Its not Russ, its not Pete, It wasnt Schotty or Bevell...

Spin Doctor

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,242
Reaction score
2,192
NFSeahawks628":xqxvo7vx said:
Pete is to blame and Russell is to blame.

Russell isnt consistant enough, needs to be able to methodically move down the field and he has rarely shown that ability.
You think Russell Wilson is the reason? Why is it whenever we hit the 4th quarter he was able the methodically move the ball down the field? Why was he able to overcome huge deficits in the 4th quarter while being completely neutered for 3 quarters?

The answer is Pete. We didn't go a record streak of games without scoring in the first quarter because of Wilson, that was on Carroll. I challenge you, go watch how other teams operate their offenses, then double back and watch a few Seahawk games. We do things differently here than just about any other team in the NFL. It's consistent among all of our coordinators and across three different quarterbacks.

Why is it that Russ is doing this now? He asked Carroll privately and brought up these concerns, nothing was done. He gave Wilson empty promises, so now he's taking it to the media. If something doesn't change this year we're going to lose our Quarterback. If that happens, Carroll needs to be fired immediately.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,639
Reaction score
1,657
Location
Roy Wa.
I just want to use an example we all deal with.

At work you have an issue, you speak to your supervisor or person that is your senior manager.

You do this a few times giving them the benefit of the doubt, they are busy or had other issues pop up etc, you go back again and they give you the your important and part of the solution we are working on it, here's your raise.

Nothing happens and over this time period your feeling about things get worse and become a issue you now fight thru daily feeling that they really are not paying attention and just giving you lip service.

So now you take it to a VP when the chance presented itself.

All of a sudden the Mangers are in your ear about using chain of command and that you should have came to them etc.

Thats kind of where we are.

Now in our work environment they could make things harder on you trying to get you to quit or transfer out from their area of operations.

That may be where we are with Wilson.

At work they love your productivity, and how you do things, they don't want to let you go until they have a replacement but you still get the stink eye.
 

BleuEyedHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
840
Reaction score
479
chris98251":q5xwnyiw said:
I just want to use an example we all deal with.

At work you have an issue, you speak to your supervisor or person that is your senior manager.

You do this a few times giving them the benefit of the doubt, they are busy or had other issues pop up etc, you go back again and they give you the your important and part of the solution we are working on it, here's your raise.

Nothing happens and over this time period your feeling about things get worse and become a issue you now fight thru daily feeling that they really are not paying attention and just giving you lip service.

So now you take it to a VP when the chance presented itself.

All of a sudden the Mangers are in your ear about using chain of command and that you should have came to them etc.

Thats kind of where we are.

Now in our work environment they could make things harder on you trying to get you to quit or transfer out from their area of operations.

That may be where we are with Wilson.

At work they love your productivity, and how you do things, they don't want to let you go until they have a replacement but you still get the stink eye.


I see your point but there are usually two sides to a story...

While it's true that a star employee will receive special consideration or even job tailoring to fit their unique talents, there are limits.

If you're in management attempting to keep everyone happy, then this employee might be considered a prima donna.

Someone attempting to dictate the direction of the business when that isn't their responsibility, is viewed as overstepping and possibly offensive - and not just by upper management. Every hiring level in the company is affected by chemistry. It can by a delicate balance and Russ needs to be more cognizant of that.

I agree with the original premise of the thread that all parties are responsible. In Russ's case, he knew the parameters when he signed the contract and he's being paid to fulfill them. Creating waves isn't in the team's best interest.
 

BASF

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,802
Reaction score
2,412
Location
Tijuana/San Diego
Spin Doctor":2k06b79b said:
NFSeahawks628":2k06b79b said:
Pete is to blame and Russell is to blame.

Russell isnt consistant enough, needs to be able to methodically move down the field and he has rarely shown that ability.
You think Russell Wilson is the reason? Why is it whenever we hit the 4th quarter he was able the methodically move the ball down the field? Why was he able to overcome huge deficits in the 4th quarter while being completely neutered for 3 quarters?

You are smarter than this Spin. It is the defense that changes more than anything. Allowing teams to move down the field with easier completions when you have a lead happens to every team in the league to burn clock and prevent the quick over the top score. When we do it for other teams people always lament how Pete lets off the gas pedal and allows teams to come back, but if Wilson is in command of the offense, it's suddenly, "He's no longer neutered."
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
You are smarter than this BASF.

