Sack Stats past 5 years

Crizilla · Jan 17, 2017

2012: Seahawks were 12th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 33 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.06 Sacks allowed per game.
2013: Seahawks were 22nd in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 44 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.75 Sacks allowed per game.
2014: Seahawks were 21st in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 42 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.63 Sacks allowed per game.
2015: Seahawks were 26th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 46 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.88 Sacks allowed per game.
2016: Seahawks were 27th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 42 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.63 Sacks allowed per game.

And all 5 these years, Seahawks were top 7 in Offensive penalties. What's interesting to me is 2012. Was that because Wilson was looking to run more? Or was the O-Line actually pretty good? Okung, McQuistin, Gaicomini, Unger, Carpenter/Sweezy. They certainly didn't get better in 2013 and 2014. Also, people are thinking Pete's quote about the O-Line means it will be exactly the same next season. Every year they compete and they'll go with what they think is best, so it very well could change. Pete said the right thing. Don't want to ruin any moral of the players you have now. When training camp starts everyone will be at it again. If these stats show anything, it shows Cable has averaged a below average offensive line in the past 5 seasons. But yea we already knew that.

MD5eahawks · Jan 18, 2017

If I'm not mistaken, in 2012 they had the highest paid o-line in the NFL and this year they had the lowest paid. I think that sheds a little light on things.

Jville · Jan 18, 2017

Crizilla":1wxp8vxq said:
2012: Seahawks were 12th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 33 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.06 Sacks allowed per game.
2013: Seahawks were 22nd in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 44 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.75 Sacks allowed per game.
2014: Seahawks were 21st in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 42 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.63 Sacks allowed per game.
2015: Seahawks were 26th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 46 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.88 Sacks allowed per game.
2016: Seahawks were 27th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 42 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.63 Sacks allowed per game.

And all 5 these years, Seahawks were top 7 in Offensive penalties. What's interesting to me is 2012. Was that because Wilson was looking to run more? Or was the O-Line actually pretty good? Okung, McQuistin, Gaicomini, Unger, Carpenter/Sweezy. They certainly didn't get better in 2013 and 2014. Also, people are thinking Pete's quote about the O-Line means it will be exactly the same next season. Every year they compete and they'll go with what they think is best, so it very well could change. Pete said the right thing. Don't want to ruin any moral of the players you have now. When training camp starts everyone will be at it again. If these stats show anything, it shows Cable has averaged a below average offensive line in the past 5 seasons. But yea we already knew that.

We also know that the last five years coincided with a scrambling quarterback that loved to extend plays with his feet. I know there is a lot of love for Russell. But take a closer look at any of the remaining four quarterbacks in this years sudden death playoff. Aaron Rogers, for example, put on a clinic verses the Cowboys. Economy of motion with a step here and there to help his blockers with their angles. Truly a clinic in great footwork. I'm enjoying this years remaining foursome of quarterbacks. They should put on a terrific show. Russell Wilson is still developing as a quarterback. His economy of motion will improve. He will work better with his blockers as they grow together. And, I'm really looking forward to that facilitating his evolution into a precision passer. Coach Carroll included Russell Wilson in his season ending remarks. He foresees Russell Wilson growing into a great quarterback. He sees him quarterbacking a powerful and complete eleven man offense.

thegreeninyoureye · Jan 18, 2017

We also know that the last five years coincided with a scrambling quarterback that loved to extend plays with his feet. I know there is a lot of love for Russell. But take a closer look at any of the remaining four quarterbacks in this years sudden death playoff. Aaron Rogers, for example, put on a clinic verses the Cowboys. Economy of motion with a step here and there to help his blockers with their angles. Truly a clinic in great footwork. I'm enjoying this years remaining foursome of quarterbacks. They should put on a terrific show. Russell Wilson is still developing as a quarterback. His economy of motion will improve. He will work better with his blockers as they grow together. And, I'm really looking forward to that facilitating his evolution into a precision passer. Coach Carroll included Russell Wilson in his season ending remarks. He foresees Russell Wilson growing into a great quarterback. He sees him quarterbacking a powerful and complete eleven man offense.[/quote]

