Wilson: $26m this year, 204 total yards.

[sutz]

300 yards, 3 TD, 0 Int, 83% completion percentage, 10am win in Pittsburgh.

Is this good enough, or still nah?

Kind of pedestrian in fantasy football terms, so I'm gonna go with no. :twisted:

Actually, it isn't good. That is too many attempts and yards passing for a well managed game. :mrgreen:

 

[bmorepunk]

Don't close, bookmark.

 

[Mad Dog]

Walked into a tough stadium, took 4 sacks and 1 illegal hit and then proceeded to mess up every Steelers fan’s day. That alone is worth 10 million bucks in my book.

 

[scutterhawk]

You're aware the more we throw, the lower Russ' efficiency gets. Literally. I think we've pretty well established that the strength of Russ' game is not short passing.

The more we run, the more dangerous Russ becomes, and the more we win. It's that simple.

ahh no we have not, that is far from a hard fact. Example last year Wilson threw 31 times against Carolina 71% complt 128 QB rating. We threw more than we passed. I am not saying dont run, I am saying pass more and add in shorter passing. Agasint GB last year again 31 pass attempts, 68% complt, 110 Qb rating, The SF game we lost but Wilson threw 31 times, complt 74% of his passes and 117 Qb rating. KC 29 pass attempts, 62 Complt% 127 qb rating. We can throw more and be successful, we just need to do it smart.

Best example 2015 we had no run game at all. Wilson threw over 25 times 14 of 16 games, and he ended up with a 110 QB rating, 68 Complt%, 34 tds only 8 ints. Why we mixed in short passing.

So this is not about Wilson needing a run game or not being able to throw more, it is about PC allowing them to and allowing them to run an offense that lets them.

Ugh. 2015 when Russ and Baldy were tearing the league a new one, so was Rawls. Rawls had a historic 5 games stretch that was as good as anyone in league history.

Nope that was 2016

Nope, McGruff had it correct, it was indeed in 2015.

 

[JayhawkMike]

Great game by Wilson. Since so many of you actually didn’t read the original posts it was about the coaches not using Wilson effectively and not anything bad about Wilson.

But hey, screw the truth. Just because you are a Seahawks fan doesn’t mean you have any integrity. Something this thread has taught me.

Original Post:

If you want someone to throw 20 times, run 4 times and hand off 21 times you might spend your money more wisely. PC has become poor at using his tools. I don’t blame Wilson though he could have ran for firsts a couple of those times but didn’t. It’s crap offense by a bad OC picked by a bad offensive HC.

 

[Jerhawk]

There was nothing wrong with your original post Jayhawk.

Just typical piling on from board members that don't really understand whats happening

 

[bmorepunk]

Great game by Wilson. Since so many of you actually didn’t read the original posts it was about the coaches not using Wilson effectively and not anything bad about Wilson.

But hey, screw the truth. Just because you are a Seahawks fan doesn’t mean you have any integrity. Something this thread has taught me.

Original Post:

If you want someone to throw 20 times, run 4 times and hand off 21 times you might spend your money more wisely. PC has become poor at using his tools. I don’t blame Wilson though he could have ran for firsts a couple of those times but didn’t. It’s crap offense by a bad OC picked by a bad offensive HC.

There are some people who didn't understand or willfully misrepresented the OP. But then you turn around and do the same generalizing. Is this because it allows you to not only disregard the aforementioned group as well as any one who might disagree with you?

 

[bmorepunk]

There was nothing wrong with your original post Jayhawk.

Just typical piling on from board members that don't really understand whats happening

What is your definition of "wrong" here? And what is happening? And who is "piling on"?

 

[Palmegranite]

This isn't correct.
The Subject heading directly implies that Wilson is payed a large sum of money(too much$?) and doesn't meet the poster's expectations for lots of yards.(apparently WAY more than 204)

 

[bmorepunk]

This isn't correct.
The Subject heading directly implies that Wilson is payed a large sum of money(too much$?) and doesn't meet the poster's expectations for lots of yards.(apparently WAY more than 204)

I'll give him the "isn't used enough" explanation.

But a lot of us disagree with that assertion. Whether it's yards, attempts, whatever I just don't care about that. It's about what you can do when it matters.

