Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Russell Wilson dominates Precision Passing event in Skills S

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE: PG-13
  • Why all the hate on RW?

    Don't get it. The guy is the best thing going for the team right now.

    I just wish Pete would step back from his ego and let RW do his thing from the first snap to the last.

    Shore up the D and the running game and give Russ the green light to run the O and good things will happen.

    Russ has 2-3 prime seasons left in the tank (he turns 32 this season) before inevitable decline sets in, especially given his skill are so athletic-centered. Time waits for no-one, not even him.

    Don't waste the good years he has left.

    We're sure going to miss him when he's gone.

    RW4LIFE
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 10
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2020 8:41 pm


  • With the offense ranked ninth in points and eighth in yards and the defense ranked twenty-second and twenty-sixth in those categories, it is blatantly obvious how we sniff a Super Bowl again, and it isn't going up tempo to put our poor defense on the field more. It is with upgrading the defense.

    With each of the high powered pass happy offenses in history, the ones that actually make the Super Bowl and win are the ones that had good performances from their defense that season. The only one I can think of that had a poor defense from the AFC was the Colts and they played very well in three of four of their playoff games allowing only one offensive touchdown in each of those games. They struggled to stop the Patriots, but it was ultimately their defense with an interception that won them that game. The only one from the NFC was the Saints, however, they were second in takeaways, third in takeaway percentage and second in conversions against and it was another instance of the defense bailing out their offense as the Vikings had their would be game winning drive stopped by an interception.
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1830
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


  • BASF wrote:With the offense ranked ninth in points and eighth in yards and the defense ranked twenty-second and twenty-sixth in those categories, it is blatantly obvious how we sniff a Super Bowl again, and it isn't going up tempo to put our poor defense on the field more. It is with upgrading the defense.

    With each of the high powered pass happy offenses in history, the ones that actually make the Super Bowl and win are the ones that had good performances from their defense that season. The only one I can think of that had a poor defense from the AFC was the Colts and they played very well in three of four of their playoff games allowing only one offensive touchdown in each of those games. They struggled to stop the Patriots, but it was ultimately their defense with an interception that won them that game. The only one from the NFC was the Saints, however, they were second in takeaways, third in takeaway percentage and second in conversions against and it was another instance of the defense bailing out their offense as the Vikings had their would be game winning drive stopped by an interception.



    Ahh if you look at TOP we actually have a higher TOP in the 2nd half when we run the change tempo than in the 1st half when we run same old same old. So the defense being on the field more if we run change tempo is wrong.

    That said I agree we need to improve the offense, but that does not mean we cannot also modify our offense.

    Imagine if we got out defense to top 15 or higher and also got our offense to top 5 with very few if any slow starts. I can and I see SB.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • Wow, I ran out of popcorn.
    Nunya's post says everything you need to know about Wilson. He backed it up with FACTS, not just making crap up that flat out isn't true like Fecal.
    Also, not sniffing the Super Bowl? Come on, this team is in the mix just about every year. And who said that we are happy with losing and/or not going to the Super Bowl as long as we have a winning record? I doubt anyone is happy about it, but having realistic expectations w/what the team has on the roster etc. That's realistic, and this team, working with Duct tape, was one drive from playing in the NFC Championship. And against a team they already beat on the road. AND they were a foot away from knocking out the Niners and winning the division here in Seattle. Talking down to people like they don't want to win it all? Come on man, you're better than that man. And you often own Tical, which is enjoyable.
    Other than the Pats, no other team has been as successful as the Hawks. I'm sure 30 other fanbases would love to have the same problems the Hawks have.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 14762
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • John63 wrote:Ahh if you look at TOP we actually have a higher TOP in the 2nd half when we run the change tempo than in the 1st half when we run same old same old. So the defense being on the field more if we run change tempo is wrong.


    It is at that point where I would be asking why our defense that was giving up long drives during the first half are suddenly getting stops and getting the offense the ball back. Of course without specific games to check the All 22, there isn't really anyway to know. So, what games are you looking at specifically?
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1830
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:07 pm


  • BASF wrote:
    John63 wrote:Ahh if you look at TOP we actually have a higher TOP in the 2nd half when we run the change tempo than in the 1st half when we run same old same old. So the defense being on the field more if we run change tempo is wrong.