I know what u mean on Rodgers! Watch that Giants playoff game if u ever get the chance again. Look at the way he moves in the pocket it is a thing of beauty. Russ looks chaotic when he moves in the pocket sometimes. Running into guys fumbling other times he will run right into a sack. This is a part of his game he needs to work on. When he does the tricky stuff it looks cool when he completes passes your like wow. Other times well

ukeface:. Russ is a good qb tho but he can work on his game a little. Especially in the pocket step up and deliver its frustrating sometimes. I do realize he probably doesnt trust the line alot at this point in time. A lot of times it is totally on the line. However watch how quick Ryan and the other qb's get rid of the ball. Russ can work on a couple of things to help this line out.

Hawks46 · Jan 18, 2017

This goes what into what I've been saying about this OL not being that horrible in pass protection. Sacks don't tell the entire story either way; you can get immediate pressure on the OL and Wilson escapes a sack, then in the Detroit game, Wilson ran straight into 2 sacks that weren't on the OL.

Even then, he's had more time and a cleaner pocket than I remember last year. With how young this OL is, i expect them to get a good deal better.

Seymour · Jan 18, 2017

MD5eahawks":tcaov4qd said:
If I'm not mistaken, in 2012 they had the highest paid o-line in the NFL and this year they had the lowest paid. I think that sheds a little light on things.

Actually that was 2013 our SB48 win year (telling I know).

As far as why 2012 was better / best? Obvious to me. Cable was still working with the previous regimes picks on the line. Put Cable in charge of that, and watch the talent go right down the tube.

ukeface:

mrt144 · Jan 18, 2017

I know what u mean on Rodgers! Watch that Giants playoff game if u ever get the chance again. Look at the way he moves in the pocket it is a thing of beauty. Russ looks chaotic when he moves in the pocket sometimes. Running into guys fumbling other times he will run right into a sack. This is a part of his game he needs to work on. When he does the tricky stuff it looks cool when he completes passes your like wow. Other times well ukeface:. Russ is a good qb tho but he can work on his game a little. Especially in the pocket step up and deliver its frustrating sometimes. I do realize he probably doesnt trust the line alot at this point in time. A lot of times it is totally on the line. However watch how quick Ryan and the other qb's get rid of the ball. Russ can work on a couple of things to help this line out.

I would argue that the reason Rodgers looks so at ease in collapsing pocket is that there is a subtle method to the madness in that collapsing pocket. When DL are getting penetration the OL of the Packers is generally herding them into spaces that aren't completely safe but still allow wiggle room and there's a reasonable expectation of escape routes and playing room.

When the Seahawks have a collapsing pocket you have no idea where its coming from and there's no routine way to manage the ensuing chaos because every pressure and OL breakdown is different. It's a lot easier to stay cool when you have a reasonable expectation that certain areas of the line will be able sustain their protection a hair longer than the weaker parts of the line.

This thought is related to the idea that OL is choreography, not a bboy freestyle competition.

Attyla the Hawk · Jan 18, 2017

Honestly, I don't think it's all that great of a barometer.

When I've looked closely at our sacks, both this year and last -- the common thing I've found is that a majority of sacks are produced at the QB/play level.

QB related:

Wilson scrambles into a lot of sacks. Probably close to half of them. Now that's a double edged sword. Because he also scrambles out of a lot of sacks. But the consistent thing I find is that when he doesn't see an open player when he reaches his drop -- he moves to extend.

He doesn't often move up into the pocket to buy that last split second to deliver a ball. There can be a multitude of reasons for this. I would be comfortable with the assertion that it's just generally harder for him to see passing windows when he gets closer to the mass of OL ahead of him. That's understandable.

Other QBs tend to avoid sacks differently from Wilson. They move up into the pocket. And they also deliver the ball for an incompletion. Wilson doesn't do the latter hardly at all unless he's outside the pocket. That trait manifests itself in a relatively better completion/rating aspect because instead of throwing the ball away incomplete -- he's taking the sack and not risking a turnover.