We are fans of the team we are fans of. And the coaches are who they are. You pay Russell Wilson because he's really damn good. He's worth it even with the Carroll style of play. The idea that some "average" QB is going to step in and do the things he does in the circumstances he does isn't reasonable. Just because his attempts are low, or his yards are low, that doesn't translate to what he's able to pull off with his opportunity. You don't put Case Keenum in there with his opportunities and expect to win games like you do with Wilson. So you pay him.

I get the "if they just used Wilson more this offense would hang 40 a game on every team" thing. And that might be right, but it's not the way these coaches do things. So it is what it is. But I do know you don't let that guy walk because he's bad value for what you're using him for. He's not bad value. It's still a tremendous value. The probability that this team would be crap without him is pretty high, because finding dudes who can stand back there with that line, throw total daggers downfield, and find magic when it's needed is next to impossible. There aren't enough QBs to be starters, much less dues who can do what he does.

 

[Mad Dog]

Great game by Wilson. Since so many of you actually didn’t read the original posts it was about the coaches not using Wilson effectively and not anything bad about Wilson.

But hey, screw the truth. Just because you are a Seahawks fan doesn’t mean you have any integrity. Something this thread has taught me.

Original Post:

If you want someone to throw 20 times, run 4 times and hand off 21 times you might spend your money more wisely. PC has become poor at using his tools. I don’t blame Wilson though he could have ran for firsts a couple of those times but didn’t. It’s crap offense by a bad OC picked by a bad offensive HC.

My issue is the implication that value equates to number of yards. And that is never a good sign of value. Many yards are fluff. Football is about handling pressure, making the most of your opportunities and not being careless with the football.

I think the other implication that Pete uses his assets poorly also is questionable. Pete preaches balance. He wins with balance. He wants his offence to pass and run effectively. He wants his defense to stop the run and the pass. He isn't going to just lean on one player no matter how much cap he takes. The cap hit is the cost to keep him on the roster not an indicator of how much he needs to be used.

 

[Fade]

Retitle the thread to -> Is Pete properly utilizing his Franchise QB?

It is on the OP for using a thread title that can easily be taken out of context.


Ultimately it comes down to defense and running the ball with Pete. His QBs are going to have to sacrifice numbers.

What people need to focus on rather than volume passing, is can Wilson perform when they need him, when they have to have it. The answer is a resounding yes. Which makes him worth the money automatically.

With that I think Pete keeps the leash too tight during the first half of games, but no one is going to change his mind. He believes what he believes.

On to the Saints now that they aren't playing Brees. Pete is going to take the foot off the gas again.

I hope I am wrong. I want to see that quick passing game they got going continue.

 

[Jerhawk]

There was nothing wrong with your original post Jayhawk.

Just typical piling on from board members that don't really understand whats happening

What is your definition of "wrong" here? And what is happening? And who is "piling on"?

A. There was nothing wrong (or incorrect) with Jayhawks original post. Hes absolutely correct. If you wanted to give Wilson a huge contract, then let him win you some games. The Bengals game was a poor offensive performance led by poor playcalling. They took the ball out of his hands and relied on the running attack to win. The offensive line hasn't been getting the same push on running plays like last year.
Today's game on the other hand was a great way of letting Wilson let it loose, and he put up some nice numbers and made some great plays that led to victory.

B. What's happening. The OP made a post that I agree with. Other posters now come back after today's awesome performance and basically witch hunt the OP, completely mis representing what the OP was about. His post was actually paying respect to Wilson. Today's posters basically make it out like the the OP read "Wilson sucks. Play Smith. We shouldn't have paid Wilson." Similar snide remarks have been made throughout this thread.

C. Related to part B. Typical group think mentality. "Person A says something, therefore it must be true!" Rather than taking a step back and comprehending what the OP was all about in the first place.

We're all Seahawks fans here. I just think Jayhawks original post was taken way out of context.

 

[Ad Hawk]

A. There was nothing wrong (or incorrect) with Jayhawks original post. Hes absolutely correct. If you wanted to give Wilson a huge contract, then let him win you some games. The Bengals game was a poor offensive performance led by poor playcalling. They took the ball out of his hands and relied on the running attack to win. The offensive line hasn't been getting the same push on running plays like last year.
Today's game on the other hand was a great way of letting Wilson let it loose, and he put up some nice numbers and made some great plays that led to victory.

