Super Bowl Update

By Kshell

This week the Seattle Seahawks(2-3) travel to the Cleveland Browns(2-3) in an important game for both teams. This will also be the first time the Seahawks face off against Mike Holmgren who is now the president of the Browns. Holmgren won't have much of an impact on the game itself although the Browns are experiencing his impact already and will in a few years. In this following post I'm going to talk about my five favorite Holmgren moments in Seattle. While in Seattle Holmgren coached for 10 seasons, leading the Seahawks to seven winning seasons, six playoff appearances(hadn't made the playoffs for 11 years prior to his arrival), five division titles and one NFC championship. Holmgren is the franchises all-time winniniest coach and in playoff victories as well. Holmgren's stamp on the Seahawks franchise when he was coach for 10 years and also general manager for four years was the greatest run in the Seahawks franchise history.

5. Holmgren's final game at Qwest Field:

Very rarely does a team win one for a coach but I always felt the Seahawks won that game for Holmgren. Holmgren was introduced last as he ran out of the tunnel during a trying 3-11 season as they took on the 9-5 New York Jets. It was a great gesture the Seahawks did for Holmgren having him run out of the tunnel.

The Seahawks pulled off the upset winning 13-3 over the Jets. Holmgren unlike most successful coach was strict but always appreciated the fans. Holmgren never had outbursts to the media and always handled himself with class. After the game was over who he actually defeated Brett Favre the quarterback who he'll always be linked with. Holmgren jogged around the whole stadium slapping hands with the fans and waving to all the fans showing his appreciation. Holmgren who was basically forced into retirement never once blew up on the Seahawks. The Seahawks players showing how much Holmgren meant to them pulled off the upset over the Jets as Holmgren walked away from Seattle a winner.

4. Holmgren builds the greatest offense in Seahawks history:

Mike Holmgren inherited Walter Jones who is the greatest Seahawks offensive lineman ever. From there Holmgren built what was eventually the Super Bowl offense. Holmgren drafted Steve Hutchinson with the 17th pick in the 2001 draft, signed Robbie Tobeck, drafted Darrell Jackson, signed Bobby Engram, drafted Shaun Alexander and traded for Matt Hasselbeck.

Holmgren for all the flack he received as a GM actually was pretty good. He traded the Seahawks 10th pick in the draft(Jamaal Reynolds-Bust) to the Packers for Matt Hasselbeck and the 17th pick(Hutchinson). He also traded Joey Galloway for two first round picks to the Dallas Cowboys which was Koren Robinson who was a key contributer to the 2003 and 2004 playoff teams. Oh the other player was Shaun Alexander who won the 2005 MVP. The Holmgren-Tim Ruskell relationship started to fall apart when Ruskell let Hutchinson go. A move had Holmgren been GM never would have happened. The Seahawks haven't had a thousand yard rusher since letting Hutchinson go. With Hutchinson and big Walter Jones the Seahawks had the best rushing attack in the NFL from 2001-2005 and had the #1 ranked offense during their 2005 Super Bowl season.

3. Defeating the Dallas Cowboys 21-20 in the 2006 NFC wild card playoffs:

On a national scale this is probably the most famous Seahawks win in franchise history. Heading into this game the defending NFC champions were banged up. The 9-7 Seahawks had lost MVP Alexander for six games, pro bowl quarterback Hasselbeck for four games. Heading into this game the Seahawks lost three of their four top cornerbacks including Marcus Trufant. Despite being at home nobody expected the Seahawks to win this game as the Dallas Cowboys featured Tony Romo and Terrell Owens. Holmgren making a bold prediction all week long stated the secondary will not be the story of the week. Well Holmgren was right on that one instead it was a fluke play which ended up ending the career of hall of fame coach and friend of Holmgren's Bill Parcells career.