    It is at that point where I would be asking why our defense that was giving up long drives during the first half are suddenly getting stops and getting the offense the ball back. Of course without specific games to check the All 22, there isn't really anyway to know. So, what games are you looking at specifically?



    I think you answered yoru own question

    "It is at that point where I would be asking why our defense that was giving up long drives during the first half are suddenly getting stops and getting the offense the ball back. "

    One we are now in the 2nd half and they are not on the field as long, 2 they see the difference in the offense and it gets their adrenalin going, 3 in some cases the change in offense gave them the lead, so they are now playing with a lead rather than form behind. There is another thread in this forum were I posted the TOP and a link.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • John63 wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    John63 wrote:Ahh if you look at TOP we actually have a higher TOP in the 2nd half when we run the change tempo than in the 1st half when we run same old same old. So the defense being on the field more if we run change tempo is wrong.


    It is at that point where I would be asking why our defense that was giving up long drives during the first half are suddenly getting stops and getting the offense the ball back. Of course without specific games to check the All 22, there isn't really anyway to know. So, what games are you looking at specifically?



    I think you answered yoru own question

    "It is at that point where I would be asking why our defense that was giving up long drives during the first half are suddenly getting stops and getting the offense the ball back. "

    One we are now in the 2nd half and they are not on the field as long, 2 they see the difference in the offense and it gets their adrenalin going, 3 in some cases the change in offense gave them the lead, so they are now playing with a lead rather than form behind. There is another thread in this forum were I posted the TOP and a link.

    There's no correlation here. The false equivalence here is that you're assuming we'll be productive in the first half the same way we are in the second half. There's two points to be made here. First, defenses play us differently when they have a two score lead against us. Secondly, Russell sometimes isn't sharp early in games. If Russell isn't sharp, and we go uptempo, the defense will be on the field far too long as a result. Your assumption that going uptempo will automatically get Russell off to better starts is much more of a possibility than it is a certainty.
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4596
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:37 pm


  • Tical21 wrote:
    John63 wrote:
    BASF wrote:
    John63 wrote:Ahh if you look at TOP we actually have a higher TOP in the 2nd half when we run the change tempo than in the 1st half when we run same old same old. So the defense being on the field more if we run change tempo is wrong.


    It is at that point where I would be asking why our defense that was giving up long drives during the first half are suddenly getting stops and getting the offense the ball back. Of course without specific games to check the All 22, there isn't really anyway to know. So, what games are you looking at specifically?



    I think you answered yoru own question

    "It is at that point where I would be asking why our defense that was giving up long drives during the first half are suddenly getting stops and getting the offense the ball back. "

    One we are now in the 2nd half and they are not on the field as long, 2 they see the difference in the offense and it gets their adrenalin going, 3 in some cases the change in offense gave them the lead, so they are now playing with a lead rather than form behind. There is another thread in this forum were I posted the TOP and a link.

    There's no correlation here. The false equivalence here is that you're assuming we'll be productive in the first half the same way we are in the second half. There's two points to be made here. First, defenses play us differently when they have a two score lead against us. Secondly, Russell sometimes isn't sharp early in games. If Russell isn't sharp, and we go uptempo, the defense will be on the field far too long as a result. Your assumption that going uptempo will automatically get Russell off to better starts is much more of a possibility than it is a certainty.



    Except there have been games were we did, and we played well. Even if I agree with the possibility of this so-called false equivalency, why not try and see. Also, it is not uptempo it is change tempo.

    So to conclude there have been games were we played change tempo from the beginning, and we played great so there is a proof of concept.

    Also once again our TOP is higher in the 2nd half then the first and since we run change tempo more int he 2nd half then the first well you can connect the dots I am sure...never mind it means we have a higher TOP when we run change tempo them when we dont. Less 3 and outs, more sustained drives etc.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • I know that this is Seahawks football discussion, so.....When can we expect to see this thread go to the Shack?...If I promise not to answer to ticals nonsense, will it stay here in the main forum?
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7230
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • scutterhawk wrote:I know that this is Seahawks football discussion, so.....When can we expect to see this thread go to the Shack?...If I promise not to answer to ticals nonsense, will it stay here in the main forum?