They go uptempo and Wilson has more command and control of the offense in those situations.
 

Spin Doctor

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,242
Reaction score
2,192
BASF":1e3t5ikc said:
Spin Doctor":1e3t5ikc said:
NFSeahawks628":1e3t5ikc said:
Pete is to blame and Russell is to blame.

Russell isnt consistant enough, needs to be able to methodically move down the field and he has rarely shown that ability.
You think Russell Wilson is the reason? Why is it whenever we hit the 4th quarter he was able the methodically move the ball down the field? Why was he able to overcome huge deficits in the 4th quarter while being completely neutered for 3 quarters?

You are smarter than this Spin. It is the defense that changes more than anything. Allowing teams to move down the field with easier completions when you have a lead happens to every team in the league to burn clock and prevent the quick over the top score. When we do it for other teams people always lament how Pete lets off the gas pedal and allows teams to come back, but if Wilson is in command of the offense, it's suddenly, "He's no longer neutered."
Why is it that even when the Seahawks are within a score that the Seahawks are able to seemingly move the ball down the field at will? Why is it that the Seahawks are able to get those long completions? You know what I see in the 4th quarter offenses? Urgency. They get to the LOS fast, they very the tempo up, I see Wilson changing plays, and most of all he has more time to read the defense. Why is it that many other teams that are stuck in the position Wilson constantly finds himself in the fourth quarter aren't able to overcome? The change in defense does not explain everything.

As for Carroll, what you just talked about other teams doing with a lead is how Carroll prefers to play on offense, only he does it starting at the first snap.
 

John63

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
6,651
Reaction score
149
Spin Doctor":1cwuzrgv said:
BASF":1cwuzrgv said:
Spin Doctor":1cwuzrgv said:
NFSeahawks628":1cwuzrgv said:
Pete is to blame and Russell is to blame.

Russell isnt consistant enough, needs to be able to methodically move down the field and he has rarely shown that ability.
You think Russell Wilson is the reason? Why is it whenever we hit the 4th quarter he was able the methodically move the ball down the field? Why was he able to overcome huge deficits in the 4th quarter while being completely neutered for 3 quarters?

You are smarter than this Spin. It is the defense that changes more than anything. Allowing teams to move down the field with easier completions when you have a lead happens to every team in the league to burn clock and prevent the quick over the top score. When we do it for other teams people always lament how Pete lets off the gas pedal and allows teams to come back, but if Wilson is in command of the offense, it's suddenly, "He's no longer neutered."
Why is it that even when the Seahawks are within a score that the Seahawks are able to seemingly move the ball down the field at will? Why is it that the Seahawks are able to get those long completions? You know what I see in the 4th quarter offenses? Urgency. They get to the LOS fast, they very the tempo up, I see Wilson changing plays, and most of all he has more time to read the defense. Why is it that many other teams that are stuck in the position Wilson constantly finds himself in the fourth quarter aren't able to overcome? The change in defense does not explain everything.

As for Carroll, what you just talked about other teams doing with a lead is how Carroll prefers to play on offense, only he does it starting at the first snap.


FYi there have been times, though not enough, when we did this before the 4th qtr and still move it at will, so the whole premise is wrong.
 

AubHawk71

Active member
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
417
Reaction score
94
It's Pete.

If you want to be the where all decisions begin and end guy, then you need to take responsibility for the outcome and put your old man pride in check to maybe, just maybe, entertain some new ideas. Beyond the usual 'well we need to focus' blah blah blah you spew to the media and fans. There's nothing wrong with being a hot B+ coach, who sometimes aces a test. But I don't really watch pro sports for the 'well, at least everyone played honest and enjoyed themselves' aspect. This isn't charity, by a long shot. How do you fine tune and clutch the brass ring? Not by having Pete make all of the decisions.

The only harm that came from the 'Let Russ Cook' mini-era was the hit to Pete's ego.

You only have to look at the Houston Texans (or Sea Mariners) to see what a huge cluster of top down disfunction can do to an organization. Are Pete's hands tied? How? By who? Nobody, but himself. And what's the cost to him? Little or nothing. He's almost 70. His record will be his final word, he has a ton of money. He won. Unless the Hawks go 1-10 next year, everyone will still blow sunshine up his ego hole. He'll have a nice bust int he Hall of Fame and respectable Wiki page. Good for him.

