Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Rice needs more touches

Post by Eric Williams on Oct. 22, 2012 at 8:29 am with 98 Comments »
October 22, 2012 8:30 am
Seattle Seahawks' Sidney Rice, right, celebrates his touchdown against the New England Patriots with Seahawks' Golden Tate, in an NFL football game, Sunday, Oct. 14, 2012, in Seattle. The Seahawks beat the Patriots 24-23. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)

John McGrath of The News Tribune says in his column this morning that the Seahawks need to make getting the ball to No. 1 receiver Sidney Rice more of a priority in the offence moving forward.

Rice was targeted just one time in the first three quarters in Seattle’s 13-6 loss to San Francisco last week, and has 22 receptions for 312 yards and two touchdowns through seven games.

McGrath: “While I’m calloused to the enormous numbers of pro-sports contracts – hey, it’s not my money – I’ve got this stodgy, old-fashioned way of looking at a contract guaranteeing $18 million to an NFL wide receiver such as Sidney Rice.

“Find him. Lean on him. Make him a playbook priority instead of the eighth receiving target in a pivotal game against the defending NFC West champions.”

Dave Wyman of 710 ESPN Seattle says to not feel too bad about Seattle’s 4-3 record. Wyman: “How bad should a 4-3 record feel? When you’re third loss came on the road, in a short week and against a top-five team, not that bad. Going 0-3 in the division and not beating the Cardinals or Rams on the road should feel bad.”

Peter King of Sports Illustrated ranks Seattle No. 10 on his Fine Fifteen rankings.

Hawk Blogger has a GIF of Russell Okung pancaking San Francisco’s Justin Smith.

Steve Muench of Scouts Inc. takes a closer look at what college players might be diamonds in the rough at the running back, similar to Washington rookie Alfred Morris this year. Dennis Johnson of Arkansas, Ohio State’s Jordan Halland Georgia Tech’sOrwin Smith are on the list. You must be an ESPN Insider to view this.

Bill Barnwell of Grantland says don’t let New England’s overtime victory over the N.Y. Jets fool you – the Patriots are full of flaws.

Categories:
Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 98
  1. HawkfaninMT says:

    Haven’t read any of the links yet…

    Just wanted to say thank you for starting a new thread! 300+ posts is too much!

  2. Ewalters7354 says:

    I have been in favor of getting Rice and Zach Miller more involved.It seemed this offense almost had things figured out, then fell right back in the same pit they started in.Minus penalties.

  3. Ewalters7354 says:

    What a great piece by John McGrath.

  4. Dukeshire says:

    This is a new week, a new thread, and I would like to put a challenge out here for everyone: let’s rise above the personal attacks, insults, rancor, and otherwise intentionally demeaning posts. I’m as guilty as anyone else regarding these things, but enough is enough. Let’s all get better, today. This is not to say spirited debate and opposing view points aren’t encouraged: just the opposite. I for one like being challenged on my views, and ideally, I can learn something from the ensuing conversation. This blog is what we make of it. We can all make this a place for civil conversation regardless of opinion, again. It’s up to us. Let’s raise the bar. I for one am not going to allow myself to get caught up in the nonsense any longer. I may get hammered for saying this, but understand this is only meant to make this a better place for us all, and to help raise the level of conversation. I hope it’s take in the spirit in which it’s intended. (… steps off soapbox…)

  5. sluggo42 says:

    Loved the Okung pancake! pour some syrup on that one!

    Reving up the passing game indeed. A different gameplan to get Rice and Miller more involved. Does Bevell have the authority to do so?, or the inclanation? Is the current state of the passing game due more to game planning than anything else? (Yes we know, and so please don’t)…:o)

    Does our alignment at snap give away the play? Is there some point where our offense becomes predictable to the point of failure? Do we fall back into the same old rut? Perhaps this more than anything else is the root of our offensive struggles, moreso than any players. If they know what we are going to do, it’s rather difficult to do it…

  6. mojjonation says:

    New England looked vulnerable last night. They looked vulnerable against us. But when you have a college coach (Chip Kelly) consulting on how to run an offense, you know the QB and some receviers are going to put up big number.

    I’ve been waiting for a TE to get involved since the Jeremy Stevens days. We still aren’t there. I still don’t see Sidney Rice as a number 1. Maybe it’s because we haven’t used him like one. Maybe because last season he was injured as much as Mr. Glass.