The Seahawks battled back to take a 21-20 lead over the Cowboys. The Cowboys had the game in end all they had to do was make a field goal for the win to eliminate the Seahawks. Instead Tony Romo fumbled the ball and the hero from the last time the Seahawks beat the Cowboys Jordan Babineaux stepped up again making the saving tackle on Romo. After the game it was recorded Holmgren screaming in joy to his guys "I told you secondary you weren't going to let me down!". Holmgren put his neck on the line and his players responded like they always did for him. Holmgren is like a father figure where you know not to walk over him but you care for him so much you can't help but rise up for that man.

2. Trading for franchise quarterback Matt Hasselbeck:

After Jon Kitna and Brock Huard proved they weren't the franchise quarterbacks during a 6-10 season in 2000 Holmgren knew he needed a quarterback. So Holmgren shocked everyone when he traded for a guy he drafted in the 6th round for the Green Bay Packers. Holmgren traded the 10th pick in the draft to the Packers for the 17th pick and Hasselbeck. Hasselbeck at that point in his career had just 29 pass attempts in his NFL career. Holmgren at the press conference said in a half joking/half serious matter "This right shoulder right here will decide how long I'm coach here."

At first the move backfield on Holmgren as Hasselbeck struggled during the 2001 season. The Seahawks were 5-7 with Hasselbeck while 4-0 with Trent Dilfer missing the playoffs by tiebreaker. Many fans were frustrated that Holmgren didn't go with Dilfer all season long. Holmgren often said he isn't going to sacrifice the long term success for a quick playoff appearance. After starting off 4-9 in 2002 rumors were circling that Holmgren was going to be fired. Hasselbeck caught fire and the Hawks finished 7-9 to end the season. After that the Seahawks went to the playoffs five straight seasons. For Hasselbeck he finished his Seahawks career with three pro bowl appearances, completed 60.2% of his passes for 29,434 yards(6.9 YPA) with 174 touchdown passes to 128 interceptions. Hasselbeck ended up winning five division titles, and won five playoff games including the NFC championship in 2005.

1. Taking the Seahawks to the Super Bowl in 2005:

The Seahawks entire 2005 season was a make or break season for Holmgren. The 2004 season had great expectations but fell short losing once again in the playoffs. This was a win a playoff game or leave town type of year for Holmgren. The team responded with a franchise record 13-3 season that saw seven Seahawks make the probowl including Alexander winning the MVP. That season included memorable wins over the Dallas Cowboys 13-10 as the Seahawks trailed 10-3 with two minutes to go only to win in regulation. The Seahawks also beat the New York Giants 24-21 in overtime as Jay Feely missed three field goals.

In the playoffs though the Seahawks lost Shaun Alexander to injury against the Washington Redskins. The Seahawks the #1 seed still won the game 20-10 behind Hasselbeck as Holmgren got the playoff monkey off his back. The following game against the Carolina Panthers in a game I was in attendance the Seahawks crushed the Panthers 34-14 which was the greatest win in franchise history. Prior to Holmgren the Seahawks had won the division title just once and had never made it to the Super Bowl. Holmgren turned the Seahawks into a top five franchise from 2003-2007 as only the New England Patriots and Indianopolis Colts had better records.

In conclusion, Holmgren won't make an impact on the game today but I'm glad Seahawks fans are talking about Holmgren. He set the bar high for this current group of Seahawks to achieve and what made him so great was he valued the importance of the quarterback. Holmgren will always be a legend in Seattle and I can't wait for the day he is elected into the Seahawks ring of honor. As you can see Holmgren did so much for this franchise and although he'll be up in the booth or maybe even on the sidelines it will feel weird seeing him not with the Seahawks. I will now know how Packers fans felt when Holmgren coached against them. This will be strange but let's remember all the great things Holmgren did for this franchise.