So here we are. Next year will be no different than the last few. Maybe Russ or Pete will be forced out. Most likely the outcome will be a wasting of Wilson's talents while Pete coasts into a well earned retirement, with a huge gold watch. Fun.
 

12th And Loud

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
67
Reaction score
11
keasley45":1y0o3guz said:
Maybe its just the ultimate embodiment of the unique character of this team.

Not to create yet another 'who's fault is it ' thread, but i wanted to post a possible scenario around how and why we are where we are with the team today that doesnt necessarily 'incriminate' anyone, but rather looks at the situation as just a case of trying to work through the gifts and challenges of a very unique circumstance and rare player at QB.

I think we can all use a bit less of the polarizing talk when it comes to Pete vs Schotty (or whoever the OC will now be ) vs Russ and the blame game for who is responsible when we dont succeed. I've certainly been guilty of going down the rabbit hole when it comes to trying to untangle the mess of our season and the last several years. But I think at the end of the day, the reality is that there isnt a 'BAD GUY' in this plot. just a bunch of guys commited to trying to figure out the best way to win.And they are much closer to what's actually going on than we are. The best we can do is look at game film.

Everyone is due their fair share of praise for the success we have seen and responsibility for the challenges.

The two constants in this game are Russ and Pete. The OC, interchangeable - although it would be great if we could get some consistency at the position, the fact that we havent found that is beginning to look like evidence to me for what might really be going on. The team has been trying to figure itself out for a while now and i think what we just finally saw this season was hopefully the last phase of a long, 4 year exploration.

I honestly believe that since the collapse of the LOB and the departure of Lynch, there has been a concerted effort to try to transition the team to RW, both from a leadership perspective, which i think he has done, but also from a scheme perspective, which to date we have struggled with. But ultimately what does that transition to a passing offense look like for such a unique QB.

He's similar in height to D Brees but doesnt have Brees's savant like ability to diagnose a defense and hit 10 different WR a game consistently. Brees overcomes the challenge of maybe not being able to SEE everything by being so enmeshed in the plays that he can run the O with his eyes closed and hit his receivers anywhere on the field so long as they are where they are designed to be. He has a rare and uncanny abiliity in this sense and i'd wager that if there was a NEXT GEN stat that could measure his brain's ability to read and react, / process data, he'd be off the charts.

Russ has come to defeat his issues with his physical stature by moving outside the pocket, releasing the ball and diagnosing plays from a deeper drop, and when all else fails, punishing a defense with is escapability and timely runs. Like Brees, he's incredibly accurate on the long ball and overall in general, when he has the opportunity to see where he's going with the ball. Russ, an uncanny pocket sense. Drew, an uncanny field sense. Again - my observation, not set in stone fact.

But given the above, an offense built around a passing game will by default need to look a bit different for Drew than for Russ. To say that Russ can do what Drew can from a shear technical ability , is in my opinon just as foolish as someone expecting Brees to be able to do what Russ can (nobody in the league can do what he can). And thats not throwing shade on Russ, he's fully capable of executing an offense. Its more praise for Drew because the dude is just that good.

The question is, what does that magical passing game look like for our QB?

Well...

It was apparent that the OC we had when we were built around a legendary defense and sledghammer in ballet shoes in Beastmode, no longer fit the profile for a team that was moving to a more aggressive passing game. He was let go.

What did that more aggressive passing game mean? Nobody knew until this year because nobody had seen RW with reliable running backs and a philosophy that was built around his arm moreso than his legs. We'd come to know him as a QB that could make something out of nothing when the plays didnt go according to plan. He built his legend on improv - turning nothing into a mile long highlight reel of spectacular plays.

But i think MAYBE at some point the improv act which had been just a tool for Russ, whether because of a poor play design, not being able to see receivers, not being able to process reads quickly, or being conditioned through years of HAVING to be ready to break from the scheme due to poor protection and do his own thing, became his default style of play.

So now, enter Schottenheimer, a guy, for all the criticism leveled at him, showed that he could pull together some pretty effectve schemes. I dont know how much responsibility to assign the OC or the QB for the inability to effectively implement a passing game that was diverse in terms of its range of routes and combinations, but the results... well, we saw them. however, i dont think its s a stretch to assume that RW is a contributing factor. He cant NOT be for the adjustments that have to be made for his height alone (deeper drops, slightly longer developing routes). And that's not bashing him at all, it just is what it is.

