Thank you. But you still haven’t supported your belief that Wilson is the better option, right now, with facts. Even you say that everything points to the “probability”. That is not fact. You may have made a reasoned argument, not contesting that. But ultimately it’s your opinion.

I am not simply stating an opinion. I have made a reasoned argument based on known facts. Neither you, nor Bobby, have countered with anything other than unsupported assertions (as evidenced by your most recent post).

Believe what you want, but everything points to the probability that PC has started the best player at the position, and that being the case, the team has (and will continue) to perform at a higher level than otherwise.

Is it possible that Flynn would do better? Yes. Is it reasonable to think so? No, it’s not, based on the known facts.

Come up with an example of PC not playing the best player in the past three years; find a statement to the effect that PC is willing to sacrifice winning a game or two to develop his QB. You won’t, because you can’t, because such evidence doesn’t exist.

Everything PC has said and done indicates he wants to compete for a title right now. The difference between a record of 10-6 and 9-7 (or 11-5) may make the difference between making the play-offs, and not. Losing an extra game may cost them home-field advantage. One game.

This isn’t a throw-away season, where losses don’t matter. PC intends to contend, by all the evidence, and that means winning as many games as possible. That means starting the best player possible, particularly at the most important position on the team.

This isn’t simply my ‘opinion’. This is what any knowledgable fan can know, and understand.

So yes, I do believe it’s a “stretch to believe that he’d [Flynn] play better than Wilson has, in his first 3 game,” based on the known facts.

But hey, you and Bobby can go along and believe what you want, independent of what actually takes place.

And yes, that’s my opinion.

Quite frankly, karma is a bitch. GB was 15-1 last year and expected to waltz into the superbowl uncontested. Then the playoffs happened and it all came crashing down. This is karma coming back to crush their spirit.

Flynn’s resume consists of two meaningless games where he lit up the scoreboard. Do you think that if Flynn were actually that good, they would of had a QB controversey in GB? Hell no. Rogers is the undisputed leader of that team. The old GB OC didn’t make a reach for Flynn during the offseason. What does that tell you? I think Flynn had the same attitude regarding Seattles QB position that GB held going into the playoffs last year. Flynn assumed the job was his and that no one would stop him. For Flynn, it was Wilson. For GB last year, it was the playoffs.

That being said, has anyone seen the All 22 and been able to determine if the route running by the receivers has anything to do with our horrid pass offense? I have seen replays that show lazy route running and receivers giving up on plays if they are not the primary target. Or giving up on plays if Wilson has broken the pocket. I’m not talking about the neck snapping hit that Tate put on Lee. I’m talking about hanging your QB out to dry and standing flat footed when he is extending the play. Run back to your QB and help the guy out by finding a hole in the zone. Our guys really don’t seem to do that.

When Seattle made the superbowl, I believe they were underdogs and expected Pittsburgh to stonewall them. When Arizona made the superbowl, everyone expected a blowout by Pittsburgh. Move to this year. When San Fran beat GB, it wasn’t San Frans physical defense that got the credit. It was GB being down because it was early in the season. When Arizona beat Bew England, it wasn’t because they slowed Tom Brady. It was because New England missed a field goal at the end of the game. Even when Seattle put a Thug style beat down on Dallas, it was because Witten was hurt and the fans were loud. When the Rams beat Washington, it was because it was RG3′s second game. Then there is the Seattle GB fiasco. There is no love for the NFC West. They have been the doormat so long, everyone just assumes it is a fluke. This group of teams if going to have to come just short of knocking an entire team out to get any repsect. Well no more. Teams are learning that if you cross into the Pacific time zone (sorry Rams, you are back east or something), you better be ready for a prison style, gen pop, no holds barred, better have a lot of pain killers in your toolbox kind of game.

While the superbowl success has yet to be reached by this division, it is only a matter of time before it does. The bad boys of the NFL now reside near or on the Pacific ocean. You know what that means? The sun doesn’t set until we tell it to.

I think slave said it best as we have been the leagues biotch for everrr, so we finally get a call in our favor and the world goes insane.

F em all. seriously

It’s weird to be hashing out Wilson/Flynn again. Until the kid starts doing some stoopid things and losing games by his actions, it’s a moot arguement. Pete is NOT going to play Flynn until RDub gets hurt or implodes.

Calling RDub out for a crappy game against one of the best “D”‘s is quite premature, especially since we won the game. What did they do to Cutler? They murdered him. PC has a gameplan for his developement and they are sticking to it.

I Predict that he goes over 200 yards and 2 TD’s this week against the Rams and they will keep him in the pocket more, and have him make some throws to the left this week. Maybe a slant or two as well. Peete is breaking him in easy and very carefully, so they don’t do irrepairable damage to him like a David Carr
Baby steps baby

Bobby is asserting that PC is sacrificing some level of performance now at the QB position in favor of future development. He is stating (as you just did) that he believes Flynn would be more effective now, that is, win more games now, than Wilson.

The latter is an opinion, one that I have already said is pointless to argue, as it’s impossible for anyone to say with any level of certainty what would have taken place the past 3 games with Flynn starting. As to the former assertion about favoring the future over the now, this goes against everything PC has ever said or done.

If there is some consideration, or fact, or argument that supports Bobby’s theory that PC is deliberately starting the weaker player at the position right now, I would love to hear it (and asserting that it doesn’t take a genius to know that Flynn would win more games qualifies as starting the weaker player). To my knowledge, such a statement or action on PC’s part doesn’t exist. If it did, and could be referenced, that might change my opinion on the matter.

And you are right: head coaches do stupid things all the time, and make bad decisions. What impresses me about PC, and why I defer to his judgment in this matter more than I might otherwise, is the process he uses to select players.

For some reason, the NFL is full of coaches making decisions based on history, or name recognition, or draft position, or contract level, or whatever. PC has consistently done otherwise: he has consistently made such decisions based on performance, and as far as we can tell, nothing else. He has said so; we have seen it happen on many occasions, too many to reference. He has cut popular players; has over-drafted several; has started UDFAs; has signed and released hundreds. And you can see the results on the field. There is no reason to believe (unless you or Bobby can reference one) an instance where this has not been the case.

And as far as the QB position goes specifically, it’s my ‘opinion’ that Wilson has done a nice job given the circumstances; it is my ‘opinion’ that Flynn would have struggled mightily in the same circumstances. But these are ‘opionions’ that I can’t back up by anything more than my personal judgment, and I won’t attempt to. But that personal judgment supports my more reasoned support for PC, his process, and his decision to start Russell Wilson.

Can PC be wrong? Of course he can. It’s football. But given his professional experience, his access to information we don’t have, and the results we see on the field, I think it foolish to pit one fan’s opinion over the head coach’s concerning his decision on who to start at QB. It would be ‘irrational’ in this case, to do so.

True that. Great teams don’t allow games to come down to one play — although the Giants won the Super Bowl in 1990 by squeaking out wins in the playoffs.

Anyone remember the game that the Seahawks lost in Baltimore in 2003 or 2004 when the refs gave the Ravens an extra 40 seconds or so. The refs directly contributed to the loss. But there was no national uproar, partly because it wasn’t on MNF and partly because it involved the Seahawks, not on of the high-profile franchises.

Hawks won, get over it.

Many of you calling out the coaches, players for replacement need to get your self in check. Hawks won what I thought was an unwinable game. I have no issue with the conservative offense In a low scoring defensive struggle. Truth is that the hawks have the superior defense, superior special teams. No need to be an aggressive play caller in this circumstance. We all must respect the turnovers win or lose the game. Look at the Dallas game if you need a proof point.