    And in there lies the problem seems every thread TICAL is part of goes to the shack at some point or gets locked. Heck last one he begged the mods to close it, because he got caught and instead off to the shack, and some got warnings, and while I will apologize for any part I might play in it. I was one of many and in the end TICAL is always the catalyst. If ti gets moved I will be done with it, I don't go to the shack on purpose. Just a place where people can call each other names, threaten to sleep with wives and other unsavory stuff.

    I know I have caused some angst here, but I never start it, but I will not back down either. I know you can bring it to someones attention when others say things out of place but the few times i have nothing happened even when I was called well lets just say even the shack people would have blushed.

    Like I said for my part in this stuff I am sorry, I will not start anything, but I will not back down either.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • John63 wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:I know that this is Seahawks football discussion, so.....When can we expect to see this thread go to the Shack?...If I promise not to answer to ticals nonsense, will it stay here in the main forum?


    And in there lies the problem seems every thread TICAL is part of goes to the shack at some point or gets locked. Heck last one he begged the mods to close it, because he got caught and instead off to the shack, and some got warnings, and while I will apologize for any part I might play in it. I was one of many and in the end TICAL is always the catalyst. If ti gets moved I will be done with it, I don't go to the shack on purpose. Just a place where people can call each other names, threaten to sleep with wives and other unsavory stuff.

    I know I have caused some angst here, but I never start it, but I will not back down either. I know you can bring it to someones attention when others say things out of place but the few times i have nothing happened even when I was called well lets just say even the shack people would have blushed.

    Like I said for my part in this stuff I am sorry, I will not start anything, but I will not back down either.

    John ..
    You are to blame along with Tical if anything and you do start stuff.
    I agree you don't back down but neither does Tical hmm.
    Stuff wouldn't get shacked if you simply just stopped defending
    every RW post that doesn't fit your vision.
    We all know what it is by now..Believe that.
    Sometimes a "I disagree with your take Tical" is good enough.
    Last edited by IndyHawk on Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5123
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • Tical21 wrote:I’m more than willing to try uptempo. Note that Bevell tried it a few times with poor results, but I’m willing to try again.

    How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 31542
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:39 am
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    Tical21 wrote:I’m more than willing to try uptempo. Note that Bevell tried it a few times with poor results, but I’m willing to try again.

    How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • John63 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    Tical21 wrote:I’m more than willing to try uptempo. Note that Bevell tried it a few times with poor results, but I’m willing to try again.

    How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5123
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    Tical21 wrote:I’m more than willing to try uptempo. Note that Bevell tried it a few times with poor results, but I’m willing to try again.

    How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 17312
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:46 am


  • IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    Tical21 wrote:I’m more than willing to try uptempo. Note that Bevell tried it a few times with poor results, but I’m willing to try again.

    How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?



    The 2nd half was, we did not go change tempo in the first half we tried the same old same old in the 2nd half we went to it and moved the ball at will, but it was to late.

    Look even if we say it does not always work, which I am still waiting for proof that it did not work for a whole qtr or half or game. But if we say it does not always work, well guess what the same old same old does not work most of the time. So which is better something that works most of the time but not all or something that does not work most of the time.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.



    I have plenty of room for it, he has, So has almost every other starting QB, that doe s not change the fact that we were running the same old for the first half of that game and did not go to change tempo until the 2nd half.

    I mean you guys can argue all you want but nearly every expert out there, and now some the players are saying the same thing, don't you think given all that it is possible they have a point.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.


    Can we name a QB who hasn't thrown pick 6's before? I don't think anyone is saying we should throw 60 times a game. The argument is almost always framed in a way that people think they should better with their sequencing and throwing a little more on early downs. Mixing in some up tempo as well. Even Russ came out and said he thinks they should do this and he studies the tape, knows what makes him comfortable and what he's good at. Is he wrong too? Seems like this argument pins the other side into extremes and then says "that's dumb" but it's not all that honest. Ironically Seattle agreed as they were more aggressive on early downs in 2019 then they were in 2018. So we're they duped by the analytics crowd too? We're talking slight adjustments which any team will always do. I'm pro leaning more on Russ if that clouds this post at all
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3705
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:05 pm


  • austinslater25 wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:

    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.


