QB Throwaways

Status
Not open for further replies.

KitsapGuy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
7,662
Reaction score
1
Location
Kitsap County
Schottenheimer knows his way around world-class quarterbacks, having worked with Brett Favre with the New York Jets and working as Drew Brees’ position coach in San Diego before becoming friends with him. Schottenheimer, of course, was hesitant to compare Russell Wilson to any of them.

“I don’t think that’s fair to him or to any of the guys that I’ve had,” Schottenheimer said. “I’ve been blessed to be around some great ones. Having been out there, I think the first thing that I recognized is just how instinctive he is on the football field. He sees things that maybe some other guys I’ve been around just wouldn’t notice. Now, when they go watch film they see it, but again, that’s what allows him to stay ahead of the defense.

“He’ll come over from time to time and he’ll tell me something that he saw, and I’ll be like ‘no way.’ And I go back and I watch and I’m like, ‘Yeah, he was right.’”

That’s not to say Schottenheimer doesn’t have ideas about how Wilson can get better.

“Russell’s obviously a tremendous athlete, but there’s certain things we’re trying to teach him in terms of his drop mechanics, his setup mechanics – it’ll be a little bit different,” Schottenheimer said. “One of those things is just trying to get him to play with a little bit of a wider base. By staying and having a wider base, you’re always ready to throw. If something pops that you’re not expecting to pop open, you’re in balance and ready to throw.

Schottenheimer and Carroll clearly share a plan for the offense this season – Schottenheimer used the world “philosophy” at least 10 times during the course of his interview with Q13 – and it’s one that will bring the focus back to the run game.

“We’re always going to want to be balanced,” Schottenheimer said. “We’re going to want to have a running attack that teams know … when we call runs and we need to run the ball late in the game, we can do that. But, we also want to have the ability to hurt people throwing the football.

https://q13fox.com/2018/07/16/brian-sch ... ll-wilson/
 

IndyHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
7,943
Reaction score
1,575
KitsapGuy":1p7vu4sw said:
Schottenheimer knows his way around world-class quarterbacks, having worked with Brett Favre with the New York Jets and working as Drew Brees’ position coach in San Diego before becoming friends with him. Schottenheimer, of course, was hesitant to compare Russell Wilson to any of them.

“I don’t think that’s fair to him or to any of the guys that I’ve had,” Schottenheimer said. “I’ve been blessed to be around some great ones. Having been out there, I think the first thing that I recognized is just how instinctive he is on the football field. He sees things that maybe some other guys I’ve been around just wouldn’t notice. Now, when they go watch film they see it, but again, that’s what allows him to stay ahead of the defense.

“He’ll come over from time to time and he’ll tell me something that he saw, and I’ll be like ‘no way.’ And I go back and I watch and I’m like, ‘Yeah, he was right.’”

That’s not to say Schottenheimer doesn’t have ideas about how Wilson can get better.

“Russell’s obviously a tremendous athlete, but there’s certain things we’re trying to teach him in terms of his drop mechanics, his setup mechanics – it’ll be a little bit different,” Schottenheimer said. “One of those things is just trying to get him to play with a little bit of a wider base. By staying and having a wider base, you’re always ready to throw. If something pops that you’re not expecting to pop open, you’re in balance and ready to throw.

Schottenheimer and Carroll clearly share a plan for the offense this season – Schottenheimer used the world “philosophy” at least 10 times during the course of his interview with Q13 – and it’s one that will bring the focus back to the run game.

“We’re always going to want to be balanced,” Schottenheimer said. “We’re going to want to have a running attack that teams know … when we call runs and we need to run the ball late in the game, we can do that. But, we also want to have the ability to hurt people throwing the football.

https://q13fox.com/2018/07/16/brian-sch ... ll-wilson/
Sounds really good and I hope it works out..
 

Spin Doctor

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,229
Reaction score
2,144
Seafan":3bmllv67 said:
There were too many plays that were throwaways and I blame Bev more than Russ. The Hawks suck at the check down throw even though with Carson, Davis, Prosise, McKissic, and Madden they had the talent to be excellent at it.