By Kshell

This week the Seattle Seahawks(0-1) take on the Pittsburgh Steelers(0-1) in a week two NFL matchup. For most NFL fans this is just a normal matchup that has a team in rebuilding mode traveling to Pittsburgh to take on the defending AFC Champions. For Seahawks fans though this is a revenge game from Super Bowl XL when the Steelers won 21-10 over the Seahawks. To make this game even more interesting is that Bill Levy will be the head ref of this week two contest. He was the head official in that Super Bowl XL game. If you've read any homer Seahawks fan(Big Lo) this has been brought up. The fans are already convinced he is out to screw the Seahawks once again this week. Now in this following post I'll explain five reasons you can't blame the refs for the Seahawks losing Super Bowl XL.

Now before I go into the five reasons let's examine those poor calls. Not to mention all the little calls the Steelers appeared to get away with there was four major calls that went against the Seahawks. The first call was the offensive pass interference on Darrell Jackson which wiped out a Seahawks touchdown. Jackson did appear to push off but it was a ticky tack call. The Seahawks had to settle for three points on that instead of the seven they wanted. The second missed call was on the Ben Roethlisberger one yard touchdown run. Roethlisberger even admitted on Dave Letterman that he didn't score but what isn't brought up is that was third and goal from the one yard line. Good chance the Steelers go for it on fourth and goal from the one. The third questionable call was the hold on Sean Locklear which nullified a completion to Jerramy Stevens down to the Steelers one yard line. The hold was very questionable but again in football there are no guarantees. You see teams fail to score from the one yard line quite a bit and even if the Seahawks do score there they are up 17-14 with around 10 minutes left in the game. Hasselbeck would throw an interception on the following play instead of overcoming that call. On the fourth call which was a bad call Hasselbeck was called for a tackle below the waste which is legal. What is lost in all that is that missed call didn't affect anything. So yes there was some missed calls and questionable calls in that game which a good team would have overcame. The Seahawks didn't overcome the Steelers that game for five reasons which I'm going to list.

5. Josh Brown missed two field goals.


During the game the Seahawks kicker Josh Brown missed two field goals. Now Brown's misses were of 54 and 50 yards which aren't chip shots at all. Still these kicks were in a dome and had Brown made his kicks the Seahawks would have trailed 21-16 going into their final drive which would have been for the win. In the NFL every point adds up. If Brown could have made those first half kicks that could have built the Seahawks lead where the Steelers would start to press a little bit. Not blaming the game on Brown but he's had better days during his time with the Seahawks that is for sure.


4. Darrell Jackson ran horrible routes which cost the Seahawks 11 points.

The Seahawks big play receiver Darrell Jackson during his career with the Seahawks was the defination of a system receiver. He ran horrible routes during his time with the Seahawks and had terrible hands. The Seahawks had a touchdown called back due to Jackson pushing off the Steelers defender. It was unnecessary to do that as well. Hasselbeck delivered a nice pass to Jackson who simply decided to push off as the Seahawks had to settle for three points. Then right before halftime the picture I have is of Jackson attempting to catch a long bomb. As you can see he has the catch but he had zero sideline awareness as he didn't drag that second foot. The following season same thing happened in the Dallas Cowboys  playoff game and announcer John Madden said "It's amazing how I see Jackson and a year later he is still running horrible routes right on the sidelines giving his quarterback no chance to complete that pass ". Jackson's poor route running cost the Seahawks 11 points and seeing how they lost by just 11 points those were huge.


3. Mike Holmgren didn't feature league MVP Shaun Alexander as much as he should have.

During the 2005 season the Seahawks had the best record in the NFC at 13-3. The Seahawks also had two all-pro offensive lineman in Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson. The Seahawks featured Mack Strong who was also first-team all-pro as well as pro bowl center Robbie Tobeck. Behind those great blockers Shaun Alexander in a contract year was a man who couldn't be stopped. Alexander that season rushed for 1,880 yards(5.1 YPC) for an NFL record 27 rushing touchdowns.  During the NFC championship game win over the Carolina Panthers Alexander ran for a playoff franchise record 132 yards with two touchdowns.

