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

[John63]

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.

Spot on great post!!

 

[John63]

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

1 he does not do it that much anymore and 2 that was part of the offense PC said it they rely on them, they practice them. YOU can go from counting on that to not doing it overnight. A lot of the issues son offense are a by-product of what PC wanted. And again when you are #1 in getting hit, sacked, hurried dor pressured in under 2.5 seconds what do you expect.

 

[Fade]

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

Have you seen the PC offense? With out the Wilson improv it's a laughable scheme. He wouldn't scramble and look to extend as much in the right system. See week 1.

In other words he is forced to hold the ball and extend so much out of necessity.

 

[HawkOG70’]

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

Have you seen the PC offense? With out the Wilson improv it's a laughable scheme. He wouldn't scramble and look to extend as much in the right system. See week 1.

In other words he is forced to hold the ball and extend so much out of necessity.

Yep it's old school pound the rock and field position.....ball control. Thing is it won't work if the defense is ass. Bobby is aging fast. Brooks played a lot better though against the Saints. Need one corner and a better nickel rover. A healthy Taylor on the D line would be nice. Glad the injury wasn't significant dodged a bullet he's a freak

 

[Jville]

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.

Couple of good posts in here.

Someone should point out that sacks are a defensive stat. They are produced by a collective effort of receiver coverage and pass rush. In this forum, one rarely reads about coverage sacks. And in the case of pass rush, applauding opposing rusher is virtually unheard of. Instead we have our never ending blame narratives.

With regards to screens, we have known for sometime that practices have been built around the attributes of Russell Wilson. Practicing scramble drills has been the priority over practicing time consuming linemen screens. However this year it seems to me that we are seeing the Seahawks attempt more screens. I can't help but wonder if they have been caught in transition. After all, we don't know what we don't know because are not privy to what they work on at practice or how well each contributor is working on film assignments.

With regard to scheme and philosophy, I think Payton Manning was ever bit as extraordinary in his style as Russell Wilson is with his style. Quick release Payton's sack percentage during his career was 3.1%. Payton made team mates around him, including linemen, look competent. Russell Wilson is at the opposite end of the spectrum. His career sack percentage of 8.4% reflects that opposite end of the quarter back spectrum.

Down the coast, Dan Fouts experienced an overall 5.4% sack rate during his career. But, during the Don Coreal era his sack rate was 6.55%. Like Coreal, Russell and Pete really live for the deep strike. But unlike bombs away Coreal, Wilson and Pete are effective when mixing in a competitive running game.

Wish the team had better continuity ....... among linemen and tight ends and running backs.

 

[John63]

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

Have you seen the PC offense? With out the Wilson improv it's a laughable scheme. He wouldn't scramble and look to extend as much in the right system. See week 1.

In other words he is forced to hold the ball and extend so much out of necessity.

Yep it's old school pound the rock and field position.....ball control. Thing is it won't work if the defense is ass. Bobby is aging fast. Brooks played a lot better though against the Saints. Need one corner and a better nickel rover. A healthy Taylor on the D line would be nice. Glad the injury wasn't significant dodged a bullet he's a freak

The problem is it still will not work if you cant pound the rock and also have a MAgician at QB. Let's remember our defense was ss top-ranked defense and had Lynch before Wilson and were 7-9. You need a Qb that can be a game manager for most of the game till PC says okay go save us, then you need a magician. The problem is there are few of these and most will not put up with being handcuffed for 3/.4 fo the game

 

[Rat]

Let's remember our defense was ss top-ranked defense and had Lynch before Wilson and were 7-9.

"Top-ranked" is a stretch. The defense went from giving up 20 points a game to 14 from 2011 to 2013. Yards were similar. They were growing, but definitely not elite; the whole team was young and learning how to win. Russ was fortunate to have an historically great defense to rely on, which allowed him to take more chances, and the defense was fortunate to have a QB who could keep them off the field and let them catch their breath and be their best. It was symbiotic.

 

[Rat]

I don't think anyone believes the sacks are all on Russ. There are times he holds onto the ball too long and takes sacks he shouldn't, but that's the flip side to having a guy who can extend plays the way he does. Sort of a necessary evil, I guess. Steelers had the same issue during Roethlisberger's peak. He could extend plays like nobody's business, but that mentality also led to frustrations where you're just like "come on, get rid of the damn ball!".

 

[OrangeGravy]

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.

The scramble drill is less frequently successful. Partly due to Russell's quickness diminishing. He's still plenty fast, but not as shifty in small space.

Honest question because I can't recall many ends of games unless they're big games, when was the last Russell saves the day moment?

 

[Jville]

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.

The scramble drill is less frequently successful. Partly due to Russell's quickness diminishing. He's still plenty fast, but not as shifty in small space.

Honest question because I can't recall many ends of games unless they're big games, when was the last Russell saves the day moment?