Schott has been working with RW on having a wider base so he's ready to throw it for a completion instead of away.
I think that Carroll and Bev have really impacted Russ's development as a player. They both encouraged that backyard style of play, and in many cases that backyard style IS his only check down. I think this was a natural tendency for Wilson, but that Bev, and Carroll double downed on it. I wonder what Wilson would look like under competent offensive management? I really do not think the man has been given the tools to succeed. Carroll, and Bev still treated the guy like he is was rookie QB. The time that they decided to give him more responsibility, freedom at the LOS and put more nuance into the playbook he goes off and has his 2015 season.
 

olyfan63

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
5,651
Reaction score
1,684
Hawk1217":ty5zepux said:
LOL you really did not get what I was getting at, that's okay, that says a lot.

Sorry Columbus, but this board actually existed before you "discovered" it and doesn't need you to validate us all with your presence and approval. Maybe stop to realize you are NOT the pearl stepping into the .NET oyster.

Learn a little logic and maybe to actually state whatever questionable "research" you vaguely refer to. If your "research" abilities are so great, why aren't you on an NFL team's payroll as a scout? Your "smack game" is just "lame" here. Can you step it up and actually bring facts, logic, and intelligent discussion?
 
OP
OP
Hawk1217

Hawk1217

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
olyfan63":2ccmzg17 said:
Hawk1217":2ccmzg17 said:
LOL you really did not get what I was getting at, that's okay, that says a lot.

Sorry Columbus, but this board actually existed before you "discovered" it and doesn't need you to validate us all with your presence and approval. Maybe stop to realize you are NOT the pearl stepping into the .NET oyster.

Learn a little logic and maybe to actually state whatever questionable "research" you vaguely refer to. If your "research" abilities are so great, why aren't you on an NFL team's payroll as a scout? Your "smack game" is just "lame" here. Can you step it up and actually bring facts, logic, and intelligent discussion?

Ahh you might want to go back and read all my posts, I bring facts, and logic, and if you read my posts here you would know what I was talking about, instead of just jumping to the defense of others who have been here longer. That is one of the other things I noticed in watching this board, there are a few that feel if you are new you can't say much, towards anyone who has been here for a while, They, on the other hand, can say anything, You just proved that correct, I think perhaps you should read and think with an open mind before you post things and call people names.
 
OP
OP
Hawk1217

Hawk1217

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
IndyHawk":1022wmzd said:
KitsapGuy":1022wmzd said:
Schottenheimer knows his way around world-class quarterbacks, having worked with Brett Favre with the New York Jets and working as Drew Brees’ position coach in San Diego before becoming friends with him. Schottenheimer, of course, was hesitant to compare Russell Wilson to any of them.

“I don’t think that’s fair to him or to any of the guys that I’ve had,” Schottenheimer said. “I’ve been blessed to be around some great ones. Having been out there, I think the first thing that I recognized is just how instinctive he is on the football field. He sees things that maybe some other guys I’ve been around just wouldn’t notice. Now, when they go watch film they see it, but again, that’s what allows him to stay ahead of the defense.

“He’ll come over from time to time and he’ll tell me something that he saw, and I’ll be like ‘no way.’ And I go back and I watch and I’m like, ‘Yeah, he was right.’”

That’s not to say Schottenheimer doesn’t have ideas about how Wilson can get better.

“Russell’s obviously a tremendous athlete, but there’s certain things we’re trying to teach him in terms of his drop mechanics, his setup mechanics – it’ll be a little bit different,” Schottenheimer said. “One of those things is just trying to get him to play with a little bit of a wider base. By staying and having a wider base, you’re always ready to throw. If something pops that you’re not expecting to pop open, you’re in balance and ready to throw.

Schottenheimer and Carroll clearly share a plan for the offense this season – Schottenheimer used the world “philosophy” at least 10 times during the course of his interview with Q13 – and it’s one that will bring the focus back to the run game.

“We’re always going to want to be balanced,” Schottenheimer said. “We’re going to want to have a running attack that teams know … when we call runs and we need to run the ball late in the game, we can do that. But, we also want to have the ability to hurt people throwing the football.

https://q13fox.com/2018/07/16/brian-sch ... ll-wilson/
Sounds really good and I hope it works out..