The question beyond that is how much of his natural tendency to want to move out of the pocket to see routes is absolutely necessary (ie , how much CAN he see at a 3 or 5 step drop from under center or a catch and release from shotgun) vs it just now being how he plays. If its how he's been conditioned to play, then the challenge is re instilling the discipline to run the offense called - essentially reconditioning him to know the field and trust it and on occassion, throw blind to a spot you trust a wr to be. If its vision (he CANT see the field in certain instances) and his ability to analyze a read, post snap iand trust it is severely impaired because his defuault reaction for 9 years has been to get the ball and move, then that's a bit more difficult to overcome. And it could also certainly by both - and likely is.

Either way, now at year 10, then the offensive strategy needs to shift. If he can get his discipline back, he should eventually be able to make the reads and get the ball out quickly. And again, i dont know whether what we saw this year from him (patting the ball, the double clutches, the indecisiveness) was a failure in being able to drop back and 1,2,3 read, react and get the ball out to the open guy in the flow of the offense, or if t was that he was trying to do it but couldnt see, and thus was constantly forced to break pocket and look deeper, which right off the bat negates the playcall and puts the chances of the down succeeding on RW and a given wr's ability to read eachother and connect. however, from what i've seen on tape over 16 weeks, i can say comfortably that although you can criticize Schotty fro maybe not adapting in game with a reasonable quickness or not calling up enough plays to RB's, there were A LOT of plays left on the field. And it could just be that the disconnect between PC and Schotty that led to his firing was a desire on Schotty's part to keep trying down the road of getting RW to function more effectively as a complete passer in the flow of the offense and plays called, getting him to use the whole field. Whereas Pete sees the best path to move the offense and RW forward being to stop trying to push him to do what he now obviously struggles to do and supplement the short pass game quick reads and a more methodical progression down the field, with a more schematically diverse and intentional run game.

And that run game CAN get us where we want to go. If its effective, it sets up all of those incredible passes Russ is known for. On its own, it can be lethal either by virtue of its diversity or its factor of intimidation. Which, depends on who is running the rock. The one thing i will say thats a bit concerning is that even if Carson comes back, between he and Penny, we have a back that is lightning quick through the hole and a bulldozer, but struggles to break long runs and a RB who dances too much in finding the holes, but can take it to the house on any given play if he breaks the first line of defense. Because they are so different, WHEN we deploy them in a game can be a tell as to what we want to do. If chris is in we are a bit more diverse, although he doesnt have great long or edge speed. When Penny is in, its likely going outside. What we need to really help Russ is either a scheme that can leverage both styles effectively, or a different back altogether. Someone like Jones in GB or conceptually the tandems that Cleveland or KC run. In the case of KC and Cleveland, either back can go inside or outside, but they each have their obvious strengths.

If you cant draw up short to middle pass plays, you have to develop a combination of longer developing passes and screens with a FAST running attack that is effective on the edges early in games and a PUNISHING one up the middle late. Gaining 5 yards consistently on swing plays, and runs off tackle forces defenses to play the width of the field. I think its why we saw the hawks constantly trying to establish the edge running game even though they knew they could reliably get 3.5 ypc between the tackles. without a consistent threat to spread the d-line and backers out, the field gets small for both runs and passes. And even harder for a shorter QB to fit the ball into tight openings.

The running game, and a well designed one that stretches the defense and punishes it seems to me to not be simply the preference of a head coach, but if any of the above is remotely true, pretty much necessary in getting RW back on the track to success.

this post is wayyyy too long but thats only because the challenges the team now faces (and i guess has faced all along) are complex and not as cut and dry as letting Russ cook, or keeping Pete out of a playbook, Russ being broken, or the OC being a dud. There's a ton that Pete and the coordinators are looking at on O to unlock the potential of this team. Some of it is in just unlocking (not unleashing) Russ, some of it is scheme, some of it, personnel and all of it doable.

We've been quick to condemn coaches and players for the failures to date but in all honesty, like everything else about the franchise, the difficulty in finding the ultimate success over the last few years is like everything else around this team, due to the fact that the circumstances are just sooo unique. Starting with the QB. And thats a blessing and a curse. But it is what it is. Cant believe i'm about to say this but it genuinely in this case really is all about the process and evolving.