    Can we name a QB who hasn't thrown pick 6's before? I don't think anyone is saying we should throw 60 times a game. The argument is almost always framed in a way that people think they should better with their sequencing and throwing a little more on early downs. Mixing in some up tempo as well. Even Russ came out and said he thinks they should do this and he studies the tape, knows what makes him comfortable and what he's good at. Is he wrong too? Seems like this argument pins the other side into extremes and then says "that's dumb" but it's not all that honest. Ironically Seattle agreed as they were more aggressive on early downs in 2019 then they were in 2018. So we're they duped by the analytics crowd too? We're talking slight adjustments which any team will always do. I'm pro leaning more on Russ if that clouds this post at all



    exactly, we are not saying throw more, just change the tempo and start from the begining it helps the whole offense.

    As to pick 6s

    https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pick_six_active.htm
    Wilson is tied for 24th amongst active Qbs

    Wilson throws a pick six every .62 seasons, to compare

    Brees throws a pick six every 1.42 seasons.
    Brady every .74
    Luck every 1.66


    So as you can see Wilson is amongst the best at not throwing a pick six.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • austinslater25 wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:

    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.


    Can we name a QB who hasn't thrown pick 6's before? I don't think anyone is saying we should throw 60 times a game. The argument is almost always framed in a way that people think they should better with their sequencing and throwing a little more on early downs. Mixing in some up tempo as well. Even Russ came out and said he thinks they should do this and he studies the tape, knows what makes him comfortable and what he's good at. Is he wrong too? Seems like this argument pins the other side into extremes and then says "that's dumb" but it's not all that honest. Ironically Seattle agreed as they were more aggressive on early downs in 2019 then they were in 2018. So we're they duped by the analytics crowd too? We're talking slight adjustments which any team will always do. I'm pro leaning more on Russ if that clouds this post at all


    I'm not creating straw men. Plenty of people out there absolutely want the pass-run ratio increased. Yet increase the number of Wilson's throws and the number of picks will rise with them, because as you said yourself, every QB throws picks.

    As far as the tempo and timing stuff goes, I was advocating that on this board long before any of you were. Of course, I was also pointing out that it might be Russ himself that's holding onto the ball, not just Pete. He was a 4th-quarter QB in college, too.
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 17312
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:46 am


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.


    Can we name a QB who hasn't thrown pick 6's before? I don't think anyone is saying we should throw 60 times a game. The argument is almost always framed in a way that people think they should better with their sequencing and throwing a little more on early downs. Mixing in some up tempo as well. Even Russ came out and said he thinks they should do this and he studies the tape, knows what makes him comfortable and what he's good at. Is he wrong too? Seems like this argument pins the other side into extremes and then says "that's dumb" but it's not all that honest. Ironically Seattle agreed as they were more aggressive on early downs in 2019 then they were in 2018. So we're they duped by the analytics crowd too? We're talking slight adjustments which any team will always do. I'm pro leaning more on Russ if that clouds this post at all


    I'm not creating straw men. Plenty of people out there absolutely want the pass-run ratio increased. Yet increase the number of Wilson's throws and the number of picks will rise with them, because as you said yourself, every QB throws picks.

    As far as the tempo and timing stuff goes, I was advocating that on this board long before any of you were. Of course, I was also pointing out that it might be Russ himself that's holding onto the ball, not just Pete. He was a 4th-quarter QB in college, too.



    So not sure about the college first half 2nd half, he threw for more yards, more tds, higher ypa, higher Qb rating, complt% in the first half. I did look at tape of 2 games and sorry it looks like they played change tempo the whole game not just 2nd half. I saw Wilson get to the line and get it snapped at different intervals throughout the game unlike us who only do it in the 2nd half.
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.


    Can we name a QB who hasn't thrown pick 6's before? I don't think anyone is saying we should throw 60 times a game. The argument is almost always framed in a way that people think they should better with their sequencing and throwing a little more on early downs. Mixing in some up tempo as well. Even Russ came out and said he thinks they should do this and he studies the tape, knows what makes him comfortable and what he's good at. Is he wrong too? Seems like this argument pins the other side into extremes and then says "that's dumb" but it's not all that honest. Ironically Seattle agreed as they were more aggressive on early downs in 2019 then they were in 2018. So we're they duped by the analytics crowd too? We're talking slight adjustments which any team will always do. I'm pro leaning more on Russ if that clouds this post at all


    I'm not creating straw men. Plenty of people out there absolutely want the pass-run ratio increased. Yet increase the number of Wilson's throws and the number of picks will rise with them, because as you said yourself, every QB throws picks.