It's a different approach to dealing with a bad play. Other QBs have worse completion percentages. They don't take the sacks. And generally most don't try to evade/outrun rushers when the plays aren't there to be made as drawn up.

Play design:

Seattle doesn't really call or execute the kinds of plays designed to beat pressure. We are plain awful at screen passes (not the bubble screen kind). We also don't execute a lot of shallow crosses which are good checkdowns for when protection falters. Sometimes we don't even run those -- so Wilson doesn't even have that option to avoid sacks to begin with.

Seattle did very well last year protection wise, when we switched to a quick passing game. Getting the ball out on rhythm. Wilson hit's his back foot and the ball comes out.

Seems teams kind of caught on with that. As well as Wilson's tendency to go lateral to escape the pocket. How many times did you see ends get marginal pressure at the QB, then literally abandon their push to the QB, and instead spin/double back and meet Wilson just as he's moving laterally to escape? Ends are rushing anticipating his lateral move from the pocket. If Wilson move up in the pocket (or move up and laterally), they're not in position to have Wilson run right into them.

I think Wilson has to be more willing to just let the ball fly instead of pull it down and spin around looking for a crease to run to. I also think he has to improve his ability to climb the pocket AND also let the ball fly and incur more incompletions. He appears to be too predictable in how he escapes the pocket and ends are getting to him despite being sufficiently blocked otherwise.

I do think there is a book on Wilson. And I think you can see it manifest not only on the sacks -- but also on just normal plays. Teams look like their strategy is to produce pressure up the middle and allowing ends to rush soft on the edge -- forcing Wilson to escape -- right into their arms. Our worst performances seem to coincide with a steady diet of twists and stunts up the middle.

I think that the ability to scramble and extend just leads to more sack opportunities. And I don't see that sack numbers really tell us much about our woes. Nor that the number of sacks we incur will improve any time soon.

Jville · Jan 18, 2017

Attyla the Hawk":2jlkj3wx said:
Honestly, I don't think it's all that great of a barometer.

When I've looked closely at our sacks, both this year and last -- the common thing I've found is that a majority of sacks are produced at the QB/play level.

QB related:

Wilson scrambles into a lot of sacks. Probably close to half of them. Now that's a double edged sword. Because he also scrambles out of a lot of sacks. But the consistent thing I find is that when he doesn't see an open player when he reaches his drop -- he moves to extend.

He doesn't often move up into the pocket to buy that last split second to deliver a ball. There can be a multitude of reasons for this. I would be comfortable with the assertion that it's just generally harder for him to see passing windows when he gets closer to the mass of OL ahead of him. That's understandable.

Other QBs tend to avoid sacks differently from Wilson. They move up into the pocket. And they also deliver the ball for an incompletion. Wilson doesn't do the latter hardly at all unless he's outside the pocket. That trait manifests itself in a relatively better completion/rating aspect because instead of throwing the ball away incomplete -- he's taking the sack and not risking a turnover.

It's a different approach to dealing with a bad play. Other QBs have worse completion percentages. They don't take the sacks. And generally most don't try to evade/outrun rushers when the plays aren't there to be made as drawn up.

Play design:

Seattle doesn't really call or execute the kinds of plays designed to beat pressure. We are plain awful at screen passes (not the bubble screen kind). We also don't execute a lot of shallow crosses which are good checkdowns for when protection falters. Sometimes we don't even run those -- so Wilson doesn't even have that option to avoid sacks to begin with.

Seattle did very well last year protection wise, when we switched to a quick passing game. Getting the ball out on rhythm. Wilson hit's his back foot and the ball comes out.

Seems teams kind of caught on with that. As well as Wilson's tendency to go lateral to escape the pocket. How many times did you see ends get marginal pressure at the QB, then literally abandon their push to the QB, and instead spin/double back and meet Wilson just as he's moving laterally to escape? Ends are rushing anticipating his lateral move from the pocket. If Wilson move up in the pocket (or move up and laterally), they're not in position to have Wilson run right into them.