That is why everyone was surprised that Alexander had just 95 yards on only 20 carries. It wasn't like he was being shut down as he was averaging 4.8 YPC during that game. Instead the Seahawks threw the ball 49 times with Matt Hasselbeck when the game was a one possession game throughout the entire contest. Mike Holmgren  in some of the Seahawks big playoff losses and regular season losses would forget about the running game. Hasselbeck is a good quarterback but the games where he is asked to carry the team the Seahawks usually lost those games. If Holmgren pounds Alexander instead of blaming the refs Alexander would have been Super Bowl MVP instead of hated on by the Seahawks fan base.


2. Jerramy Stevens opens up mouth but couldn't hang onto the ball.

Heading into the Super Bowl Seahawks tight end Jerramy Stevens had a war of words with Steelers outside linebacker Joey Porter(thanks to Walter Jones was a non factor). During the Super Bowl game Stevens was costly to his team dropping at least four passes during that game. Stevens may be the only Seahawk who has ever scored a touchdown in the Super Bowl but he also stalled plenty of Seahawks drives. During the 2003 and 2004 seasons the Seahawks had a problem with dropped passes which cost them big games. This game was no different with Stevens drops. If Stevens had played like he had all season long(his only good season) there is no blaming of the refs. Instead the Seahawks are remembering what a great season they had. That game appeared to have affected Stevens as the following year the Seahawks fans turned on him booing him and he simply was never the same player. Stevens proved that it's one thing to talk crap but it takes a real player to back it up. Stevens failed to back up his war of the words and it cost the Seahawks the Super Bowl win.


1. Seahawks were missing two key safeties during the game.

Earlier in the season the Seahawks had crushed the Houston Texans on Sunday Night football 42-10 to improve to 4-2 on the season. Later that night starting free safety Ken Hamlin who was at a night club(in the wrong part of town) decided to pick a fight with some other guys at the bar. There was a huge brawl and when the dust had settled Hamlin was knocked unconcious. Hamlin was lucky to have survived his act of stupidity but was out for the remaining of the season.

Filling in for Hamlin was safety Marquand Manuel who had played great in replacing Hamlin during the season. He would play so well the Green Bay Packers the following offseason would grossly overpay for him. During the game Manuel would end up pulling a hamstring and would have to miss the rest of the game. He was replaced by what should have been third string safety Etric Pruitt who was exposed as was fellow safety Michael Boulware. The Seahawks would allow the longest run in super bowl history when Willie Parker would open up the second half with a 75 yard touchdown run. Boulware would whiff on the tackle while Pruitt took a terrible angle on the play. Earlier in the game on a third and 30 Roethlisberger would complete the pass setting up their first touchdown because the safety play allowed the receiver to get behind them. Then the dagger of the game with the Steelers up 14-10 the Steelers did a reverse touchdown pass to Hines Ward for a 43 yard touchdown. Neither safety was in sight as Ward had blown past Marcus Trufant for the touchdown to go up 21-10.

In conclusion, that is a shame the NFL is having Bill Levy ref this game because it showed the NFL how idiotic some of our fans can be. The officiating in that game was pretty bad but as I pointed out with better execution the Seahawks walk away hoisting the Lombardi trophy. Some fans just love to live in denial but they don't realize they give the Seahawks a bad name. You'll hear words like "revenge" this week but with both teams making so many changes it's just another game. The Super Bowl loss will always haunt this franchise but I feel like the Seahawks fans aren't look at the whole picture. Instead of making excuses remember the Seahawks didn't play well enough to win that game. This sunday when Levy throws his first flag on the Seahawks I'm sure homers will be complaining but keep in mind there are always other factors that dictate an NFL game. That loss still hurts but the Seahawks lost for more reasons besides the officiating. The Seahawks take on the Steelers this week hopefully win or lose fans can simply accept the outcome without having to make excuses.