B. What's happening. The OP made a post that I agree with. Other posters now come back after today's awesome performance and basically witch hunt the OP, completely mis representing what the OP was about. His post was actually paying respect to Wilson. Today's posters basically make it out like the the OP read "Wilson sucks. Play Smith. We shouldn't have paid Wilson." Similar snide remarks have been made throughout this thread.

C. Related to part B. Typical group think mentality. "Person A says something, therefore it must be true!" Rather than taking a step back and comprehending what the OP was all about in the first place.

We're all Seahawks fans here. I just think Jayhawks original post was taken way out of context.

The assumptions from the original post are absolutely wrong, since they equate the higher salary of the QB with a requirement of doing more on the field. It's a non-sequitur, even if the OP (and others) wish it happened. It's the logic that's faulty, not the desire.

Russ is paid to play the game placed before him as well or better than most QBs out there (or in history, as his paycheck shows). And he can. If he throws only 20 passes, but connects on 70% and a couple TDs with no INTs? That's what he's paid for. Most QBs in the league will never approach that ability, game-in and game-out.

 

[bmorepunk]

Retitle the thread to -> Is Pete properly utilizing his Franchise QB?

It is on the OP for using a thread title that can easily be taken out of context.

This first section has to be taken out to make that change as well:

If you want someone to throw 20 times, run 4 times and hand off 21 times you might spend your money more wisely.

That's pretty strong context regarding not spending money on Wilson in the first place given the coaches.

Again, if the assertion is that Wilson isn't being used enough, that might be true. Maybe a 50/50 run/pass ratio won't work as well as a 40/60 or 25/75.

But if the assertion is that you shouldn't pay someone of this caliber and skillset that money because they don't get enough direct reps, you're implying that you can just plug in whoever. But you can't.

 

[bmorepunk]

There was nothing wrong with your original post Jayhawk.

Just typical piling on from board members that don't really understand whats happening

What is your definition of "wrong" here? And what is happening? And who is "piling on"?

A. There was nothing wrong (or incorrect) with Jayhawks original post. Hes absolutely correct. If you wanted to give Wilson a huge contract, then let him win you some games. The Bengals game was a poor offensive performance led by poor playcalling. They took the ball out of his hands and relied on the running attack to win. The offensive line hasn't been getting the same push on running plays like last year.
Today's game on the other hand was a great way of letting Wilson let it loose, and he put up some nice numbers and made some great plays that led to victory.

B. What's happening. The OP made a post that I agree with. Other posters now come back after today's awesome performance and basically witch hunt the OP, completely mis representing what the OP was about. His post was actually paying respect to Wilson. Today's posters basically make it out like the the OP read "Wilson sucks. Play Smith. We shouldn't have paid Wilson." Similar snide remarks have been made throughout this thread.

C. Related to part B. Typical group think mentality. "Person A says something, therefore it must be true!" Rather than taking a step back and comprehending what the OP was all about in the first place.

We're all Seahawks fans here. I just think Jayhawks original post was taken way out of context.

Out of context by some people, but correctly in context by others. He assigned money to yardage. Then he indicated that they shouldn't have signed him if they weren't going to throw or let him run more. But then what? Save $10 mil and get some journeyman or draft some rookie who can't do the things he does and just perpetually get thumped?

 

[chris98251]

Well it's nice to have these threads, means we are not saying we need to replace McGwire, Gelbaugh, Friez, Dilfer, etc, but we have many fans that don't even know what that is like as a Seattle Fan.

Also means we are not wanting to throw the coach out the window.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

A. There was nothing wrong (or incorrect) with Jayhawks original post. Hes absolutely correct. If you wanted to give Wilson a huge contract, then let him win you some games. The Bengals game was a poor offensive performance led by poor playcalling. They took the ball out of his hands and relied on the running attack to win. The offensive line hasn't been getting the same push on running plays like last year.
Today's game on the other hand was a great way of letting Wilson let it loose, and he put up some nice numbers and made some great plays that led to victory.

B. What's happening. The OP made a post that I agree with. Other posters now come back after today's awesome performance and basically witch hunt the OP, completely mis representing what the OP was about. His post was actually paying respect to Wilson. Today's posters basically make it out like the the OP read "Wilson sucks. Play Smith. We shouldn't have paid Wilson." Similar snide remarks have been made throughout this thread.

