russell Okung, and Russell Wilson, anchoring the offense and defense, should be around for many, many years to come.. The defense was #2 last year, and #1 this year in both categories (and in take-aways), with all key players between the age of 24 and 26..So to imagine the defense not being in the top 5 for the next couple of years, is assuming major injuries.
    As for Russell Wilson, bringing up the 4,000 yards as a marker is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. He has not had the ATTEMPTS to get those yards. Yet his completion percentage and yards per attempt are very good, and he has record breaking numbers for TD’s thrown in his first 2 years, AND is the most winning QB EVER in his first 2 years—plus over 100 QB rating in first 2 years.
    Better yet, he has showcased over his first 2 years that he plays his best football in the biggest games, and in the 4th quarter. He is in the top 5 in the NFL in comeback drives in his first 2 years. To not put him in the same category as those other QB’s in his first 2 years, is literally ignoring the numbers of those QB’s in there first 2 years.
    If this writer could come with one solid explanation behind his theory that the Hawks should not be in the dynasty discussion, I would give him some credit…but this is a bad piece.
    Yes, they are in the NFC west, and you never know with any team in the NFL these days, but the Hawks have as much of a chance to be a dynasty as any modern era football team. To attempt to say it should not be in the discussion is ignoring the facts, and disagreeing with 90% of the NFL experts right now as well.