The Santa Clara 49ers implosion is imminent!

[rideaducati]

The eagles were 8-8 & 4-12 the 2 seasons before kelly came to the eagles. Your argument for him being handed a talented roster is a bit of a stretch. Kelly is gonna get some time with the 49er organization , I'd say at least 3 seasons. So we're gonna find out who he is. This roster is young and has some talent along with quite a few guys who may turn Inot darn good players

I give him 2 years before the combo platter hits. First where he wears out his welcome with Jedthro and the Trentster, and secondly, he figures out how big of tools Jedthro and the Trentster are to work for. Then it's the mutual agreement to part ways press conference.

It will be an amusing two years though. I fully expect Dork to fire Baalke after this season and then force the next GM to keep Chip for a year before firing Chip after year two.

 

[NINEster]

:lol: .....And after the implosion of last year, the great news for 9er fans is it will keep going.

Should the thread title be updated to remove the implosion part?

 

[Sports Hernia]

:lol: .....And after the implosion of last year, the great news for 9er fans is it will keep going.

Should the thread title be updated to remove the implosion part?

Better yet remove the 2 words after implosion. 8)

 

[chris98251]

:lol: .....And after the implosion of last year, the great news for 9er fans is it will keep going.

Should the thread title be updated to remove the implosion part?

Better yet remove the 2 words after implosion. 8)

It's been proven lighting can strike twice in the same spot. You have Kelly York and Baalke, basically a Lighting Rod .

 

[Maulbert]

Hey, Marv, Popeye, NINEster, just wondering about your thoughts on this:

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=125999

 

[NINEster]

Responded.

Thanks for pointing it out for me.

 

[Popeyejones]

Hey, Marv, Popeye, NINEster, just wondering about your thoughts on this:

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=125999

two of 'em:

1) Yeah, I think Wilson is a borderline top tier QB (as I've said a couple times recently: if we're talking 2nd half of the season last year he's the best QB in the NFL and it's not that close, whereas if we're talking first half of the season and playoffs last year he's more 10-15. That's borderline top tier IMO).


2) Wilson has consistently beaten the 9ers. The Hawks defense has consistently owned the 9ers. Big difference, IMO.

 

[Laloosh]

Hey, Marv, Popeye, NINEster, just wondering about your thoughts on this:

http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=125999

two of 'em:

1) Yeah, I think Wilson is a borderline top tier QB (as I've said a couple times recently: if we're talking 2nd half of the season last year he's the best QB in the NFL and it's not that close, whereas if we're talking first half of the season and playoffs last year he's more 10-15. That's borderline top tier IMO).


2) Wilson has consistently beaten the 9ers. The Hawks defense has consistently owned the 9ers. Big difference, IMO.

Follow up question: What do you credit with being the cause for the sudden shift from 10-15 in the first half, to 1 in the second half of the season?

Popeye secretly PMs me and tells me that Wilson is his favorite QB in the league (don't tell him I told you).

 

[Popeyejones]

^^^ The obvious answer is opening up the offense, but I think that can run the risk of confusing cause and effect a little bit.

To a lesser degree it's like asking why Devonta Freeman looked like the best starting RB in the NFL for six games from weeks 3 (when he took over) through 8, and then looked like the worst starting RB in the NFL for seven games from weeks 9-17.

With these types of splits I think you just gotta go throw your hands up and go with the safest hypothesis, which is high variance in small sample sizes.

Wilson almost certainly ain't as bad as he was in games 1-9 and the playoffs, just as he almost certainly ain't as good as he was in games 10-16 of the regular season. Put another way, he's as unlikely to throw 50 TDs against 2 Ints next year (weeks 10-16 projected out) as he's unlikely to only throw 20 TDs against 15 Ints next year (weeks 1-9 and the playoffs projected out).

 

[Laloosh]

^^^ The obvious answer is opening up the offense, but I think that can run the risk of confusing cause and effect a little bit.

To a lesser degree it's like asking why Devonta Freeman looked like the best starting RB in the NFL for six games from weeks 3 (when he took over) through 8, and then looked like the worst starting RB in the NFL for seven games from weeks 9-17.

With these types of splits I think you just gotta go throw your hands up and go with the safest hypothesis, which is high variance in small sample sizes.