I'm confident we will get there.

:179422:
 

Scorpion05

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2016
Messages
1,722
Reaction score
10
Sgt. Largent":1xdefjbk said:
John63":1xdefjbk said:
Sgt. Largent":1xdefjbk said:
John63":1xdefjbk said:
I presume you have a link to were it says over half right? Never mind you dont, So we have a link with facts saying our oline was bad, and no link for fact showing over half is on Wilson.. HMMM fact or fiction. I will go with fact thanks.


I am over blaming everyone but the HC for the crappy oline we have had for now 10 years.

I said our O-line was ranked 14th in 2020.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2020 ... e-rankings

That's top half of the league. Not great, but also not the dumpster fire you guys make it out to be every year so you have something to blame for Russell getting sacked too much.

He's great at getting out of trouble and making plays, but as he ages it's less and less every year. If you don't see that he holds onto the ball too long and takes too many sacks, which contributes to Dome's stat? Then I can't help you.

Half, 30%, 40%, 70%........pick whatever percentage you want. It's a terrible stat to prove our O-line is bad.

my apologies for coming across s snarky. Tired of watching a bad oline year in and out and having some try to blame everyone but the person responsible for the oline Also I do see how he causes some of the sacks, I also see how in most cases he has no choice since everyone is sent long. However, I don't think the sacks he causes are near as many as you think. FYI Footballoustisders has our oline ranked as 27th in pass blocking. They started charging, so I can't share a link. I would agree they were pretty good in the first half of the year, but we also faced alot of very weak defenses. As we started facing better defenses they looked really bad. In fact on KJR they were saying Wilson was hit, hurried, sacked or pressured on over 50% of his drop backs. That is not good.

Russell's continually at the bottom of the list every year in the "time to throw" stat.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/pass ... e-to-throw

This year's he's almost at 3 seconds, and this stat has continuously increased over the past five years. Not a good sign for an aging QB that still thinks he can duck out of trouble and make plays, and is becoming less and less effective at doing so.

So yeah, I'm all for a better O-line. But again, pass pro is not a good stat IMO to throw out there when it comes to the O-line that has to block for Russell.


Time to throw is not an indication of hits and sacks when it comes to Wilson. He has been getting hit and sacked FAR MORE than other QBs with similar time to throw numbers over the years. I would argue Wilson saves the offense more than he hurts it, by escaping pressure his entire time here. Yes, even in 2020. There’s a reason the Packers D-line after last year’s playoff, said sacking Wilson is like trying to catch a chicken. You think you have him then you don’t.

NFL players in the top 100, said if this was Madden Russ would have 100 pocket awareness. With an elite O-line, which he has literally never had (because poor drafting), Wilson would still be able to hold the ball and make more great plays. The game winning TD against Dallas? He had plenty of time. That’s the way it should be.

A good O-line completely opens up the offense. The Athletic highlighted that our O-line was ranked near the bottom of the league for the last 8 games.
 
OP
OP
keasley45

keasley45

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
6,776
Location
Cockeysville, Md
Sgt. Largent":2ylmppku said:
John63":2ylmppku said:
Sgt. Largent":2ylmppku said:
John63":2ylmppku said:
I guess I don't agree with you saying its all Wilson when we know for a fact PC has said he wants chunk plays, which means longer routes, which means having to hold the ball longer. I am not saying some of the sacks are not on him, all qbs cause some of their sacks. I just don't believe out of the 40+ sacks this year more than 10-20% of them are on him. And either way does not excuse being hit, hurried, pressured and sacked don over 50% of your drop backs. Also Wilson is always top 5 in being pressured in under 2 seconds. Then if you want to talk about the 10-20% of sacks he causes you must also talked about the additional 10-20 he stops from happening.

It's not all Wilson. It's football, a team sport, every positive and every negative is some degree and percentage of praise or blame/criticism on all parts involved.

Guess that's where we part ways, you think it's more on Pete and the O-line that Russell gets sacked so much, and I think it's more on Wilson.

Mobile QB's get sacked more, pocket QB's who get the ball out quickly get sacked less.

So get All Pro's at every O-line position and Russell will still be in the top 10 in the league in sacks.

not if you change the system from chunk plays to take what's given, get the ball out quicker. I believe the biggest issue is the system, PC wants of chunk plays.