I think Wilson has to be more willing to just let the ball fly instead of pull it down and spin around looking for a crease to run to. I also think he has to improve his ability to climb the pocket AND also let the ball fly and incur more incompletions. He appears to be too predictable in how he escapes the pocket and ends are getting to him despite being sufficiently blocked otherwise.

I do think there is a book on Wilson. And I think you can see it manifest not only on the sacks -- but also on just normal plays. Teams look like their strategy is to produce pressure up the middle and allowing ends to rush soft on the edge -- forcing Wilson to escape -- right into their arms. Our worst performances seem to coincide with a steady diet of twists and stunts up the middle.

I think that the ability to scramble and extend just leads to more sack opportunities. And I don't see that sack numbers really tell us much about our woes. Nor that the number of sacks we incur will improve any time soon.

After reading thru Attyla the Hawk's recent posts, this is clearly one of the better contributors here. His often clarifying posts are typically thoughtful and well expressed. Dot net offers a friend feature available thru the User Control Panel that serves as a useful marker for posts from contributors worth seeking out. Attyla's posts are rewarding to search for and read. Thanks for posting your thoughts Attyla. :2thumbs: I'm a fan.

That's right ...... exceptional Posters have fans too!

MontanaHawk05 · Jan 18, 2017

Attyla the Hawk in epic fashion":3errvwne said:
All that stuff

I went and looked at the sacks from Arizona in the first half, all five of them. Three of them were on Fant, at least partially (or entirely, in the case of the goal-line sack...Fant was supposed to block down and didn't). Two of them, though, were squarely on Wilson - he ran right into them. His scrambling habits make it difficult for his offensive linemen to know how to block - he'll sometimes run right past the edge and get pressured by a DE than Gilliam just had locked down.

Here's the thing: Some systems and offenses are more reliant on the offensive line than others, and some systems get their QB sacked more than others. Mike Martz was notorious for his high-sack philosophy; he wanted the big play all the time.

Remember that early TD to Greg Olsen in the game after the Beastmode playoff win in 2010? It was a long seam TD and everyone blamed Lawyer Milloy for being too old and slow for the game. What nobody noticed was that the play happened on 3rd and short. This explains Milloy's hesitation; he probably never imagined Martz would go deep on that play, because there are about a hundred higher-percentage plays you can run in that situation. Had Jay Cutler missed Olsen on the throw, Martz indeed would have looked stupid. But Cutler didn't miss.

Pete (I'm not blaming Bevell, he's a sock puppet) does this stuff all the time. That deep sideline catch by Doug Baldwin in overtime in the NFCCG against the Packers? Same thing. Casey Heyward didn't expect Baldwin to go deep on short yardage and he hesitated; Baldwin got right past him. But it's a double-edged sword; that same deep greed lost us several games in '15 because we didn't convert, could have much more easily, and lost. Hell, has everyone forgotten Pete's love of deep fades to Golden Tate as early as 2012? It's always been a thing.

Point is, those deep throws require a lot of protection. You can run a system that requires a lot from your line, and you can run a system that doesn't. Pete can't make up his mind. Until the Tampa game, Wilson was amongst league leaders in getting the ball out quickly. Then, against Tampa, Pete reverted to the big play (with his starting center out, I might add - terrible timing) and Wilson started getting pounded.

I'm not saying the OL isn't to blame; you can't throw 40 times without at least a few deep shots. But Pete and Wilson aren't making life easy on them either. Imagine trying to block for a QB doing his best Ash-from-Alien-with-his-head-half-off impression upon getting pressured. You could almost say Wilson is one of the toughest QBs to block for, and Pete is one of the toughest coaches to protect for.

Anthony! · Jan 18, 2017

Jville":jxpaapkb said:
Crizilla":jxpaapkb said:

2012: Seahawks were 12th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 33 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.06 Sacks allowed per game.
2013: Seahawks were 22nd in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 44 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.75 Sacks allowed per game.
2014: Seahawks were 21st in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 42 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.63 Sacks allowed per game.
2015: Seahawks were 26th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 46 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.88 Sacks allowed per game.
2016: Seahawks were 27th in the league for fewest sacks allowed. 42 Sacks total allowed, averaging 2.63 Sacks allowed per game.

