So the Sacks are on Russell huh?? Guess again.

[Seymour]

To those chanting trade Russell, be careful what you wish for. Saints have 9 sacks for the season yet 5 against Seattle!! This season is toast, this isn't about that. This post is to call those out that think our problems are Wilson and not the notoriously bad Oline protection and play calling combination that REQUIRES improvisation to win.

Seattle repeatedly plowed Alex Collins into a wall of defenders and essentially refused to do anything but define insanity, receiving similar results on most of their rushing attempts. Even on run-pass options that appeared to favor the pass before the snap, the Seahawks didn't give it a thought, instead electing to continue slamming backs into the teeth of New Orleans' defense.

https://www.nfl.com/news/2021-nfl-s...ned-from-saints-win-over-seahawks-on-monday-n

 

[JustTheTip]

If you have watched Seahawks football you know that some not insignificant number of the sacks are on Wilson. To say otherwise requires putting your head in the sand.

You could make an argument that a primary cause of Wilson taking unnecessary sacks is him knowing he has to do more to overcome Pete.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Yep.

The only QB even remotely available that would be able to still be effective behind this line is Minshew.

And I think we never considered him because he does not have a strong arm so those long passes would be out. He excels throwing on the run, but quick passes with good ball placement. None of this toxic differential crap.

But we have a coach that does not believe in hiding or obscuring your intentions, does not try to confuse defenses, and often makes it clear what the play is (on defense and offense) before the snap.

Geno sucks. But Joe Montana in his prime would have a problem being successful in those circumstances.

(Sidenote:
That Collins could get ANY yards in that circumstance is amazing. Not a big fan of Penny lately, but he is being set up to fail. )

A big part of the problem is that we have plays where the QB reads the defender midway through the route and then passes. Done right, it is hard to defend. But, you have to have time to survey the field, read the defender, and then get the pass off. Which means you take 2x-3x the time before you get the pass off. That isn't on Wilson, that is literally our tactics.

The reason Wilson gets sacked so much is that our line is asked to hold up a rush 2x-3x as long, and yet often has one or two pieces that are not that good. Which means the OL not only has to worry about his man/area but try to help the guy next to him recover from teh missteps he regularly makes. (Not to mention we have a love affair with trying to plug generalists into the line, instead of getting someone good at what they do. And if someone is good, we often decide to move him to cover up for a weakness somewhere else - creating a new weakness)

The short answer to why Wilson gets sacked is our offensive tactics and our philosophy in how we build the line ARE NOT A MATCH.

If you want an offense that needs to make reads on routes in progress to be effective?
you need a better line.
If you want a cheap line?
you need to get the ball out faster.

 

[Seymour]

If you have watched Seahawks football you know that some not insignificant number of the sacks are on Wilson. To say otherwise requires putting your head in the sand.

You could make an argument that a primary cause of Wilson taking unnecessary sacks is him knowing he has to do more to overcome Pete.

Sure some are on Russ. But my point is the same could be said about any QB because they didn't get rid of the ball also. He also has a habit of making huge plays under those same scramble drills that most QB's will not make.

I'm saying the situation and conditions create this sack problem as we just saw last night against a team that had just 4 sacks coming in.

And I also am saying he has to overcome Pete when I say the play calling contributes to the problem big time.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Most sacks on any team is on the O-line.

We have a QB in Russell who likes to extend plays, and that makes him more susceptible to hits and sacks.

Conclusion: Both Russell and the O-line are responsible for sacks. To what degree we can debate, but both are true.

What we've REALLY learned over the past three games is how many warts on this team Russell has been compensating for. From the mediocre coaching staff to the deficit in talent.

Now they're ALL being exposed for the world to see.

 

[John63]

If you have watched Seahawks football you know that some not insignificant number of the sacks are on Wilson. To say otherwise requires putting your head in the sand.

You could make an argument that a primary cause of Wilson taking unnecessary sacks is him knowing he has to do more to overcome Pete.

except for ESPN already said about 20-25% could be on Wilson (without knowing the play call, so it could be due to long developing plays) Even if we take those away he was still top 5 in sacks. Also, PC as an HC in the NFL all his QBs were top 7 in sacks. it is his style run and chunk plays, chunk plays take time.

 

[NY Hawk]

At this point what difference does it make?