    As far as the tempo and timing stuff goes, I was advocating that on this board long before any of you were. Of course, I was also pointing out that it might be Russ himself that's holding onto the ball, not just Pete. He was a 4th-quarter QB in college, too.


    That's fair I remember you pushing for that. I think it's a function of Pete's philosophy moreso than execution or Russ being a second half player. Pete doesn't want any mistakes or turnovers especially early in games as they feel teams out. This causes Russ to play a little too cautious imo. He runs way less, no urgency, he doesn't take as many chances down the field etc. Obviously this is fluid and there are times this isn't true but overall it's a part of the offensive system. It's not so much the play calling it's a pressured environment for being conservative. Later in games Pete and Russ let it go a little for a multitude of reasons. Maybe they're down, they know what the defense is doing against them or whatever the reason may be.
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3705
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:05 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?


    Shhhh...the "Russ would be throwing 7 TD's a game if Pete would just let him loose" crowd on Twitter doesn't have room for the idea that Russ has thrown pick-6's before. They'd melt into puddles.

    Ha Ha true..
    Sorry I had to point it out..I know he isn't perfect by far and all QB's have bad games.
    I saw a thread where he was being compared historically with all time greats and I
    had a point coming for that one also..I know they won't wanna hear that either.
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5123
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • Indy you don't think he is on an all time great trajectory? His numbers are historical at 8 years in and seems be getting better. I'd love to hear the argument against it.
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3705
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:05 pm


  • austinslater25 wrote:Indy you don't think he is on an all time great trajectory? His numbers are historical at 8 years in and seems be getting better. I'd love to hear the argument against it.

    The thing is he doesn't have the same rules those guys had to play under
    as it was a brutal game back then..You pass too much you got hammered.
    Your WR's got jammed and hammered..Defenses were better as the rules
    allowed them to be..I just don't put much stock into modern day records
    because of this..Yes RW is on a all time great trajectory under a different
    game than those other guys had to endure,it's not his fault ect but not fair
    to other QB's who were just as great if not better to be beneath him based
    on stats that are easier to exceed in the modern game.
    You asked and that's my take..
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5123
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • IndyHawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:Indy you don't think he is on an all time great trajectory? His numbers are historical at 8 years in and seems be getting better. I'd love to hear the argument against it.

    The thing is he doesn't have the same rules those guys had to play under
    as it was a brutal game back then..You pass too much you got hammered.
    Your WR's got jammed and hammered..Defenses were better as the rules
    allowed them to be..I just don't put much stock into modern day records
    because of this..Yes RW is on a all time great trajectory under a different
    game than those other guys had to endure,it's not his fault ect but not fair
    to other QB's who were just as great if not better to be beneath him based
    on stats that are easier to exceed in the modern game.
    You asked and that's my take..


    While to a point I get your position. However the issue is we dont known how they would do now, while the rules favor the offense the defenders are bigger and faster. Example I highly doubt Jim brown is near the player he was then if he played now. Almost every LB is as big or bigger and faster.

    In the end all we can use is stats to compare different era's. I agree rules of today do benefit QB, but the size and athleticism would cause issue for some of those earlier QBs. Not to mention a way superior ability of pass rushers. I mean do we really think Terry Bradshaw would be anything more than a back up now or avg starter?
    John63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2587
    Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:56 pm


  • The notion that stats can be used to compare different era's of a sport is incorrect.

    The nineteen fifties were limited to simple box scores printed on a sports page in newspapers. Since then, the scope of generally available statistical recordings has expanded greatly over time. Heck, Bradshaw was finishing up his career about the time the quarterback sack became an official statistic in 1982. The head slap had long since been outlawed. The nature of NFL football has evolved along with the collection of era specific stats. Performances, past and present, are tied to a timeline. Today's game is far less brutal. And although the stats of today's game are more expansive than those of the past, they remain an incomplete accounting of everything that transpired.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 9401
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:49 pm


  • IndyHawk wrote:
    John63 wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    Tical21 wrote:I’m more than willing to try uptempo. Note that Bevell tried it a few times with poor results, but I’m willing to try again.