And all 5 these years, Seahawks were top 7 in Offensive penalties. What's interesting to me is 2012. Was that because Wilson was looking to run more? Or was the O-Line actually pretty good? Okung, McQuistin, Gaicomini, Unger, Carpenter/Sweezy. They certainly didn't get better in 2013 and 2014. Also, people are thinking Pete's quote about the O-Line means it will be exactly the same next season. Every year they compete and they'll go with what they think is best, so it very well could change. Pete said the right thing. Don't want to ruin any moral of the players you have now. When training camp starts everyone will be at it again. If these stats show anything, it shows Cable has averaged a below average offensive line in the past 5 seasons. But yea we already knew that.

Click to expand...

We also know that the last five years coincided with a scrambling quarterback that loved to extend plays with his feet. I know there is a lot of love for Russell. But take a closer look at any of the remaining four quarterbacks in this years sudden death playoff. Aaron Rogers, for example, put on a clinic verses the Cowboys. Economy of motion with a step here and there to help his blockers with their angles. Truly a clinic in great footwork. I'm enjoying this years remaining foursome of quarterbacks. They should put on a terrific show. Russell Wilson is still developing as a quarterback. His economy of motion will improve. He will work better with his blockers as they grow together. And, I'm really looking forward to that facilitating his evolution into a precision passer. Coach Carroll included Russell Wilson in his season ending remarks. He foresees Russell Wilson growing into a great quarterback. He sees him quarterbacking a powerful and complete eleven man offense.

something else we need to knwo is what were the hurries, pressures, and hits for each year. This year there were a lot

Anthony! · Jan 18, 2017

MontanaHawk05":13nltjdu said:
Attyla the Hawk in epic fashion":13nltjdu said:

All that stuff

Click to expand...

I went and looked at the sacks from Arizona in the first half, all five of them. Three of them were on Fant, at least partially (or entirely, in the case of the goal-line sack...Fant was supposed to block down and didn't). Two of them, though, were squarely on Wilson - he ran right into them. His scrambling habits make it difficult for his offensive linemen to know how to block - he'll sometimes run right past the edge and get pressured by a DE than Gilliam just had locked down.

Here's the thing: Some systems and offenses are more reliant on the offensive line than others, and some systems get their QB sacked more than others. Mike Martz was notorious for his high-sack philosophy; he wanted the big play all the time.

Remember that early TD to Greg Olsen in the game after the Beastmode playoff win in 2010? It was a long seam TD and everyone blamed Lawyer Milloy for being too old and slow for the game. What nobody noticed was that the play happened on 3rd and short. This explains Milloy's hesitation; he probably never imagined Martz would go deep on that play, because there are about a hundred higher-percentage plays you can run in that situation. Had Jay Cutler missed Olsen on the throw, Martz indeed would have looked stupid. But Cutler didn't miss.

Pete (I'm not blaming Bevell, he's a sock puppet) does this stuff all the time. That deep sideline catch by Doug Baldwin in overtime in the NFCCG against the Packers? Same thing. Casey Heyward didn't expect Baldwin to go deep on short yardage and he hesitated; Baldwin got right past him. But it's a double-edged sword; that same deep greed lost us several games in '15 because we didn't convert, could have much more easily, and lost. Hell, has everyone forgotten Pete's love of deep fades to Golden Tate as early as 2012? It's always been a thing.

Point is, those deep throws require a lot of protection. You can run a system that requires a lot from your line, and you can run a system that doesn't. Pete can't make up his mind. Until the Tampa game, Wilson was amongst league leaders in getting the ball out quickly. Then, against Tampa, Pete reverted to the big play (with his starting center out, I might add - terrible timing) and Wilson started getting pounded.