 

[JustTheTip]

If you have watched Seahawks football you know that some not insignificant number of the sacks are on Wilson. To say otherwise requires putting your head in the sand.

You could make an argument that a primary cause of Wilson taking unnecessary sacks is him knowing he has to do more to overcome Pete.

except for ESPN already said about 20-25% could be on Wilson (without knowing the play call, so it could be due to long developing plays) Even if we take those away he was still top 5 in sacks. Also, PC as an HC in the NFL all his QBs were top 7 in sacks. it is his style run and chunk plays, chunk plays take time.

No doubt and no doubt he knows he has to take those sacks under Pete for any kind of chance at winning. But many of those sacks are because of decisions he makes. Not saying they are poor decisions, he is working with what he is given, which is crap.

 

[misfit]

Russ does get a few extra sacks due to extending plays. But he also gets you a bunch of incredible plays for doing this. The trade off is worth it.

There have been metrics pulled that all the way back to Hasselbeck and even w/ his other NFL teams that Pete has had some of the most sacked QBs in the league. Its a function of his offenses and his desire for big plays down the field.

 

[John63]

Russ does get a few extra sacks due to extending plays. But he also gets you a bunch of incredible plays for doing this. The trade off is worth it.

There have been metrics pulled that all the way back to Hasselbeck and even w/ his other NFL teams that Pete has had some of the most sacked QBs in the league. Its a function of his offenses and his desire for big plays down the field.

BINGO!!!

 

[JustTheTip]

Russ does get a few extra sacks due to extending plays. But he also gets you a bunch of incredible plays for doing this. The trade off is worth it.

There have been metrics pulled that all the way back to Hasselbeck and even w/ his other NFL teams that Pete has had some of the most sacked QBs in the league. Its a function of his offenses and his desire for big plays down the field.

BINGO!!!

I don't at all disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that the number of sacks that are on Russ is not insignificant.

 

[John63]

Russ does get a few extra sacks due to extending plays. But he also gets you a bunch of incredible plays for doing this. The trade off is worth it.

There have been metrics pulled that all the way back to Hasselbeck and even w/ his other NFL teams that Pete has had some of the most sacked QBs in the league. Its a function of his offenses and his desire for big plays down the field.

BINGO!!!

I don't at all disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that the number of sacks that are on Russ is not insignificant.

Well the question is, is the percentage of sacks on wilson significantly higher than the percentage on other QBs. According to ESPN Wilson is avg in percentage. What is bad is even without those sacks were Wilson is on the hook he is still top 5in sacks. Also given his sack percentage as a percentage of drop backs is right were all of PCs QBs have been once again not a Wilson thing but a PC thing.

 

[Tinamedina]

At this point what difference does it make?

makes all the difference, its about clearing wilson's name. wilson has been taking the blame when the blame belongs to carroll. ever since 2014.

 

[Scorpion05]

If you have watched Seahawks football you know that some not insignificant number of the sacks are on Wilson. To say otherwise requires putting your head in the sand.

You could make an argument that a primary cause of Wilson taking unnecessary sacks is him knowing he has to do more to overcome Pete.

Russ is sacked about 40+ times a season. About 5-8 of those are purely Russ running into sacks.

To blame most of the sacks on Wilson is sticking your head in the sand. No legitimate offense would put this O-line on the field. Continue to be this ignorant about the O-line with another QB. Because Russ is probably tired of pleading his case and will be gone. Sean Payton will make sure he’s properly protected

I’m not shocked that Geno being back there didn’t illustrate the O-line issues either. Honestly, the QB will have to look and play like Tom Brady..or “traditional,” for some people to acknowledge the real issues with this O-line and offense. Others are reasonable enough to see Kyle Fuller is bad, and the O-line in general is below average.

 

[Fade]

Oddly enough the people that have been placing the blame on Wilson all these years are strangely silent. I wonder why? :shock:

It's always been weird to me that Wilson has been blamed for this mess when you can point to actual metrics such as allowing the most pressures in under 2 seconds. This separates the plays where Wilson does hold the ball. To see if maybe that is the root cause. The Seahawks rank last since 2013 in this stat. No matter what QB you put back there they are going to look like crap for long stretches. Wilson, Murray, Lamar, are the only ones who would still be able to find a way to be elite in this scheme. Everybody else would see massive decline, where those 3 would see only some decline.