Wilson almost certainly ain't as bad as he was in games 1-9 and the playoffs, just as he almost certainly ain't as good as he was in games 10-16 of the regular season. Put another way, he's as unlikely to throw 50 TDs against 2 Ints next year (weeks 10-16 projected out) as he's unlikely to only throw 20 TDs against 15 Ints next year (weeks 1-9 and the playoffs projected out).

Blasphemer!

 

[Maulbert]

^^^ The obvious answer is opening up the offense, but I think that can run the risk of confusing cause and effect a little bit.

To a lesser degree it's like asking why Devonta Freeman looked like the best starting RB in the NFL for six games from weeks 3 (when he took over) through 8, and then looked like the worst starting RB in the NFL for seven games from weeks 9-17.

With these types of splits I think you just gotta go throw your hands up and go with the safest hypothesis, which is high variance in small sample sizes.

Wilson almost certainly ain't as bad as he was in games 1-9 and the playoffs, just as he almost certainly ain't as good as he was in games 10-16 of the regular season. Put another way, he's as unlikely to throw 50 TDs against 2 Ints next year (weeks 10-16 projected out) as he's unlikely to only throw 20 TDs against 15 Ints next year (weeks 1-9 and the playoffs projected out).

Blasphemer!

Can he be a blasphemer if he was already profane? :stirthepot:

 

[hawk45]

^^^ The obvious answer is opening up the offense, but I think that can run the risk of confusing cause and effect a little bit.

To a lesser degree it's like asking why Devonta Freeman looked like the best starting RB in the NFL for six games from weeks 3 (when he took over) through 8, and then looked like the worst starting RB in the NFL for seven games from weeks 9-17.

With these types of splits I think you just gotta go throw your hands up and go with the safest hypothesis, which is high variance in small sample sizes.

Wilson almost certainly ain't as bad as he was in games 1-9 and the playoffs, just as he almost certainly ain't as good as he was in games 10-16 of the regular season. Put another way, he's as unlikely to throw 50 TDs against 2 Ints next year (weeks 10-16 projected out) as he's unlikely to only throw 20 TDs against 15 Ints next year (weeks 1-9 and the playoffs projected out).

I view Wilson's last-half breakout similarly to how I viewed the last-half breakout in his rookie season when we dropped 50-burgers with regularity. In both cases, we had added an element that it took defenses some time to adjust to, but adjust they did, and we were back to running the ball and throwing now and then. In fact, we were right back to that approach vs. Carolina in the playoffs, although I don't know if that was because Carolina demonstrated on film an ability to stymie a quick passing approach, or whether Pete got conservative and went to his bread and butter approach (I favor the latter explanation).

A quarterback like Tom Brady seems to be able to keep the quick-passing offense going year after year, but for one, Wilson will never have *quite* the command Brady does over the short middle and for two, Brady's stats aren't consistently gaudy with that approach. What I like about the Patriots, though, is that they are adept at the counter-counter-adjustments in a way that Seattle has not proved to be.

What I can say is that the beginning of next season will be interesting. Our OL will be it's usual dumpster fire for the first half of the season as we replace 4/5 positions, which seems to be the mission statement hanging over the Seahawk desk. That would be the time to rely on quick passing, one would think, but I can just as easily see Pete deciding that handing the ball off more is a better option for keeping Russell healthy.

 

[Laloosh]

^^^ The obvious answer is opening up the offense, but I think that can run the risk of confusing cause and effect a little bit.

To a lesser degree it's like asking why Devonta Freeman looked like the best starting RB in the NFL for six games from weeks 3 (when he took over) through 8, and then looked like the worst starting RB in the NFL for seven games from weeks 9-17.

With these types of splits I think you just gotta go throw your hands up and go with the safest hypothesis, which is high variance in small sample sizes.

Wilson almost certainly ain't as bad as he was in games 1-9 and the playoffs, just as he almost certainly ain't as good as he was in games 10-16 of the regular season. Put another way, he's as unlikely to throw 50 TDs against 2 Ints next year (weeks 10-16 projected out) as he's unlikely to only throw 20 TDs against 15 Ints next year (weeks 1-9 and the playoffs projected out).