Pete wants ball control, a punishing run game and thinks that opens up opportunities for explosive play action down field.

So "chunk plays?" I think that's a basic way of looking at it. Playcalling is layered, you do certain things, give certain looks, run certain styles of offense early in order to open other things up in those games and drives.

That's what Pete believes in..........but does that suit Russell's game? Somewhat for me, but not entirely...........because I think what suits Russell is pace, tempo and getting him in rhythm. I think he said the word "pace" at least a dozen times this year in his pressers, especially in his last presser after the Rams game.

THAT'S what I wish Pete would pay attention to, and implement more into the offense and consider that for his next coordinator hire.

Doubtful. But that's my dream.

I agree that Pete has a certain style of play that he wants to see - Slower, methodical, demoralizing run / pass, with an emphasis on ball control and explosive plays off of play-action. Russ wants the uptempo because historically, when he turns to it late in games, we have success. But two things here -

One, how much of the success is due to Russ just going off script and improvising freely in those instances VS the playcalls being more effective (Russ getting in rhythm) and thus it being an actual viable way to script play for a full 4 quarters?

And two, how can one justify going uptempo on offense as a consistent strategy when your defense is only average at best and a downright liability if made to be on the field too long?

I think all the convo about Russ's push for up-tempo being the saving grace of the offense vs Pete's 'stubborn' insistance on ground and pound / chunk plays is way off point. The up-tempo success that we have at the end of halves, in my opinion, is reliant on us either getting a play off before e a defense has time to match-up, or Russ being a bit more free to break pocket and make a play with his legs.

The vast majority of our late half drives feature one key component that the majority of the rest of the game does not - Russ picking up first downs on the ground or being faster to go off script, break the pocket and hit a wr on a scramble drill type play. That changes the way a defense plays and adds enough of an element of uncertainty to what we are running that it causes breakdowns in coverage and missed assignments in general. We dont do it the rest of the game because we dont want Russ getting killed - and I'd wager neither Russ nor PC want the latter half of his career to see him average 50yds a game on the ground.

We also dont do it because its a great way to make an ok defense look horrid if it doesnt work consistently.

The challenge I see is that theres a huge swath of XandO's real estate between uptempo, 2 minute offense being run perpetually and slow, methodical / explosive play. And our offense is consistently failing in that zone. It was good last year on the ground when we actually committed to run (and were healthy) and was good through the air WITHOUT going 2 minute for the first 7 weeks.

But the pass game struggled mightily when defenses decided to take away the big plays. Not everything we did last year was homerun or bust in terms of pass calls. There was enough to be had in the short and middle games last year in the offense that was called that we should have won the Giants game and arguably the playoff game against the Rams.

Why do we fail? at this point im probably of the mind that its as much on the QB failing to properly diagnose a defense and get the ball to the WR that will come open as anything else. Not more, but as much as anything else. And i'm comfortable saying that because i've watched enough game tape to see a bit more clearly where the failures were and enough of them were in the realm of just not throwing the ball when it was supposed to be thrown that you can make the argument that it tangibly effected the overall efficiency of the offense over the course of a game and then, season.

Thats not to say that the PC and the gameplan wasnt at fault. At some point, I think it falls on the shoulders of the OC and HC to put together a plan that is suited to what your QB CAN do. And if for whatever reason, your QB isnt great at certain reads or throws to certain areas of the field, you SHOULD take that into account when scripting plays. And I'm drawing a distinction here between 'adapting' to a defense week to week or in game and adapting to the QB. Because what I think what we are seeing play out right now between RW and the Seahawks is less a clash of philosophies as it is a coaching staff saying to Russ - Run the damn play because the WRs are there if you hit him - and refusing to change what we are doing to suit Russ's tendency to just do what he does. Pete obviously feels as though the strategy is sound and again, you can make the argument that it was good enough last year to potentially have gotten us to 14-2. And so the lines are drawn.

If you buy any of the above as being plausible, then the challenge from the FO and PC's perspective is feeling as though you now have to script an offense to a QB who has undeniably seen his greatest success when he is not running your plays, is unscripted and improvising in a way that only he can. How do you do that? I dont think they plan to and likely see the same hurdles we've had executing the offense under Waldron (even with his new wrinkles) as we've seen in prior years under Bevel and Schotty.

