I'm typing this less than an hour after one of the more embarrassing losses in recent Seahawk history (and that's saying something). Through a combination of botched special teams plays, questionable decision making by Matt Hasselbeck, and perhaps the worst end-game coaching I've ever seen, Seattle kept New Orleans alive, at least for one more week.

However, I'm not all that interested in discussing the game itself, at least not after I mention that coaching blunder. So after this brief aside, the real meat of the post begins.

The Seahawks had a 29-yard gain to the Saints 15 to head into the two-minute warning. They had no timeouts left, and trailed by 11 points. Obviously, some combination of a touchdown, two-point conversion, and field goal were necessary in order to keep the game going. On first and second down, Hasselbeck threw incomplete into the end zone. No complaints there. It's on third down that things get screwy.

Mike Holmgren had already showed an utter lack of faith in Shaun Alexander by giving the ball to new fullback Leonard Weaver on a fourth-and-three earlier in the game (that failed). This time, he runs a draw play on third-and-ten from the 15 with 1:45 or so remaining and no timeouts. Weaver gained a yard.

Now, this is already a terrible decision...it's got almost no chance of working in any fashion, as Weaver is highly unlikely to either score, pick up the first down, or even get out of bounds. Plus, Seattle already burned New Orleans on a draw to Weaver on their last possession (that ended with Hasselbeck gifting an interception to the Saints). In short, it was a play that was certain to result in little more than a minimal gain and a running clock.

Even so, the Seahawks still had time to kick a field goal and at least extend the game a bit. Yes, they'd have had to recover an onside kick, but no matter what, even if you score a touchdown, that's still the case.

Idiotically, Holmgren has the team go for it. Now, if it were, say, fourth-and-one on the goal line, I could almost understand this. But the team was facing fourth-and-nine on the 14. You're almost obligated to throw to the end zone in that situation, because a completion which picks up the first down but doesn't get into the end zone likely costs you a fair amount of time, which especially considering the time wasted on the last play is a bad idea. So really, you're going for it on fourth-and-14, which is never a good idea, especially when you could just kick the goddamn field goal.

Needless to say, the pass falls incomplete, and the game is over. Even with a field goal, the odds against recovering the onside kick, scoring a touchdown, and then scoring the two-point conversion are low. But that's no excuse for horrendous coaching. Holmgren has been guilty of terrible clock management for his entire tenure in Seattle, and it cost them dearly in the Super Bowl. Still, this was not just a failure in clock management, it was a failure in game management, and his mistake was one that no coach at the professional level should ever make.

Now that I've got that off my chest, let's move on to the actual post.

In 2005, Shaun Alexander won the NFL MVP. While it's debatable whether he actually deserved the award, he certainly had a fantastic season, rushing for 1880 yards (and a 5.1 ypc) and a then-record 27 touchdowns. He was second in DPAR to Larry Johnson, so it wasn't just the conventional stats that liked him. Following the season, he signed an 8-year, $62 million contract to stay with the Seahawks.

Now, I fully understand that it would have been incredibly difficult for the team to not resign Alexander. He was coming off that MVP year, and it would have been a massive PR hit to the team to not resign him. But the warning signs were there. He was going to be 29 heading into the 2006 season, and 29-year-old running backs are terrible gambles. Plus, he'd had 370 regular season carries and another helping during the Super Bowl run, and as Football Outsiders has documented, going over that 370 mark (or 390 including the playoffs) almost always spells bad things for running backs.

Alexander's year in 2006 was, to be blunt, awful. He suffered a foot injury in Week 3 and struggled after coming back from it. Most people blamed the injury, and the loss of All-Pro guard Steve Hutchinson to free agency, as the reason for Alexander's woes, but it was becoming clear to me that he lacked the ability to execute the cutback runs that had defined his success in Seattle.

Shaun has always heard criticism from fans because he doesn't run particularly hard and often tries to avoid contact. While avoiding contact is, overall, a good idea for a football player, his tendency to dance around in the backfield can hurt the team, especially when he's not playing behind a dominant offensive line. Couple in a loss of speed and elusiveness due to age and wear and tear, and you have the Alexander of the last two years: one of the worst starters in the NFL.

Don't believe me? Look at the numbers. Last year, Alexander ranked 47th (out of 53) in DPAR. This year, he's 27th out of 42, and that doesn't include this week's 14 carries for 35 yards against the 26th ranked defense in the league. Of his two 100 yard games this year, one saw him gain just 3.9 yards per carry (and minus a fairly meaningless 22-yard run at the end of the game with Seattle up by 14 that drops to just 3.2 ypc) and the other came against the hapless Bengals defense.

Yes, the offensive line deserves some of the blame, as this unit is clearly inferior to the 2005 model. Still, I can't escape the feeling that a large part of the problem is that Alexander's unique style is no longer effective, not with his diminished physical skills.

So what remains? Well, the sentiment in Seattle has been growing that Alexander is a problem. Even the morons on local sports talk seem to be realizing that the Alexander of 2005 isn't coming back (nor are the Seahawks of that year in general). While it's true that this year's squad has other problems, their lack of a run game has put tremendous pressure on Hasselbeck, who is now without his top two receivers and has struggled the last two games.

Unfortunately, the Seahawks lack viable options at running back. Maurice Morris has been largely unimpressive whenever he's been given the chance to carry the ball, including the four games that Alexander missed last year. Still, you'd have to figure that he could at least run the ball harder than Alexander, and while far from skilled at pass-catching he's not the utter black hole that Alexander is. Weaver is intriguing, but shouldn't get more than 8-10 carries a game.

No matter the money committed to Alexander, the Seahawks need to wake up and realize that he's an over-the-hill back with little to recommend him. Perhaps limiting his carries will allow him to be more aggressive when he is on the field, and a running back-by-committee may be the only way the Seahawks can generate some semblance of a ground game, because it's clear that Alexander alone can't get the job done. Mike Holmgren desperately needs to find some sort of running attack, because the passing game isn't nearly good enough to carry the offense.

Football is a cruel and ruthless game, and often times high quality individuals who have contributed to a team's success have to be cast aside once they're no longer effective. No team has done this better than the New England Patriots, and considering their success the Seahawks would be well advised to follow their example.