C. Related to part B. Typical group think mentality. "Person A says something, therefore it must be true!" Rather than taking a step back and comprehending what the OP was all about in the first place.

We're all Seahawks fans here. I just think Jayhawks original post was taken way out of context.

The assumptions from the original post are absolutely wrong, since they equate the higher salary of the QB with a requirement of doing more on the field. It's a non-sequitur, even if the OP (and others) wish it happened. It's the logic that's faulty, not the desire.

Russ is paid to play the game placed before him as well or better than most QBs out there (or in history, as his paycheck shows). And he can. If he throws only 20 passes, but connects on 70% and a couple TDs with no INTs? That's what he's paid for. Most QBs in the league will never approach that ability, game-in and game-out.

Pretty much what Ad said here. Whether Russ makes ten of those jaw-dropping throws like the Metcalf in a season, or whether he makes seventy, he's still going to be worth the money, because the only alternative is a guy who costs $10m a year and can't make that kind of throw to save his life.

As far as Cincy, they were one of the league's worst rushing defenses last year. It wasn't the craziest idea to run at them. Credit Cincy for surprising them in Week 1.

 

[Smellyman]

Regardless of OP title it is about adapting.

Too many people are getting caught up in yards and money.

We don't care if they rush 50 times if it is working. We don't care if all it is 5 second drop backs for deep shots.

But be adaptable and use the best player on the field if needed.

Today they did great doing just that.

That is all.

Quit twisting this topic.

 

[erik2690]

LOL I am talking 2015 you know like the game where he went 23-32 and 249 and 5 tds, or 21 for 30 and 345 and 5 tds. and so on, You see you seem to think it is an either or. I am not saying either or, I am saying mix it in, that is what they did in 2015 when he went on a tear to the tune of 21 td in 4 game. Why did they do it, because they had no run game and the oline was bad. Now imagine if we mixed in more short passing in the last game. FYI we won both games I just talked about and alot more. I am not saying don't take shots I am saying mix it in more especially when the run game is not working and the oline can't give him the time for the long plays. Oh and FYI he also went 22 for 31 for 339 and 2 tds, and we won last year. They made the mistake in the first 2 games of going to pass heavy with an oline that could not well block and in a new system. You seem to be confusing lots of pass attempts means a short passing game, which is not the case. Also again I never said give up on the long game just mix it in more and b Ther eis nto reason we cannto have an NFL caliber passing game were you have levels of routes and the QB takes what is given adn needed. We dont always have to all or nothing. When we did do it this past game it worked.

Right, so just turn back the clock and get the players we had in 2015? Sounds easy. Where's your time machine? It was Baldwin catching a lot of those passes, wasn't it? Where's he on our roster?

Last season when we went pass-happy, we turned the ball over, had too many sacks, and lost football games. Then we went more run-centric, and we won 10 of the next 14 games, against tougher teams than the Broncos and Bears.

Also, this was Game 1 and Wilson didn't play much in the pre-season, nor did Lockett, nor did Metcalf. Let things work in a bit, let the OL get their feet, etc. before going pass-happy.

OR try running it now, adn see if you can, the fat it at times they do, ie under 2 minutes and when they go uptempo, so they can do it now as well. And if you want to play the turn the clock back, we dont have the same players we had last year so just because you say it did not work then does not mean it cant work now, Also again I am not saying ignore the long ball I am saying mix the short passing in more. Bring those Safeties up forcing them with short passes and the go over the stop. If they dont come up no problem move the ball 5-10 yards at a time. FYI We did not go pass happy in a league were people throw 50 times a game 33 attempts is not pass happy.

Again I am not saying going pass happy you seem to focus in on that. I am saying pass more than 25 times a game and through in more short passes.

You're aware the more we throw, the lower Russ' efficiency gets. Literally. I think we've pretty well established that the strength of Russ' game is not short passing.

The more we run, the more dangerous Russ becomes, and the more we win. It's that simple.

Can you show the data on Russ' efficiency going down when attempts. You can't just state something like that as if it's factual without showing the facts. It's 100% not as "simple as that" so show the data please.