And from RW's perspective, its being in a place where you have been told squarely that the offense will not change significantly to suit your specific style of play. And i dont think he will back down from his position that its not his shortcomings that are the cause of his unorthodox play, but the plays themselves, and the lack of protection.

I genuinely think this is a case of neither side being right or wrong. Its starting to loook like it just might not be a great fit anymore. Thats not to say that if Russ goes somewhere else and is successful, that it proves that Pete was wrong anymore than if we get Derrick Carr in here and we make the NFC CG that we would have moved on from Russ sooner.

Maybe Russ just needs someone to call the game he wants - question is whether its possible for someone who lives on the fringes of a playcall, play in and playout. We wont know until he leaves. 10 years of tape shows that Russel is best when he is doing 'Russ' kind of things. Cant deny the guy is a phenom.

And maybe its just that Pete needs a guy to just be top 10 or 12 in the league to make his system go. RW was 22nd and 17th in pass attempts the years we made the superbowl and 7th and 10th in passer rating. Historcal fact supports his position.

We shall see.

Go Hawks!
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
You will see alright. Mediocrity at best without Russ.

Pete Carroll is 46-49 without Wilson. Nearly 100 games, that is not a small sample size. Now he is 70 years old and has more power than Bill Belichick. This is not going to end well for Pete. The question is how long are the Seahawks going to allow him to hang himself if he indeed does trade Wilson.

Pete cannot win without a franchise QB. If he has a good QB he can go .500. If he has anything below that they will be a laughing stock surrendering top 5 picks to the Jets.
 

brimsalabim

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
4,509
Reaction score
3
We need and Russ needs to take a salary cut so he can find and bring in his own offensive line protection. It worked once before and That's probably the only way that it could happen again. Beyond that Russ has two of the best receivers in the league to work with. If the offensive play calling is a problem Russell can do like Payton or Brady would. Blow it off and call your plays! Take charge!
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,639
Reaction score
1,657
Location
Roy Wa.
brimsalabim":2foasaco said:
We need and Russ needs to take a salary cut so he can find and bring in his own offensive line protection. It worked once before and That's probably the only way that it could happen again. Beyond that Russ has two of the best receivers in the league to work with. If the offensive play calling is a problem Russell can do like Payton or Brady would. Blow it off and call your plays! Take charge!

Barkley did this at USC, he was benched the next game against the Huskies. If I remember correctly Pete was shutting down the offense when they had a nice lead and Barkley continued to push and score. Pete started the Freshman the next week against Washington. The Freshman got hurt or something and Barkley did make an appearance if I am remembering correctly, but it does tell me Pete will not be ignored.

Can you imagine Pete yanking Wilson for opening up the offense and putting another QB in to just run the ball and the fall out?
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
brimsalabim":p84b5v32 said:
We need and Russ needs to take a salary cut so he can find and bring in his own offensive line protection. It worked once before and That's probably the only way that it could happen again. Beyond that Russ has two of the best receivers in the league to work with. If the offensive play calling is a problem Russell can do like Payton or Brady would. Blow it off and call your plays! Take charge!

How come Rodgers doesn't have to take a pay cut to have an O-Line?

How come Brees never had to take a pay cut down in NO to get an O-Line?

Rodgers cap hit this year is $39M that is $7M more than Wilson.

It has little to do with the franchise QB taking a paycut, and more to do with emphasizing protecting the QB, and acquiring the right players. You could give Seattle $50M in cap space and they would blow it on JAGs, as they did last year.
 

ElhanKartal

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2021
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
It doesn’t matter who is wrong or right. What matters is that Russell Wilson is more important to the team than Pete Carroll. I also think that you need to determine your approach based on what you have. If your most valuable asset is a great quarterback, then build your game plan around that quarterback.
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
ElhanKartal":37flkgl0 said:
It doesn’t matter who is wrong or right. What matters is that Russell Wilson is more important to the team than Pete Carroll. I also think that you need to determine your approach based on what you have. If your most valuable asset is a great quarterback, then build your game plan around that quarterback.

Very logical.

But Pete has a football philosophy that is his dogmatic religion that he must adhere to, strength of the team be damned.
 

brimsalabim

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
4,509
Reaction score
3
I'm just looking at records and in the NFL without Russell Wilson,

Pete Carroll is:

46 wins - 49 losses

and the Pats went on to win 6 owls after firing him... (of course that was mostly Brady)
 
Top