    How efficient is our offense when we go no-huddle and Russell's basically running it?

    (Rhetorical question.)



    First I would love some proof when Bevell tried going change tempo and it did not work. I know when he tried it and it worked see 2nd half of 2015. I am betting there is no proof it did not work Also not we are not saying uptempo we are saying change tempo which is slightly different. Uptempo means call the play get to the line and snap is quick. Change tempo means some times call play in huddle, some times at the line, sometimes snap tight away, sometimes with 10 seconds left, sometimes more, sometimes less. Big difference.

    That Carolina playoff game wasn't proof?

    2015 Game against the Stealers WAS "PROOF".
    What was amazing about that shootout, is that Russell Wilson kicked ass WITHOUT having a Run game, and the O-Line (way out of character), gave RW the time he needed by focusing on Pass Protection...Up to that game, Wilson was being sacked, Hit, & hurried.
    There were several games that season where Russell Wilson PROVED TICKLE & CO. that he could indeed sling it, from kick-off in the 1st quarter, til' the buzzer sounded in the 4th quarter.
    Am I the only one who remembers that Wilson & Baldwin were besting ALL OTHER QUARTERBACKS in the League?
    OH AND, if I remember correctly, didn't we still have ET & Sherm on our Defense?
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7230
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


  • IndyHawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:Indy you don't think he is on an all time great trajectory? His numbers are historical at 8 years in and seems be getting better. I'd love to hear the argument against it.

    The thing is he doesn't have the same rules those guys had to play under
    as it was a brutal game back then..You pass too much you got hammered.
    Your WR's got jammed and hammered..Defenses were better as the rules
    allowed them to be..I just don't put much stock into modern day records
    because of this..Yes RW is on a all time great trajectory under a different
    game than those other guys had to endure,it's not his fault ect but not fair
    to other QB's who were just as great if not better to be beneath him based
    on stats that are easier to exceed in the modern game.
    You asked and that's my take..


    I respect the thought process for this even if I disagree. It's hard to compare players across eras.
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3705
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:05 pm


  • John63 wrote:
    IndyHawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:Indy you don't think he is on an all time great trajectory? His numbers are historical at 8 years in and seems be getting better. I'd love to hear the argument against it.

    The thing is he doesn't have the same rules those guys had to play under
    as it was a brutal game back then..You pass too much you got hammered.
    Your WR's got jammed and hammered..Defenses were better as the rules
    allowed them to be..I just don't put much stock into modern day records
    because of this..Yes RW is on a all time great trajectory under a different
    game than those other guys had to endure,it's not his fault ect but not fair
    to other QB's who were just as great if not better to be beneath him based
    on stats that are easier to exceed in the modern game.
    You asked and that's my take..


    While to a point I get your position. However the issue is we dont known how they would do now, while the rules favor the offense the defenders are bigger and faster. Example I highly doubt Jim brown is near the player he was then if he played now. Almost every LB is as big or bigger and faster.

    In the end all we can use is stats to compare different era's. I agree rules of today do benefit QB, but the size and athleticism would cause issue for some of those earlier QBs. Not to mention a way superior ability of pass rushers. I mean do we really think Terry Bradshaw would be anything more than a back up now or avg starter?

    Cherry picking can work for & against some of the "Back Then" & "Nowadays" when it comes to stats....Example; Russell Wilson's 2017, 2018, & 2019,Offen->Sieve<- O-Lines as compared to Matt Hasselbecks 2003, 2004, & 2005. ALL PRO O-Line.
    Can anyone even imaging how Wilson would perform, (or Marshawn Lynch for that matter) if they'd have had guys like ' Walter Jones, Hutchinson, Tobeck, Gray, Locklear, & a blocking Mack Truck, er, I mean Mack Strong as his FB?
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7230
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:48 pm


Previous


It is currently Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:48 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ SEATTLE SEAHAWKS FOOTBALL ]




Information
  • Who is online