I'm not saying the OL isn't to blame; you can't throw 40 times without at least a few deep shots. But Pete and Wilson aren't making life easy on them either. Imagine trying to block for a QB doing his best Ash-from-Alien-with-his-head-half-off impression upon getting pressured. You could almost say Wilson is one of the toughest QBs to block for, and Pete is one of the toughest coaches to protect for.

LOL yup I am a believer it's all Wilson fault get rid of him and get a statue we will be fine, our oline is great obviously. Yes I did see your "I'm not saying the OL isn't to blame;" but most of your post is about how it is Wilsons fault, so get rid of him then and see what happens with a statue in the offense.

Jville · Jan 18, 2017

Anthony!":3177afvg said:
MontanaHawk05":3177afvg said:

Attyla the Hawk in epic fashion":3177afvg said:

All that stuff

Click to expand...

I went and looked at the sacks from Arizona in the first half, all five of them. Three of them were on Fant, at least partially (or entirely, in the case of the goal-line sack...Fant was supposed to block down and didn't). Two of them, though, were squarely on Wilson - he ran right into them. His scrambling habits make it difficult for his offensive linemen to know how to block - he'll sometimes run right past the edge and get pressured by a DE than Gilliam just had locked down.

Here's the thing: Some systems and offenses are more reliant on the offensive line than others, and some systems get their QB sacked more than others. Mike Martz was notorious for his high-sack philosophy; he wanted the big play all the time.

Remember that early TD to Greg Olsen in the game after the Beastmode playoff win in 2010? It was a long seam TD and everyone blamed Lawyer Milloy for being too old and slow for the game. What nobody noticed was that the play happened on 3rd and short. This explains Milloy's hesitation; he probably never imagined Martz would go deep on that play, because there are about a hundred higher-percentage plays you can run in that situation. Had Jay Cutler missed Olsen on the throw, Martz indeed would have looked stupid. But Cutler didn't miss.

Pete (I'm not blaming Bevell, he's a sock puppet) does this stuff all the time. That deep sideline catch by Doug Baldwin in overtime in the NFCCG against the Packers? Same thing. Casey Heyward didn't expect Baldwin to go deep on short yardage and he hesitated; Baldwin got right past him. But it's a double-edged sword; that same deep greed lost us several games in '15 because we didn't convert, could have much more easily, and lost. Hell, has everyone forgotten Pete's love of deep fades to Golden Tate as early as 2012? It's always been a thing.

Point is, those deep throws require a lot of protection. You can run a system that requires a lot from your line, and you can run a system that doesn't. Pete can't make up his mind. Until the Tampa game, Wilson was amongst league leaders in getting the ball out quickly. Then, against Tampa, Pete reverted to the big play (with his starting center out, I might add - terrible timing) and Wilson started getting pounded.

I'm not saying the OL isn't to blame; you can't throw 40 times without at least a few deep shots. But Pete and Wilson aren't making life easy on them either. Imagine trying to block for a QB doing his best Ash-from-Alien-with-his-head-half-off impression upon getting pressured. You could almost say Wilson is one of the toughest QBs to block for, and Pete is one of the toughest coaches to protect for.

Click to expand...

LOL yup I am a believer it's all Wilson fault get rid of him and get a statue we will be fine, our oline is great obviously. Yes I did see your "I'm not saying the OL isn't to blame;" but most of your post is about how it is Wilsons fault, so get rid of him then and see what happens with a statue in the offense.

Calm down ..... take a big breath and try reading the post again ..... thoughtfully.

Anthony! · Jan 18, 2017

Jville":7ce6sdwb said:
Anthony!":7ce6sdwb said:

MontanaHawk05":7ce6sdwb said:

Attyla the Hawk in epic fashion":7ce6sdwb said:

All that stuff

Click to expand...

I went and looked at the sacks from Arizona in the first half, all five of them. Three of them were on Fant, at least partially (or entirely, in the case of the goal-line sack...Fant was supposed to block down and didn't). Two of them, though, were squarely on Wilson - he ran right into them. His scrambling habits make it difficult for his offensive linemen to know how to block - he'll sometimes run right past the edge and get pressured by a DE than Gilliam just had locked down.