Martha note:  I'm deliberately not blogging about WMRA's 4 X 4 Fundraiser because I feel that the best way to get you to support it is to deliver an informative blog that helps demonstrate the station's worth in our community conversation. 

That, however, will not stop me from giving the phone number: 800-677-9672; or a link to on-line support.

Anyone else remember the scene in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid when our (anti-)heroes are being pursued relentlessly by a posse of unidentified men whom Butch and Sundance just can't seem to shake?

Butch (Paul Newman) and Sundance (Robert Redford), peering

At one point in the movie, having abandoned their horses to scramble up a rocky ridge, Butch and Sundance peer out from behind a boulder. There, sure enough, just like death and taxes, are those mysterious guys. "Damn!" says Butch. "Who are those guys?

That same question came into my mind Saturday morning when I saw that House Republicans had not passed their budget bill in party lock-step. Three Republican congressmen had voted against it.

Hmmmmm, I thought.  Who are those guys? 


And why did they break party ranks to vote "no" on the House federal budget bill?


"Those guys" are Representatives Jeff Flake (Arizona), Walter Jones (N.C.), and John Campbell (Calif.).


Jeff Flake has been in Congress since 2001, representing Arizona's 6th district, which is mostly made up of the eastern suburbs of Phoenix. Mr. Flake "was rated the most conservative representative by VoteView.  He is one of only eight representatives to get a 100% rating from the American Conservative Union."


According to his website, "Congressman Flake consistently looks for opportunities to cut federal spending. He has been a leader in Congress on earmark reform and has called for the new Medicare prescription drug benefit to be canceled, or at a minimum means-tested, in order help defray its cost." Among other conservative cost-cutting measures, he favors ending federal funding for Planned Parenthood.


Extremely interesting to me, just before last year's midterms, Esquire ranked the extremely conservative Mr. Flake among the 10 best members of Congress, citing him for consistently applied principles:

Demagoguing an issue is cheap and easy, especially this year. And there's perhaps been no state where demagoguery has been a precondition to electoral viability this year more than Arizona. (See: McCain, John, reelection of.) And so by contrast it is stunning to see a conservative Arizonan keep his head and stick to his principles while all around him is chaos. In his five terms, Flake has been one of the steadiest and most articulate proponents of sane spending and restrained government. And it has cost him repeatedly: In 2007, he was stripped of his main committee assignment by his own party for being too critical of profligate spending by Republicans when they were in power. And this year he withstood a stout challenge from the right for (among other things) having the guts to oppose the awful SB 1070 in favor of comprehensive federal immigration reform.

As to that "no" vote on the budget, the only reasonably direct explanation I could find came from an article in the National Review online, that refers to Mr. Flake's vote as a member of the Appropriations Committee:

Flake Defies GOP on Cuts
February 8, 2011 11:13 P.M.
By Andrew Stiles
Following a contentious vote Tuesday night, the House Appropriations Committee will move forward with a GOP proposal to cut tens of billions in federal non-security spending for the remainder of the fiscal year (through September). The move puts Republicans one step closer to bringing a continuing resolution to the floor that will replace the one that expires on March 4. 

The 27–22 vote broke down by party, with two notable exceptions: GOP Reps. Jeff Flake (R., Ariz.) and Cynthia Lummis (R., Wyo.) joined with Democrats and voted ‘no’ in protest over cuts they viewed as insufficient. (my bold)

Jeff Flake recently announced that he will run for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Jon Kyl.

Next . . .

Congressman Walter Jones serves North Carolina's 3rd District, which rambles around Beaufort on the state's coast and includes the Outer Banks. Mr. Jones, a Republican first elected to Congress in 1995, is the son of a Congressman of the same name who was a Democrat (as was initially Jesse Helms, who was his partial Congressional contemporary).

Mr. Jones' voting record appears to exemplify hard-line fiscal conservatism; i.e. the U.S. government should not spend money it doesn't have. The Hill  reported he drifted from Republican Party ranks in a March 10, 2010 vote:

Five House Republicans joined 60 Democrats tonight in voting to pull out U.S. forces from Afghanistan. 