I view Wilson's last-half breakout similarly to how I viewed the last-half breakout in his rookie season when we dropped 50-burgers with regularity. In both cases, we had added an element that it took defenses some time to adjust to, but adjust they did, and we were back to running the ball and throwing now and then. In fact, we were right back to that approach vs. Carolina in the playoffs, although I don't know if that was because Carolina demonstrated on film an ability to stymie a quick passing approach, or whether Pete got conservative and went to his bread and butter approach (I favor the latter explanation).

A quarterback like Tom Brady seems to be able to keep the quick-passing offense going year after year, but for one, Wilson will never have *quite* the command Brady does over the short middle and for two, Brady's stats aren't consistently gaudy with that approach. What I like about the Patriots, though, is that they are adept at the counter-counter-adjustments in a way that Seattle has not proved to be.

What I can say is that the beginning of next season will be interesting. Our OL will be it's usual dumpster fire for the first half of the season as we replace 4/5 positions, which seems to be the mission statement hanging over the Seahawk desk. That would be the time to rely on quick passing, one would think, but I can just as easily see Pete deciding that handing the ball off more is a better option for keeping Russell healthy.

Given the offensive take off in the 2nd half @ CAR when going back to the spread, I don't feel like we went away from it because teams had adjusted.

 

[rideaducati]

^^^ The obvious answer is opening up the offense, but I think that can run the risk of confusing cause and effect a little bit.

To a lesser degree it's like asking why Devonta Freeman looked like the best starting RB in the NFL for six games from weeks 3 (when he took over) through 8, and then looked like the worst starting RB in the NFL for seven games from weeks 9-17.

With these types of splits I think you just gotta go throw your hands up and go with the safest hypothesis, which is high variance in small sample sizes.

Wilson almost certainly ain't as bad as he was in games 1-9 and the playoffs, just as he almost certainly ain't as good as he was in games 10-16 of the regular season. Put another way, he's as unlikely to throw 50 TDs against 2 Ints next year (weeks 10-16 projected out) as he's unlikely to only throw 20 TDs against 15 Ints next year (weeks 1-9 and the playoffs projected out).

Time together among the offensive line was the biggest factor in Russell's play. We might see the same this season because of the complete overhaul.

 

[Popeyejones]

Yeah, it could be (a) defensive/offensive adjustment, (b) use of the spread, or (c) the line playing better.

Or it could just be the variance of small sample sizes.

I think you can take all three of those nobs and crank them as hard in any direction you want and you're still not going to see Wilson go for 50 tds and 2 ints OR 20 tds and 15 ints across a full season.

 

[rideaducati]

Yeah, it could be (a) defensive/offensive adjustment, (b) use of the spread, or (c) the line playing better.

Or it could just be the variance of small sample sizes.

I think you can take all three of those nobs and crank them as hard in any direction you want and you're still not going to see Wilson go for 50 tds and 2 ints OR 20 tds and 15 ints across a full season.

We'll find out if they ever get an offensive line to stay together, but I'd bet on Russell being a lot closer to the 50-2 than he is to the 20-15 guy.

 

[hawk45]

Given the offensive take off in the 2nd half @ CAR when going back to the spread, I don't feel like we went away from it because teams had adjusted.

Oh I agree. Really, there hadn't been all that much time for adjustment, as we'd been kicking the nards off of teams just prior to that. I raised the possibility of adjustment in the interests of completeness.

And while I spent most of my previous post enumerating reasons why the high-scoring quick-pass offense of last year is comparable to Wilson's first year read-zone, and implying it may be similarly unsustainable, I don't think NFL defenses can completely shut down a quick-pass offense if the QB has near-mastery the way NFL defenses were able to completely mitigate the read-zone (more or less).

Meaning that while Wilson certainly won't continue on the pace he was last half of last year, it's a decent proposition that his production will continue to be elevated to some degree.

At least in the second half of the season. The chicken and egg situation is that we went to the quick-passing attack later in the year last year, but later in the year is also when the line had a chance to go from cover-your-eyes bad, to "huh, they might not be the absolute worst in the league at pass pro." How big a percentage of our success was the quick passing taking pressure off of pass pro, and how big a percentage was the annual "hey, our center sucks, do we still have that Patrick Lewis guy around" revelation.

 

[NINEster]

Yeah, it could be (a) defensive/offensive adjustment, (b) use of the spread, or (c) the line playing better.