Here's the thing: Some systems and offenses are more reliant on the offensive line than others, and some systems get their QB sacked more than others. Mike Martz was notorious for his high-sack philosophy; he wanted the big play all the time.

Remember that early TD to Greg Olsen in the game after the Beastmode playoff win in 2010? It was a long seam TD and everyone blamed Lawyer Milloy for being too old and slow for the game. What nobody noticed was that the play happened on 3rd and short. This explains Milloy's hesitation; he probably never imagined Martz would go deep on that play, because there are about a hundred higher-percentage plays you can run in that situation. Had Jay Cutler missed Olsen on the throw, Martz indeed would have looked stupid. But Cutler didn't miss.

Pete (I'm not blaming Bevell, he's a sock puppet) does this stuff all the time. That deep sideline catch by Doug Baldwin in overtime in the NFCCG against the Packers? Same thing. Casey Heyward didn't expect Baldwin to go deep on short yardage and he hesitated; Baldwin got right past him. But it's a double-edged sword; that same deep greed lost us several games in '15 because we didn't convert, could have much more easily, and lost. Hell, has everyone forgotten Pete's love of deep fades to Golden Tate as early as 2012? It's always been a thing.

Point is, those deep throws require a lot of protection. You can run a system that requires a lot from your line, and you can run a system that doesn't. Pete can't make up his mind. Until the Tampa game, Wilson was amongst league leaders in getting the ball out quickly. Then, against Tampa, Pete reverted to the big play (with his starting center out, I might add - terrible timing) and Wilson started getting pounded.

I'm not saying the OL isn't to blame; you can't throw 40 times without at least a few deep shots. But Pete and Wilson aren't making life easy on them either. Imagine trying to block for a QB doing his best Ash-from-Alien-with-his-head-half-off impression upon getting pressured. You could almost say Wilson is one of the toughest QBs to block for, and Pete is one of the toughest coaches to protect for.

Click to expand...

LOL yup I am a believer it's all Wilson fault get rid of him and get a statue we will be fine, our oline is great obviously. Yes I did see your "I'm not saying the OL isn't to blame;" but most of your post is about how it is Wilsons fault, so get rid of him then and see what happens with a statue in the offense.

Click to expand...

Calm down ..... take a big breath and try reading the post again ..... thoughtfully.

First off "Two of them, though, were squarely on Wilson - he ran right into them. His scrambling habits make it difficult for his offensive linemen to know how to block - he'll sometimes run right past the edge and get pressured by a DE than Gilliam just had locked down." enough said and the reality is its the same song he has been saying for awhile its mostly Wilsons fault. Some on here even say over half. So fine you really think he is the problem then get rid of him you will soon find he is not in fact he saves way more than he gives up but hey go for it. FYI Wilson has run into some sacks but staying pout he would have been sacked too at least he tried, its better than half the oline who just stand there once they have been beat and watch. It is always amazing to me how all the experts say the iline sucks and is the biggest problem but a few agenda minded people want to blame Wilson

mrt144 · Jan 18, 2017

Anthony, Wilson can shoulder some blame and still be the best player on offense and still do his job better than others on the team doing theirs.

But it seems like the team as a whole hasnt worked together in mitigating sacks. Wilson sometimes saves the OLs butts sometimes he doesnt. Sometimes he makes it harder for them when they do just enough and takes a sack.

Its not the screaming indictment you imagine it is and frankly you make my RW apologetics seem almost like criticisms.

Jville · Jan 18, 2017

Anthony,

Everyone here thinks well of Russell. That certainly is evident in the posts within this thread. There are, however, trade offs. Strengths and weaknesses. Attributes that make life for team mates easier and attributes that make life for team mates more difficult. There are also limitations as to what stats can reveal. Those are among the considerations that have been addressed here. Nobody has been called out or blamed.

Anthony! · Jan 18, 2017

mrt144":6m8v42n2 said:
Anthony, Wilson can shoulder some blame and still be the best player on offense and still do his job better than others on the team doing theirs.

