seahawk12thman":aoqdrz6e said:
Excellent article. It's too bad that so many posters on here can't actually read any dissenting piece without getting butt hurt. Our offense has gone from a run based offense to a passing one. In our 4 wins this year the defense hasn't given up a touchdown but in our 4 losses, we have won the turnover battle and lost all of them. So what is the quantifiable factor? Russell Wilson. Our receiving crew is the best it has ever been and our oline is doing a decent job of protecting Wilson (first time since 2012 an opposing team didn't register a sack). So basically the defense has had to shut the opponents out of the endzone to win and yet, if Wilson moves the ball with any consistency in the 4th quarter we win 3 of the 4 games we loss. The writer says that Wilson is a top ten quarterback but most people who criticized this article can't handle objective dissent and are to weak to read anything that diminishes their hero. Our defense has choked down the stretch but have gotten no help from our sorry O in spite of the fact we have veterans all across the skill positions.
Common sense isn't very common on this board!!! :34853_doh:
seahawk12thman, you said,
"You didn't address any of my points.
How does this team not resemble the 3-3 team?
I don't know, maybe 4 games in which we won the turnover battle but still lost...
Here let me help you . Good teams don't lose 4th quarter leads regardless of opponents especially when winning the turnover battle regardless of the teams record. Our offense has been obliterated in the fourth quarter when all we needed were simple first downs. These were 3rd and 3 and 4. Not long distances. The o put Wilson up for success and he hasn't responded.
My comment was a point-by-point critique of the article that you described as "excellent". I wasn't addressing any other of your points other than the fact you think the article was excellent. So fine; I'll proceed to address some of your points.
I've been a devout Seahawk fan for over 20 years...I would be more guilty of being a bit biased in favor of the Seahawks, but never would I troll a Seahawks thread...I don't ever troll other team's blogs either. So no, not a troll!!! Regarding the basement (a typical troll degradation), I'm semi-retired and almost 60 years old...married for 38 years...I've owned the house I currently live in for 20+ years...I have 4 adult kids...ironically, my mom is dead and my 85 year-old dad has Alzheimer's, and he lives in MY basement and he is totally dependent on me and my wife for everything. My greatest joy in life is my grandchildren.
Regarding the 3-3 team and turnovers, turnovers are a poor measure of success...they can be flukey and they are not always an indicator of how well a team is playing. I love how trolls end up fabricating stats to prove their assertions. Week 2 against the Packers; they won the turnover battle 2-1 and won the game. By the way, against the Lions, we won the TO battle 3-1, and we barely won the game.
The Hawks made it to the SB last year even though they started off 3-3, and then 6-4, a record which, by the way, is quite achievable this year also. And last year, the Seahawks won the TO battle with the Chargers and still lost the game. In the Rams game, we tied the TO battle 0-0 and still lost the game.
It's like you found an article that was biased against Wilson and the Hawks offense, and you thought to yourself, "WOW... a negative article on the Seahawks...awesome, I can add my two cents and really try to make them look bad!"
The rest of your points:
"It's too bad that so many posters on here can't actually read any dissenting piece without getting butt hurt." I rarely get butt-hurt, but I draw the line at pretentious "journalist" hacks writing hit pieces.
"Our offense has gone from a run based offense to a passing one." Another fabrication...our offense has still run 52% run plays this year (granted that's less than the 55% we ran in 2014)...however, given the fact that Lynch has essentially missed 3 games this year and played hurt the other 5, is it any wonder they ran the ball less? And what effect does an injured Lynch have on Wilson's performance?
" Our receiving crew is the best it has ever been and our oline is doing a decent job of protecting Wilson (first time since 2012 an opposing team didn't register a sack)." The receiving crew is pretty much the same as last year, except Graham, Richardson (absent thus far), and I would say Baldwin had a much better season last year. I would say that the 2013 receiving crew was way better than this year's version. Not only that, but Wilson is on pace to improve all of his passing stats this year over last except TD's. Bear in mind that the teams we lost to all have highly ranked defenses in DVOA (all 4 teams are also ranked TOP 11 in points and yards allowed). Panthers #2, Rams #4, Packers #8 (ranked much higher prior to their last 2 games), and the Bengals #12. What a concept there...the Hawks offense struggled a bit against 4 of the BEST D's in the NFL. Not one peep in the article addressing the tough schedule.
"So basically the defense has had to shut the opponents out of the endzone to win and yet, if Wilson moves the ball with any consistency in the 4th quarter we win 3 of the 4 games we loss." First, Wilson had a game-winning drive against the Cowboys. And Wilson had the lead midway through the 4th quarter in all 4 losses. It was the defense that was unable to hold the lead. But most importantly, the 3 of the 4 losses came against some REALLY GOOD TEAMS. The Bengals, Packers and Panthers are all favorites to win the SB this year. The Rams ALWAYS play us tough in St. Louis. A lot of this is nothing more than a tough schedule.
"The writer says that Wilson is a top ten quarterback but most people who criticized this article can't handle objective dissent and are to weak to read anything that diminishes their hero." You obviously failed to recognize the typical passive-aggressive nature of the article. The guy sounds very wishy-washy and hypocritical. How can anyone fail to see this? The author claims that Wilson is a Top-10 QB, and yet he doesn't deserve to be paid as such. Excellent article my ass!
"Our defense has choked down the stretch but have gotten no help from our sorry O in spite of the fact we have veterans all across the skill positions. " There are plenty of reasons that the offense hasn't looked great this year...the O-Line, the chemistry between Wilson and Graham, Lynch's injuries, the schedule (3 tough road games), psychological damage from the SB loss, a predictable OC, Wilson's struggles...
So there, I addressed each of your points, and each of the points from the article. Now it's your turn...you haven't addressed any of my points, nor have you explained why you consider the article to be excellent. Although, if the schedule for the second half of the season doesn't translate to better performances by the offense, then I'll just write it off as a bad season.