Or it could just be the variance of small sample sizes.

I think you can take all three of those nobs and crank them as hard in any direction you want and you're still not going to see Wilson go for 50 tds and 2 ints OR 20 tds and 15 ints across a full season.

We'll find out if they ever get an offensive line to stay together, but I'd bet on Russell being a lot closer to the 50-2 than he is to the 20-15 guy.

No one has ever thrown for a 25:1 ratio, so it won't happen by any QB this season or for a long time, if ever. Many QBs have thrown for a barely better than 1:1 ratio, so it could happen to a good number of QBs this year.

Wilson still doesn't have the experience or supporting cast to get it done....good OL or not. Rodgers throwing 46 TDs to 6 INTs in 2011 was insane all in itself, and it wasn't even 8:1....

BTW, I cannot recall the last time a team won the SB with the QB throwing 40+ TDs. Cam last year, Brees in 2011, Rodgers in 2011....Romo close to that in 2014....Peyton Manning any number of seasons....Brady in 2007, 2011...

Quick stat check: Kurt Warner in 1999 did it.

I wouldn't be surprised if he was the only one to do so ever.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

Yeah, it could be (a) defensive/offensive adjustment, (b) use of the spread, or (c) the line playing better.

Or it could just be the variance of small sample sizes.

I think you can take all three of those nobs and crank them as hard in any direction you want and you're still not going to see Wilson go for 50 tds and 2 ints OR 20 tds and 15 ints across a full season.

We'll find out if they ever get an offensive line to stay together, but I'd bet on Russell being a lot closer to the 50-2 than he is to the 20-15 guy.

No one has ever thrown for a 25:1 ratio, so it won't happen by any QB this season or for a long time, if ever. Many QBs have thrown for a barely better than 1:1 ratio, so it could happen to a good number of QBs this year.

Wilson still doesn't have the experience or supporting cast to get it done....good OL or not. Rodgers throwing 46 TDs to 6 INTs in 2011 was insane all in itself, and it wasn't even 8:1....

BTW, I cannot recall the last time a team won the SB with the QB throwing 40+ TDs. Cam last year, Brees in 2011, Rodgers in 2011....Romo close to that in 2014....Peyton Manning any number of seasons....Brady in 2007, 2011...

Quick stat check: Kurt Warner in 1999 did it.

I wouldn't be surprised if he was the only one to do so ever.

Wow. Sweet extrapolation on that hypothetical extrapolation, bro. Awesome stats work as well.

Feel free to post some cool 9er QB stats when your team gets some.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Yeah, it could be (a) defensive/offensive adjustment, (b) use of the spread, or (c) the line playing better.

Or it could just be the variance of small sample sizes.

I think you can take all three of those nobs and crank them as hard in any direction you want and you're still not going to see Wilson go for 50 tds and 2 ints OR 20 tds and 15 ints across a full season.

We'll find out if they ever get an offensive line to stay together, but I'd bet on Russell being a lot closer to the 50-2 than he is to the 20-15 guy.

No one has ever thrown for a 25:1 ratio, so it won't happen by any QB this season or for a long time, if ever. Many QBs have thrown for a barely better than 1:1 ratio, so it could happen to a good number of QBs this year.

Wilson still doesn't have the experience or supporting cast to get it done....good OL or not. Rodgers throwing 46 TDs to 6 INTs in 2011 was insane all in itself, and it wasn't even 8:1....

BTW, I cannot recall the last time a team won the SB with the QB throwing 40+ TDs. Cam last year, Brees in 2011, Rodgers in 2011....Romo close to that in 2014....Peyton Manning any number of seasons....Brady in 2007, 2011...

Quick stat check: Kurt Warner in 1999 did it.

I wouldn't be surprised if he was the only one to do so ever.

Seriously? Come on man. Baldwin and Lockett are 1st tier wide receivers. And we have the second best receiving TE in the NFL and the best combination TE and RB out of this draft class. Work harder to entertain me. Don't be mad that Russell is finally reaching his goal of 70% completions. It's only a half season they actually started to focus the offense around him and not Lynch you know?

Tom Brady came damn close when he threw for 50 TD's by the way. Though I will admit none of our current wide receivers are a Randy Moss in his prime.