The measure, defeated by a vote of 356-65, was introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and co-sponsored by three of the Republicans who ended up supporting it: Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Ron Paul (R-Texas), and Tim Johnson (R-Ill.).

Walter Jones also broke political ranks when he recently sponsored an amendment (that was soundly defeated) to the just-passed (in the House) federal budget that would have eliminated the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund. Jones stated, "We are trying to find $400 million to put in an infrastructure fund for Afghanistan, which is going to be borrowed money from the Chinese to begin with. It's not even Uncle Sam's money."

“During difficult times, American families and small businesses make sacrifices and do what they can to tighten their belts and rein in spending. Most people expect the federal government to do the same. Sadly, Washington has chosen to go on a spending spree and ignore the pressing demand for fiscal discipline. Rather than scale back wasteful spending, this budget resolution is projected to nearly triple the national debt over the next 10 years.”

But perhaps the clearest explanation for his "no vote" was delivered last Friday in the first paragraph of a Washington Post OpEd piece. Walter Jones co-authored the editorial with Congressman James McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat:

No one, it seems, wants to talk about the war in Afghanistan. This week the House debated a budget bill that is touted as reflecting new fiscal restraint, yet borrows tens of billions more for the war.

And finally . . . 

John Campbell has represented California's 48th  District (encompassing Newport and Laguna beaches) since 2005. His vote also appears to have been a statement that Republican cost-cutting measures did not go far enough.

Mr. Campbell's website offers an article from Politico that details the last ditch efforts he made with his fellow fiscal conservatives to chop more out of the federal budget:

The central event was an amendment from the conservative Republican Study Committee to cut an additional $22 billion from domestic and foreign-aid spending, pushing these accounts all the way back to appropriations levels in the last years of the George W. Bush administration. . . . 

 . . . “All this amendment does is ask the government to spend what it spent two years ago,” countered Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.). “Most Americans would probably like to do that. Why is that such a devastation?” 

“This amendment does not threaten government services. It is actually a step toward saving them.”

As to his "no" vote on the whole budget package,  Mr. Campbell made his reasons clear yesterday by writing on his website:

"I have been driven many times upon my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had no where else to go."    - President Abraham Lincoln 

I'm exhausted. I wasn't good at pulling "all-nighters" when I was in college. Now, at age 55, my resilience from such things is even less. Congress had an all-nighter Friday night, after a "most of the nighter" on Thursday. Just before 5 AM Saturday morning, after being in session and voting for 20 straight hours, and after 90 hours of debate on over 600 amendments, the House passed a bill to fund the federal government from March 5th until September 30, 2011 spending about $62 billion less than last year. But, more important than my physical depletion is the profound melancholy I feel right now. Yes, a spending bill passed that actually reduces spending. Many of my colleagues who have been around much longer than I have remind me that it is a huge shift to talk about how much we are going to cut instead of how to slow the rate of  increase. I get that.  But, if you are in a car heading for a cliff, it is not enough to apply the brakes if that braking is insufficient to keep you from going over the cliff. You must brake hard. It looks like Wisconsin Governor Walker is doing that in Madison. But, we are not doing it in Washington. I think America is ready to do what is necessary to avoid national fiscal collapse and calamity. But, I'm not sure Congress is there yet. 

The vote was 235-189. Every Democrat voted against it. That surprised and disappointed me. The cuts are not that deep and I would have thought that a few of the remaining "blue dogs" who often speak about fiscal sanity would have voted yes. I was one of 3 Republicans to vote no. We all voted no because it did not reduce spending enough. I thought there might have been a few more to join our little band of rebels. 

So, there you have "those guys."

Any thoughts, comments, reactions? Any opinion, yourself, about whether the House Republicans cut enough, too much, not enough from the federal budget?