But it seems like the team as a whole hasnt worked together in mitigating sacks. Wilson sometimes saves the OLs butts sometimes he doesnt. Sometimes he makes it harder for them when they do just enough and takes a sack.

Its not the screaming indictment you imagine it is and frankly you make my RW apologetics seem almost like criticisms.

Perhaps but when I read it and the way it and some other are written they come across as blaming it on Wilson I mean really over half? Sorry nope. The reality is if the oline did its job Wilson would just stand there and throw but more often then not there is a reason he has to run alot. 4 of the 5 may do a great job but if one does not he has to move to not get sacked and well sometimes there is no place to move, or he moves and gets sack anyway that does not mean it is on him, if they all do their jobs no sack. its pretty simple.

Attyla the Hawk · Jan 19, 2017

Anthony!":1wni2h48 said:
Some on here even say over half. So fine you really think he is the problem then get rid of him you will soon find he is not in fact he saves way more than he gives up but hey go for it. FYI Wilson has run into some sacks but staying pout he would have been sacked too at least he tried, its better than half the oline who just stand there once they have been beat and watch. It is always amazing to me how all the experts say the iline sucks and is the biggest problem but a few agenda minded people want to blame Wilson

I'm not saying that. Obviously part of what makes Wilson dangerous is that he can extend plays and really get explosive plays that way.

I'm suggesting that there is good with bad. And that there are differences in how Wilson plays compared to other QBs that don't have his gifts. Do I wish he'd throw it away more? Not exactly.

What I do think, is that the nature of what you get from Wilson (both good and bad) is going to inflate sack numbers. And that the nature of the boom/bust value of Wilson's abilities have to be accounted for contextually. Merely listing sack ratings to me isn't a real accurate barometer for how the line performs.

We get more sacks. We also have a QB that goes 21 for 25, instead of 18 for 28. And we get big plays downfield that other teams don't get. Sacks are part of the 'cost'. And this year, that cost in negative plays was too much for the offense to overcome.

I don't have an agenda. I just see that there are ways to more fully understand raw statistics. And it's worth exploring if maybe opposing teams haven't altered how they approach our pass protection based on what are are (or aren't doing).

brimsalabim · Jan 19, 2017

The only O Line stat that should matter is : 2016 QB hurt multiple times , All running backs hurt...

Anthony! · Jan 19, 2017

Attyla the Hawk":3li4sna6 said:
Anthony!":3li4sna6 said:

Some on here even say over half. So fine you really think he is the problem then get rid of him you will soon find he is not in fact he saves way more than he gives up but hey go for it. FYI Wilson has run into some sacks but staying pout he would have been sacked too at least he tried, its better than half the oline who just stand there once they have been beat and watch. It is always amazing to me how all the experts say the iline sucks and is the biggest problem but a few agenda minded people want to blame Wilson

Click to expand...

I'm not saying that. Obviously part of what makes Wilson dangerous is that he can extend plays and really get explosive plays that way.

I'm suggesting that there is good with bad. And that there are differences in how Wilson plays compared to other QBs that don't have his gifts. Do I wish he'd throw it away more? Not exactly.

What I do think, is that the nature of what you get from Wilson (both good and bad) is going to inflate sack numbers. And that the nature of the boom/bust value of Wilson's abilities have to be accounted for contextually. Merely listing sack ratings to me isn't a real accurate barometer for how the line performs.

We get more sacks. We also have a QB that goes 21 for 25, instead of 18 for 28. And we get big plays downfield that other teams don't get. Sacks are part of the 'cost'. And this year, that cost in negative plays was too much for the offense to overcome.

I don't have an agenda. I just see that there are ways to more fully understand raw statistics. And it's worth exploring if maybe opposing teams haven't altered how they approach our pass protection based on what are are (or aren't doing).

The difference I think is for every Sack Wilsons might arguably cause he gets out of 2 that most qbs would take and that is a huge thing some forget.

Sack Stats past 5 years

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

New member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Similar threads