Good question. Sometime in 2020? Maybe?

Another, as yet, unaddressed question is what affect player tracking has had on Russell's game. I would think by now that a considerable mapping of Wilson's game day situational movements and tendencies would be there for all, with access, to study. I would think the 4th quarter would be of particular emphasis.

 

[OrangeGravy]

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.

The scramble drill is less frequently successful. Partly due to Russell's quickness diminishing. He's still plenty fast, but not as shifty in small space.

Honest question because I canc't recall many ends of games unless they're big games, when was the last Russell saves the day moment?

Good question. Sometime in 2020? Maybe?

Another, as yet, unaddressed question is what affect player tracking has had on Russell's game. I would think by now that a considerable mapping of Wilson's game day situational movements and tendencies would be there for all, with access, to study. I would think the 4th quarter would be of particular emphasis.

That's a good point. It would highly improbable for him to not have tendencies in that regard

 

[John63]

Let's remember our defense was ss top-ranked defense and had Lynch before Wilson and were 7-9.

"Top-ranked" is a stretch. The defense went from giving up 20 points a game to 14 from 2011 to 2013. Yards were similar. They were growing, but definitely not elite; the whole team was young and learning how to win. Russ was fortunate to have an historically great defense to rely on, which allowed him to take more chances, and the defense was fortunate to have a QB who could keep them off the field and let them catch their breath and be their best. It was symbiotic.

The defense was ranked 7th in scoring in 2011 before Wilson. So yeah top ranked I did not the top ranked just top ranked. U have top rank run game. And top ranked defense according to PC a game manager works. Well he was wrong.

 

[Maelstrom787]

I think it's a disservice to logic to be so far on one side or other of the debate. The more we learn about football, the more sacks are increasingly seen as a stat that reflects upon the quarterback.

This doesn't mean that the offensive line is blameless, just that certain quarterbacks have a tendency to take sacks more often. Russell is one of them.

As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, and I find it crazy to say either party is blameless. Russ takes a lot of needless sacks, and the offensive line has been letting a lot of rushers through for a variety of reasons.

 

[Maelstrom787]

according to PC a game manager works. Well he was wrong.

This is so false. The opposite of Pete's philosophy. It is WELL, WELL DOCUMENTED that he prefers point guard quarterbacks, but with an extreme premium placed on explosive plays.

This is part of my problem with the discourse on this board. So many are willing to believe two completely opposite things at the same time as long as the common denominator allows them to denounce Pete Carroll. He deserves a big plate of criticism, but not when that plate is full of contradictions and half-truths.

 

[John63]

according to PC a game manager works. Well he was wrong.

This is so false. The opposite of Pete's philosophy. It is WELL, WELL DOCUMENTED that he prefers point guard quarterbacks, but with an extreme premium placed on explosive plays.

This is part of my problem with the discourse on this board. So many are willing to believe two completely opposite things at the same time as long as the common denominator allows them to denounce Pete Carroll. He deserves a big plate of criticism, but not when that plate is full of contradictions and half-truths.

Ahh he is the one that said when he got here he just needs a QB to manage the game and not create TOs.

 

[Maelstrom787]

according to PC a game manager works. Well he was wrong.

This is so false. The opposite of Pete's philosophy. It is WELL, WELL DOCUMENTED that he prefers point guard quarterbacks, but with an extreme premium placed on explosive plays.

This is part of my problem with the discourse on this board. So many are willing to believe two completely opposite things at the same time as long as the common denominator allows them to denounce Pete Carroll. He deserves a big plate of criticism, but not when that plate is full of contradictions and half-truths.

Ahh he is the one that said when he got here he just needs a WB to manage the game and not create TOs.

Ahh ahh he is the one that has had an offense predicated on deep passing for a decade running regardless of his statement in 2010

 

[RCATES]

Homerism at its finest. Wilson is washed. Time to eat your crow.

 

[John63]

according to PC a game manager works. Well he was wrong.

This is so false. The opposite of Pete's philosophy. It is WELL, WELL DOCUMENTED that he prefers point guard quarterbacks, but with an extreme premium placed on explosive plays.

This is part of my problem with the discourse on this board. So many are willing to believe two completely opposite things at the same time as long as the common denominator allows them to denounce Pete Carroll. He deserves a big plate of criticism, but not when that plate is full of contradictions and half-truths.

Ahh he is the one that said when he got here he just needs a WB to manage the game and not create TOs.

Ahh ahh he is the one that has had an offense predicated on deep passing for a decade running regardless of his statement in 2010

Okay well, thanks for agreeing this is on PC appreciate it.

 

[John63]

Homerism at its finest. Wilson is washed. Time to eat your crow.

Except the facts show once again and as usual your WRONG.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

His point about the offensive line has at this point been manifestly made. If we're doing any big trades it should be for fricken o line guys, bro.