Should Russell be more involved with game plan/play calling?

thegameq":3r0mcgva said:

I believe it was on Brock and Salk; Russ has 3 plays that he can audible to--that's it. Maybe it was more for this year? It's also been said that they don't want Russ having to worry to much about "all that stuff" and just have Russ play loose and free.

I think Peyton Manning revolutionized the position and Brady, while not to the extent of Manning, also has the playbook at his disposal at the line of scrimmage. It also shows how difficult it is to play at that mental level and only a few can do it. The quarterback with the full playbook at his disposal at the line of scrimmage is hard to beat--of course a great passrush will negate that in a hurry.

We will never know if Russ is capable while Pete is the HC.

Click to expand...

Thepeelsessions":lyguexak said:

I'm a firm believer in that one of the main reasons the Patriots are the dynasty they are is because of TB12's ability to check out of a play whenever he sees fit. He is so good at recognizing a defense at the LOS and exploiting that particular defense on the fly.

I really believe that if Russ can diagnose a defense and audible out, or even call a simple hot route, he would. I don't think he can. If he could, there should be no reason Pete wouldn't let him.

Click to expand...

Fade":20b7v1yo said:

The Seahawks and Patriots are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

The Patriots be like: If you do this, we'll do that.

The Seahawks be like. If you do this, well we're doing it anyway, we don't care, and we're going to keep doing it.

Click to expand...

Tical21":1szv31y1 said:

Fade":1szv31y1 said:

The Seahawks and Patriots are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

The Patriots be like: If you do this, we'll do that.

The Seahawks be like. If you do this, well we're doing it anyway, we don't care, and we're going to keep doing it.

Click to expand...

My friend, you're better than this. Russell audibles A LOT. However, unless he sees cover-0, it is almost always to a run. Now, that may be almost exclusively because of Pete, but my guess is that it is primarily because of Russ.

Click to expand...

Tical21":1szv31y1 said:

Exactly, Lymon. For some reason, people can't understand that Russ thrives in and wants to play in the offense we ran this year.

The previous 2 years and 2 games this season, it was glaringly obvious that our missing ingredient was a dominant running game. We get said running game going in a major way, resulting in Russ' most efficient season. He throws a ton of TDs, we put up a bunch of points with a mediocre roster, barely ever turn the ball over, go 10-6 in a rebuilding year, and we get thread after thread arguing that our path to success is opening up the offense and throwing the ball all over the yard. I don't. I can't. I just. Wow.

Click to expand...

erik2690":b6k132qq said:

Tical21":b6k132qq said:

Fade":b6k132qq said:

The Seahawks and Patriots are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

The Patriots be like: If you do this, we'll do that.

The Seahawks be like. If you do this, well we're doing it anyway, we don't care, and we're going to keep doing it.

Click to expand...

My friend, you're better than this. Russell audibles A LOT. However, unless he sees cover-0, it is almost always to a run. Now, that may be almost exclusively because of Pete, but my guess is that it is primarily because of Russ.

Click to expand...

Really? You saw earlier this year where Russ got a TO called from the sideline after an audible with 10+ on the play clock? Most upset at his sideline I've ever seen him. That's not a high bar but I'm pretty sure they aren't as lenient with audibles as you are kinda suggesting. Maybe you are right but I don't think the evidence on this is cut and dry.

Tical21":b6k132qq said:

Exactly, Lymon. For some reason, people can't understand that Russ thrives in and wants to play in the offense we ran this year.

The previous 2 years and 2 games this season, it was glaringly obvious that our missing ingredient was a dominant running game. We get said running game going in a major way, resulting in Russ' most efficient season. He throws a ton of TDs, we put up a bunch of points with a mediocre roster, barely ever turn the ball over, go 10-6 in a rebuilding year, and we get thread after thread arguing that our path to success is opening up the offense and throwing the ball all over the yard. I don't. I can't. I just. Wow.

Click to expand...

Another post where parts I agree with but some things jump out as disingenuous. First and most notable is you pretending to know what Russ "wants" seems a bit silly. I would say the most pointed he's ever been was his end of year presser about probably 'could have done that more' in regard to throwing in the DAL game. It wouldn't be notable for any other player, but for Russ that's a shot. Now your point about the 2 years and 2 games has some big holes I think. 2016: Russ injured early, badly and often. 2017: literally the 4th worst RB rushing season in NFL history, not some change in philosophy to pass first just holy shit we literally can't run. That's way different from starting in the offseason planning some new pass-centric offensive plan. The first 2 games this year likely should have been more runs but it was against 2 of the top 5 defenses in the league including early season at altitude in Denver which is a L for most teams in recent history. I don't think it's good to extrapolate what would be from those 2 games. However I'm not sure those 2 games are what people are calling for. They overcorrected and also weren't very agile at changing mid-stream. So instead of saying 'whatabout 2016 and 17' why not say 'think about combining our now more potent rushing attack with a healthier dose of passing'. That makes way more sense as a hypothetical notion than 'look what happened when we were historically terrible at running and had to pass more'. No one is asking them to re-create horrible rushing efficiency. Combine your now good rushing efficiency with more of your more potent passing efficiency (by EPA, DVOA, ypa, etc).

Click to expand...