Tweets on Seahawks from SI columnist Andy Benoit

[Anthony!]

Some of the responses by "fans" are sad and bordering on pathetic. Why do some fans always take everything as an insult? He's complimenting RW yet they have to respond with tweets like "you failed miserably, You fail to realize Hope you feel educated now."

Just enjoy the success and notoreity, stop tweeting like the world is out to get you. I know it's difficult after some of the things of the past, but it's time to move on. I have (I think). :snack:

Maybe that's some of that passive aggressive we always hear about.

Only thing i would disagree about is

"This passing game almost never has any rhythm. A series of individual plays. Product of Wilson’s style."

It isnt because of Wilson. Its because of a poor oline and terrible O Cor in Bevel

That statement is on of the ones that is just plain wrong. Whenever we are in hurry up and Wilson is deciding what happens we have rhythm, we move the ball well. Whenever we are using the 25 scripted plays we look really bad. The lack of rhythm has nothing to do with Wilson but with the play call.

 

[mikeak]

To be honest there is a lot of double talk, and some things that are just not true, but there is also some good stuff. That said he is getting responses and that is the point.

where do you see the double-talk? Just asking because I don't see it as such

Russel is un-refined in the pocket - agree 100% - he throws one of the best seam balls in the league - agree 100%

They combine for one negative and one positive but they are not mutually exclusive as in double-talk. That is to me proper feedback but maybe there are other things that I am missing / interpreting differently

If you see no double talk then that is your choice, I do.

LOL that is funny

I take the perspective of being interested in why you say you see double-talk. What am I missing give one example and the reply is some smart reply about it being my choice. I just asked where you see it

Of course you don't have to answer which I will use to draw my own conclusions about

 

[mikeak]

That statement is on of the ones that is just plain wrong. Whenever we are in hurry up and Wilson is deciding what happens we have rhythm, we move the ball well. Whenever we are using the 25 scripted plays we look really bad. The lack of rhythm has nothing to do with Wilson but with the play call.

100% agree with this. We dominate in hurry up and click like a team

Not only 25 scripted plays. A time-out is enough to take us out of this rhytm but then back in it as soon as we get one play done after the time-out

 

[two dog]

Some people see immorality in the crotch of a tree.

So if you perceive something as double talk, no one is in a position
to tell you that is not what you see.

For me, this was closer to "straight talk" than "double talk".

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Anthony, please stop derailing threads every time someone points out a flaw in Russell Wilson.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Anthony, please stop derailing threads every time someone points out a flaw in Russell Wilson.

This. I LOVE Wilson and have said for some time he is a future HOFer. But he's not perfect. No player is. Elway trusted his arm too much and threw unnecessary picks, Brady and Pey Pey are immobile as hell (and Pey Pey chokes in big games), and so on and so forth. Russ isn't perfect. It's not an attack on him when someone points out a flaw in his game nor should it be a personal affront to you.

 

[Anthony!]

To be honest there is a lot of double talk, and some things that are just not true, but there is also some good stuff. That said he is getting responses and that is the point.

where do you see the double-talk? Just asking because I don't see it as such

Russel is un-refined in the pocket - agree 100% - he throws one of the best seam balls in the league - agree 100%

They combine for one negative and one positive but they are not mutually exclusive as in double-talk. That is to me proper feedback but maybe there are other things that I am missing / interpreting differently

If you see no double talk then that is your choice, I do.

LOL that is funny

I take the perspective of being interested in why you say you see double-talk. What am I missing give one example and the reply is some smart reply about it being my choice. I just asked where you see it

Of course you don't have to answer which I will use to draw my own conclusions about

your a smart person you will figure it out. Let me help you

"Misdirection and disguise major factors of Seattle’s ground game. It’s about more than just Lynch’s power."

and yet

"Lynch’s power and ability to cut the ball backside nullifies the mediocrity of Seattle’s OL."

its about more than Lynchs power but his power makes up for the oline seem like double talk to me.

 

[Anthony!]

Anthony, please stop derailing threads every time someone points out a flaw in Russell Wilson.

Ahh who said my issue was about Wilson

 

[Anthony!]

Anthony, please stop derailing threads every time someone points out a flaw in Russell Wilson.

This. I LOVE Wilson and have said for some time he is a future HOFer. But he's not perfect. No player is. Elway trusted his arm too much and threw unnecessary picks, Brady and Pey Pey are immobile as hell (and Pey Pey chokes in big games), and so on and so forth. Russ isn't perfect. It's not an attack on him when someone points out a flaw in his game nor should it be a personal affront to you.

I agree and have also pointed out when he has made mistakes however some choose to ignore it. No player or QB is perfect even Rodgers has weakneses.

 

[Siouxhawk]

I think there are a few ways to explain the usage of isos routes: (a) philosophy -- if you want to play young players, you have to use a pared down offensive scheme. No one bashes the DCs for running an overly simplistic defense, which it does. (b) I think a lot of what we do on offense is designed to create running lanes for Wilson; I don't think it's an accident that he found himself with tons of running room last season. That is by design, and you get that by sending guys downfield; not by crossing them up in short areas. (c) Due to QB limitations, we do not throw to every area of the field and most teams have probably figured that out by now. So, you could have a guy run a shallow cross, but pretty sure most coaches know that Russell isn't going to hit that guy even if he's wide open.

Great post. Lots of criticism for Bevell from knee-jerk-type of fans, but it would be a handful trying to design a play that on the surface would work, but would also have a built-in mechanism allowing Russell to freelance and do what he does for big yardage. The lanes, as you say, would have to be kept clean, thus the isos and limited crossing patterns over the middle.