My only fear comes from a story I read were Shotty was I believe with the Giants and had planned to run the ball 40 times no matter what and the HC had to tell him to throw it when they got behind big, as he refused to change. THat concerns me in that Pete is unlikely to tell him that should he fall into that trap here. ITs okay to run 40 times if it is working, but if it is not then its time to change.
 

KiwiHawk

New member
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
4,203
Reaction score
1
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
Hawk1217":jkxyw2go said:
Ahh you might want to go back and read all my posts, I bring facts, and logic, and if you read my posts here you would know what I was talking about, instead of just jumping to the defense of others who have been here longer. That is one of the other things I noticed in watching this board, there are a few that feel if you are new you can't say much, towards anyone who has been here for a while, They, on the other hand, can say anything, You just proved that correct, I think perhaps you should read and think with an open mind before you post things and call people names.
I believe you are incorrectly attributing peoples' criticism of your posts to being new, and not stopping to see that you have not in fact supported your position adequately.

The above quote is a great example of the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc.. You posit that because someone criticised you it is proof of a bias against new posters.

It's entirely possible a different explanation exists for the criticism, that being you are simply wrong or failed to support your point when challenged.

You don't get a free pass for being a vet around here, and nor do you get a free pass because you are new. You get a pass when you make a reasoned argument that you can support, and you get criticised if you fail to do so.

Beginning your career here with the self-martyring attitude of "i'm new and the old guys are picking on me" is not going to serve you well, and is probably a path you should not continue to follow.
 
OP
OP
Hawk1217

Hawk1217

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
KiwiHawk":295eb1tz said:
Hawk1217":295eb1tz said:
Ahh you might want to go back and read all my posts, I bring facts, and logic, and if you read my posts here you would know what I was talking about, instead of just jumping to the defense of others who have been here longer. That is one of the other things I noticed in watching this board, there are a few that feel if you are new you can't say much, towards anyone who has been here for a while, They, on the other hand, can say anything, You just proved that correct, I think perhaps you should read and think with an open mind before you post things and call people names.
I believe you are incorrectly attributing peoples' criticism of your posts to being new, and not stopping to see that you have not in fact supported your position adequately.

The above quote is a great example of the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc.. You posit that because someone criticised you it is proof of a bias against new posters.

It's entirely possible a different explanation exists for the criticism, that being you are simply wrong or failed to support your point when challenged.

You don't get a free pass for being a vet around here, and nor do you get a free pass because you are new. You get a pass when you make a reasoned argument that you can support, and you get criticised if you fail to do so.

Beginning your career here with the self-martyring attitude of "i'm new and the old guys are picking on me" is not going to serve you well, and is probably a path you should not continue to follow.

lol, Okay whatever you say :roll:
 

olyfan63

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
5,651
Reaction score
1,684
Hawk1217":soozr63p said:
lol, Okay whatever you say :roll:

Everything that KiwiHawk said in addition to what I said. All you're doing is further validating and putting an exclamation point on negative things that have been said regarding your posts.

I find the recurrng retaliatory dismissive attitude towards others so juvenile, and it's so unnecessary and out of place here; it really sticks out like a sore thumb. Why do you NEED to do that? Lose that, develop some humility about your own level of knowledge, and you could be a real asset here. The truth is that we all have such limited information compared to what PC/JS and the team insiders have.

There are so many great posters here who share great information and analysis, and the quality of their posts and information stands on its own. They also know there are many other smart people here and appreciate and value the insights that others bring, even when it's different than their take. When challenged, they typically either respond with quality information, or accept and incorporate some of the valid points from the challenge into their view.

Your overall point in starting this thread was a good one, and there is still a lot of room for great discussion on the original point. It may be an oversimplification to blame Russell's throwaways so much on the (historically) crappy OL.

We haven't even talked about how much of the "throwaways" issue is due to receivers not getting separation, and then there is Russell's seeming lack of confidence in some of his receivers to throw it up for them to make a play. It's only this last year or so Russell figured out he could throw jump balls to Jimmy Graham for TDs. Why did that take so long?