When Wilson cooked the 1st half of last year, the O-Line played very well, like top 10 well. And Wilson was about to rewrite the record books. The O-Line didn't sustain it of course, but it gave people a glimpse of what it would look like if you put a good O-Line in front of Russell Wilson.

 

[JustTheTip]

If you have watched Seahawks football you know that some not insignificant number of the sacks are on Wilson. To say otherwise requires putting your head in the sand.

You could make an argument that a primary cause of Wilson taking unnecessary sacks is him knowing he has to do more to overcome Pete.

Russ is sacked about 40+ times a season. About 5-8 of those are purely Russ running into sacks.

To blame most of the sacks on Wilson is sticking your head in the sand. No legitimate offense would put this O-line on the field. Continue to be this ignorant about the O-line with another QB. Because Russ is probably tired of pleading his case and will be gone. Sean Payton will make sure he’s properly protected

I’m not shocked that Geno being back there didn’t illustrate the O-line issues either. Honestly, the QB will have to look and play like Tom Brady..or “traditional,” for some people to acknowledge the real issues with this O-line and offense. Others are reasonable enough to see Kyle Fuller is bad, and the O-line in general is below average.

And where did I blame most on Wilson?

 

[LTH]

Oddly enough the people that have been placing the blame on Wilson all these years are strangely silent. I wonder why? :shock:

It's always been weird to me that Wilson has been blamed for this mess when you can point to actual metrics such as allowing the most pressures in under 2 seconds. This separates the plays where Wilson does hold the ball. To see if maybe that is the root cause. The Seahawks rank last since 2013 in this stat. No matter what QB you put back there they are going to look like crap for long stretches. Wilson, Murray, Lamar, are the only ones who would still be able to find a way to be elite in this scheme. Everybody else would see massive decline, where those 3 would see only some decline.

When Wilson cooked the 1st half of last year, the O-Line played very well, like top 10 well. And Wilson was about to rewrite the record books. The O-Line didn't sustain it of course, but it gave people a glimpse of what it would look like if you put a good O-Line in front of Russell Wilson.

I have been critical of Wilson but not because I don't think he is a great QB i think he has not gotten to a Brady level of football I don't think its all of the O lines fault some of it is...

I do agree with you that they need to spend some draft capital on some lineman O and D...as they have enough play makers and in the past my mock drafts I chose almost all O lineman D lineman and secondary...

I think they will be better this year if they can stay healthy but your right when Russ is dangerous when he has a O line in front of him..... deadly...


LTH

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Be careful what you wish for. We are seeing it. 3 straight games w/the ball in hand and a chance to win. 3 Straight losses.

We'll be "just fine with Geno"

No, we won't. At all.

 

[RiverDog]

Sure some are on Russ. But my point is the same could be said about any QB because they didn't get rid of the ball also. He also has a habit of making huge plays under those same scramble drills that most QB's will not make.

I'm saying the situation and conditions create this sack problem as we just saw last night against a team that had just 4 sacks coming in.

And I also am saying he has to overcome Pete when I say the play calling contributes to the problem big time.

There's more to a quarterback's sack avoidance responsibility than getting rid of the ball. Only the quarterback has the ability to change the play at the LOS. If he does not identify a blitz situation and either fails to change a play or changes into the wrong one, a quarterback induced sack can result.

Some quarterbacks are given complete control to change the play, others not so much. My understanding is that Russell is more of the former than the latter.

Russell's "huge plays under scramble drills" are a lot more infrequent than they were in the past. One of the areas where I feel that Russell could improve his game is getting over his tendency to think that he can save every aborted play and ends up taking a sack. Our last offensive play in OT vs. the Titans, the one where he should have been called for intentional grounding in the end zone and a walk off safety, is a classic example.

Having said that, I agree that our OL is below par, at least in pass pro. But they're not chopped liver, either. I haven't seen the PFF rankings from this season, but last year, our OL was ranked 14th overall, 16th in pass protection. Room for improvement for sure but not completely unworkable for a quarterback/offensive coordinator.

 

[xray]

Wilson improvises off script so much , that even a very good O-line would have trouble keeping him clean . They are clueless on many plays on what Wilson might do behind them . IMO