 

[sc85sis]

your a smart person you will figure it out. Let me help you

"Misdirection and disguise major factors of Seattle’s ground game. It’s about more than just Lynch’s power."

and yet

"Lynch’s power and ability to cut the ball backside nullifies the mediocrity of Seattle’s OL."

its about more than Lynchs power but his power makes up for the oline seem like double talk to me.

I can't read Benoit's mind, but I'll take a stab at this.

The first point is possibly in reference to using the read option to help open the run game. Defenses are never too sure whether Russell will hand it off, keep it and run himself or roll out and pass. This helps both him and Marshawn rack up run yards.

On the other hand, Marshawn breaks a tons of tackles and makes quick cuts that can gain him yards even when the o-line blows it.

Both points are valid.

 

[brimsalabim]

I enjoyed this read but how long ago was it written? He still has Britt at right tackle?

As to the comments on RW you guys are discussing well I think they are fair enough. Now we will see if having Graham and Lockett change anything.

 

[Anthony!]

your a smart person you will figure it out. Let me help you

"Misdirection and disguise major factors of Seattle’s ground game. It’s about more than just Lynch’s power."

and yet

"Lynch’s power and ability to cut the ball backside nullifies the mediocrity of Seattle’s OL."

its about more than Lynchs power but his power makes up for the oline seem like double talk to me.

I can't read Benoit's mind, but I'll take a stab at this.

The first point is possibly in reference to using the read option to help open the run game. Defenses are never too sure whether Russell will hand it off, keep it and run himself or roll out and pass. This helps both him and Marshawn rack up run yards.

On the other hand, Marshawn breaks a tons of tackles and makes quick cuts that can gain him yards even when the o-line blows it.

Both points are valid.

You could be right could also be him saying on one hand mis direction is the major factor for our ground game not Lynchs power but on the other it is his power. To be it is speaking out of both side of his mouth

 

[Hawks46]

your a smart person you will figure it out. Let me help you

"Misdirection and disguise major factors of Seattle’s ground game. It’s about more than just Lynch’s power."

and yet

"Lynch’s power and ability to cut the ball backside nullifies the mediocrity of Seattle’s OL."

its about more than Lynchs power but his power makes up for the oline seem like double talk to me.

I can't read Benoit's mind, but I'll take a stab at this.

The first point is possibly in reference to using the read option to help open the run game. Defenses are never too sure whether Russell will hand it off, keep it and run himself or roll out and pass. This helps both him and Marshawn rack up run yards.

On the other hand, Marshawn breaks a tons of tackles and makes quick cuts that can gain him yards even when the o-line blows it.

Both points are valid.

You could be right could also be him saying on one hand mis direction is the major factor for our ground game not Lynchs power but on the other it is his power. To be it is speaking out of both side of his mouth

Just thank her for pointing that out and move on. She's 100% correct and it was an insightful post. Do you have to argue about EVERYTHING ? Holy crap.

SC85sis, that was insightful. Thank you for the post.

 

[morgulon1]

Some of the responses by "fans" are sad and bordering on pathetic. Why do some fans always take everything as an insult? He's complimenting RW yet they have to respond with tweets like "you failed miserably, You fail to realize Hope you feel educated now."

Just enjoy the success and notoreity, stop tweeting like the world is out to get you. I know it's difficult after some of the things of the past, but it's time to move on. I have (I think). :snack:

Maybe that's some of that passive aggressive we always hear about.

It is the new society we live in where everything is black or white. A joke cannot be a joke if it insults someone, politicians cannot compromise without being called sell-outs and a person cannot say that a QB is not elite due to this and that but he is top 10 without insulting him and getting lots of complaints.

It is the non-productive side of society......

Ask Colin Cowherd when he was supercomplemntary of Rose (bulls) but said he wasn't MVP. Everyone called in and asked why he said that Rose sucked. It was amazing to listen to - people hear what they want to and ignore everything else.

I thought most of these tweets were very insightful and spot on and in alignment with a lot of things that we read here

It is called "Newspeak"

 

[Anthony!]

your a smart person you will figure it out. Let me help you

"Misdirection and disguise major factors of Seattle’s ground game. It’s about more than just Lynch’s power."

and yet

"Lynch’s power and ability to cut the ball backside nullifies the mediocrity of Seattle’s OL."

its about more than Lynchs power but his power makes up for the oline seem like double talk to me.

I can't read Benoit's mind, but I'll take a stab at this.

The first point is possibly in reference to using the read option to help open the run game. Defenses are never too sure whether Russell will hand it off, keep it and run himself or roll out and pass. This helps both him and Marshawn rack up run yards.

On the other hand, Marshawn breaks a tons of tackles and makes quick cuts that can gain him yards even when the o-line blows it.

Both points are valid.

You could be right could also be him saying on one hand mis direction is the major factor for our ground game not Lynchs power but on the other it is his power. To be it is speaking out of both side of his mouth

Just thank her for pointing that out and move on. She's 100% correct and it was an insightful post. Do you have to argue about EVERYTHING ? Holy crap.

SC85sis, that was insightful. Thank you for the post.

Only when I do not agree but thanks, oh and by the way if you actually rad my posts you would see there are plenty of times when I agree and move on.

 

[nanomoz]

"Misdirection and disguise major factors of Seattle’s ground game. It’s about more than just Lynch’s power."

and yet

"Lynch’s power and ability to cut the ball backside nullifies the mediocrity of Seattle’s OL."

its about more than Lynchs power but his power makes up for the oline seem like double talk to me.

I see zero doubletalk in those quotes. Those points are not contradictory in any way. Misdirection is schemematic, not an indication of good offensive line play.

Dude is reasonable in all points, or, at worst, I couldn't formulate a strong counter argument to any of them.

 

[morgulon1]

I don't disagree with any of the points made. There CAN be arguments against Russell Wilson's game. He is pure awesomeness at what he does and he gets results.