There was some discussion of play design and overall offensive concept giving Russell more check-down options, and Russell learning better to use those options. Maybe Schotty will improve things there. We can always hope.

QB throwaways are a complicated, multi-factor issue, involving way more than just the OL.
 
OP
OP
Hawk1217

Hawk1217

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
olyfan63":zm7kg1eo said:
Hawk1217":zm7kg1eo said:
lol, Okay whatever you say :roll:

Everything that KiwiHawk said in addition to what I said. All you're doing is further validating and putting an exclamation point on negative things that have been said regarding your posts.

I find the recurrng retaliatory dismissive attitude towards others so juvenile, and it's so unnecessary and out of place here; it really sticks out like a sore thumb. Why do you NEED to do that? Lose that, develop some humility about your own level of knowledge, and you could be a real asset here. The truth is that we all have such limited information compared to what PC/JS and the team insiders have.

There are so many great posters here who share great information and analysis, and the quality of their posts and information stands on its own. They also know there are many other smart people here and appreciate and value the insights that others bring, even when it's different than their take. When challenged, they typically either respond with quality information, or accept and incorporate some of the valid points from the challenge into their view.

Your overall point in starting this thread was a good one, and there is still a lot of room for great discussion on the original point. It may be an oversimplification to blame Russell's throwaways so much on the (historically) crappy OL.

We haven't even talked about how much of the "throwaways" issue is due to receivers not getting separation, and then there is Russell's seeming lack of confidence in some of his receivers to throw it up for them to make a play. It's only this last year or so Russell figured out he could throw jump balls to Jimmy Graham for TDs. Why did that take so long?

There was some discussion of play design and overall offensive concept giving Russell more check-down options, and Russell learning better to use those options. Maybe Schotty will improve things there. We can always hope.

QB throwaways are a complicated, multi-factor issue, involving way more than just the OL.

and so it starts, Okay lets look at it. My first post in this thread

"During my time watching this forum before joining one common theme for some is why doesn't Wilson throw the ball away more, rather than get sacked or run. Well, the answer is he already has to throw it away more than anyone else. " This is the post that started the whole thread with facts. nothing bad here at all.

My second p[ost "Most QBs would have more sacks and more Ints behind this oline." again my opinion and nothing bad here at all. and was in response to someone else's opinion.

MY 3rd post
"Agree to disagree on nearly all counts and you forgot more throwaways and sacks. Counting you there is only one who really thinks most QBs would not have more sacks than Wilson. Remember it would be the same scheme and a lot of the holding the balls is waiting on the play and receivers to get open. One thing for sure is all my research prior to joining this site has been proven accurate." I said agree to disagree and made a point that the person who posted above was the only one who said this, despite posting like ti was a fact. I bring up the research I did prior to joining this forum and that his post fits what I found, never said it was good or bad just there.

My 4th post "I rest my case, research-proven again." Again just saying the what I saw on the board as the norm was baring out.

5th post I agreed in total with someone who voiced their opinion. "Agreed!"

6th
"LOL you really did not get what I was getting at, that's okay, that says a lot." I made it clear the person in question did not get what I was saying and instead turned this into something it was not and tried to claim I was someone I was not, an attack and not the first on me in this thread,

7th post

In response to someone who was trying really hard to belittle me "Ahh you might want to go back and read all my posts, I bring facts, and logic, and if you read my posts here you would know what I was talking about, instead of just jumping to the defense of others who have been here longer. That is one of the other things I noticed in watching this board, there are a few that feel if you are new you can't say much, towards anyone who has been here for a while, They, on the other hand, can say anything, You just proved that correct, I think perhaps you should read and think with an open mind before you post things and call people names."

8th post were I try to get back on topic and voice a fear I have relevant to the offense "My only fear comes from a story I read were Shotty was I believe with the Giants and had planned to run the ball 40 times no matter what and the HC had to tell him to throw it when they got behind big, as he refused to change. THat concerns me in that Pete is unlikely to tell him that should he fall into that trap here. ITs okay to run 40 times if it is working, but if it is not then its time to change."


9th post I make it clear though perhaps passively that this is getting us no place "lol, Okay whatever you say :roll:"


And now this one. if you read all my posts and then read the posts I am responding to with an open mind you would say I did not say anything wrong and tried several times to defuse the situation and yet some here the ones who have been here awhile and know each other felt the need to attack when one of their own felt slighted, despite no slit being made.

As to my posts, there is nothing wrong with my posts, I posted facts when required and gave my opinion when needed and defended this opinion just like the people I responded to.

Now hopefully we can get back on subject and stop with these thread stealing, need to alienate and chastise anyone who does not agree with the guard.
 
OP
OP
Hawk1217

Hawk1217

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
SoulfishHawk":30flrwp4 said:
Get over it Sherm, I mean Hawk

So not knowing other than the player who you are referring to, I have tried to get over it, but the usual pile-on started. Hopefully, we can get back on track.
 

KiwiHawk

New member
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
4,203
Reaction score
1
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
Hawk1217":2fxayhwm said:
SoulfishHawk":2fxayhwm said:
Get over it Sherm, I mean Hawk

So not knowing other than the player who you are referring to, I have tried to get over it, but the usual pile-on started. Hopefully, we can get back on track.
I'll try to be as constructive as I can here.

Can you see that saying you have done a lot of research prior to joining this site, yet offering none of it, and proclaiming the entirety is proven by a thread in which we agree only that throwaways are a complex issue with no single right answer, looks a bit contrived, to say the least?

A: nothing had been proven to be anything, conclusively

and

B: where is all this research such that it might be reviewed?

This is an odd mix of argumentum ad verecundiam ("appeal to authority") and petitio principii ("circular argument") in which you promote yourself as the authority ("research") and then use your authority to prove yourself right.

It doesn't make for someone I want to have a discourse with, because you can literally pull any "proof" out of your ass and attribute it to volumes of "research" no one has ever seen.

I am sometimes critical of Wilson because he doesn't throw it away when he should, and because he sometimes missed HUGE opportunities because he's too busy running around to see them.

For example:

[youtube]hmsbHpTBl6Q[/youtube]
Wilson spends a bit of time juking around, but has plenty of opportunities to throw the ball away "near" someone even though he's still in the pocket, and i would have preferred he throw it away to the wide-freaking-open Doug Baldwin streaking to the end zone.

in this play:

https://www.seahawks.com/video/cowboys- ... ack-203346

Wilson is outside the pocket and can lob the ball out of bounds, but continues to drop back and takes a whopping 22-yard sack and looked stupid doing it.

The following two pays were sacks. Look at Kearse in each of them:
RW20misses20open20Jermaine

RW20doesn27t20see20Kearse

A throwaway (he has Baldwin at the 39 and another guy whose number I can't see at the 34):
RW20no20trigger20Baldwin20middle

And this play resulted in a scramble for a short gain:
RW20no20trigger

Here's a throwaway - he was under pressure but could have hit Lynch. Baldwin was open deep, but probably too deep to be useful.
0has20Marshawn20in20flat2C20doesn27t20throw

Another throwaway with a clearly open receiver and a clear throwing lane:
RW20no20trigger20copy

So not all the throwaways are about avoiding sacks. Some are missed opportunities - sometimes huge opportunities, and it's a fair call to be occasionally critical of Wilson when he misses these opportunities.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,479
Reaction score
1,460
Location
Roy Wa.
When your scrambling your not seeing the whole field, your looking for defenders, your seeing whats down field in the direction your running and your gauge of separation is off, hard to see speed between guys when your running also. Why guys that are good at going into scramble drill mode run into his line of sight not away from it and run to where he is going not where he has been.
 
OP
OP
Hawk1217

Hawk1217

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
chris98251":2819a3rl said:
When your scrambling your not seeing the whole field, your looking for defenders, your seeing whats down field in the direction your running and your gauge of separation is off, hard to see speed between guys when your running also. Why guys that are good at going into scramble drill mode run into his line of sight not away from it and run to where he is going not where he has been.

Exactly, pictures are great but you don't know what the QB sees, what order the progression is, saying someone is open is great but again can the QB see them, are they at a distance that helps given it might be 3rd and long or whatever. etc etc. So a lot of variables and far from cut a dry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top