    Anyone figure out how often Rice is on the left side of the field and RW rolls right when he gets happy feet? Or if Rice is on the opposite side of the field when RW decides to leave the pocket?

    I watched last night as the Jets receivers stood flat footed and did nothing to help Sanchez out when he fled the pocket. After watching the Seattle game, you figure every NFL team out there would put their receivers in constant motion knowing that NE’s secondary is not so scary.

    Duke…grand idea but I’m not holding my breath.

  7. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    I feel like Russell Wilson is the bane of my existence. I spent like 100 years defending this guy leading up to the draft, and everyone excluding Wisconsin Badgers fans were pooping on him. Now he’s playing mediocre at best and getting carried by one of the league’s best running backs and arguably the #1 defense and now everyone loves him.

  8. mojjonation says:

    Maybe Seattle could use 1 or 2 formations and run maybe 20 plays out of it. Indianapolis had what 400 plays in their playbook when Peyton was there? But you swear they didn’t use more than 4 or 5 formations. I know RW is no Peyton, but if it is the coaching staff holding back the playbook because of the QB, then maybe scale it back to a couple formations and a lot of plays so the offnsive assignments don’t become confusing. Could you imagine the faces the opposing defense would have if we ran Lynch behind Robinson on an off tackle play then turned around, used the same formation, had Miller run up a seam, have Baldwin drag across the middle, and Rice pull a post-corner? Play action would be your best friend.

  9. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    That great piece on Rice brings up an interesting point; how can long can the offense continue to sputter along like this before the team fractures? Here’s a GIF of Rice’s fury: http://thebiglead.fantasysportsven.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/rice-mouth-piece-10-18-12.gif

    Richard Sherman and Red Bryant were livid after that Rams game, with Sherman subtly taking a shot at the offense by declaring that the defense “did their job” by holding the Rams out of the endzone the entire game. Rice was also expressing his frustration.

    Also, great GIF of Okung, anyone have the GIFs of the couple of times James Carpenter demolished Patrick Willis?

  10. Excited to see the Lions on MNF tonight to see what we can expect next week. Also excited to see Cutler pout on the sidelines.

  11. Dukeshire says:

    sluggo42 – There’s no question an inexperienced QB limits what the offense can do, and as a result, make it easier for d coordinators to spot trends. It’s a real challenge for OCs to remain creative and unpredictable with a limited playbook. So I’m sure there is some of that going on here. Despite that however, Seattle has still be effective running the ball, which ought to be encouraging regarding the quality of the o line. But even still, every team has tendencies, that simply comes with the concepts and schemes that a particular offense has. In short, I don’t think presnap alignment is exposing plays to the defense anymore than personnel groupings do.

  12. Dukeshire says:

    mojjonation – You’re right about Indy running nearly an entire playbook out of 3 basic personnel groupings. But that’s an entirely different scheme. WCO uses a myriad of personnel groupings and sub often to get deep into the playbook. And while the Colts (Tom Moore OC) concept may seem simpler under Manning, it really isn’t. Running that many plays out of a single grouping is incredibly layered. Regardless, Bevell has a very different background and Wilson is learning a different scheme, for good or ill.

  13. In NFC West style ball, allowing the opposing offense to engage in long, time consuming drives is the equivalent of allowing an extra TD through out the course of the game.

    And if Sherman really did claim the Defense “held the Rams out of the endzone the entire game”, he is pointing fingers back at himself. The FG team consists of just about all Defensive players and they allowed a TD which they supposedly practiced against during the week.

    And while this defense is very good, it isn’t elite or even in the top 5. The Defense faced the number 1 passing game and was lit up (yardage) and then the next game faced the number 1 rushing attack and was again lit up. It will be very good down the road, but it isn’t yet. We saw the number 1 ranked defense a few nights ago and it took nearly 5 years to put together.

  14. I for one saw some stuff that made me much more comfortable with Wilson specifically and the Seahawks overall. I thought he threw accurately and with zip on the shorter and mid level routes, but it is more than a little frustrating with the drops again. I agree with McGrath (and I hate to do that) he needs to read Rice earlier.

  15. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “And if Sherman really did claim the Defense “held the Rams out of the endzone the entire game”, he is pointing fingers back at himself. The FG team consists of just about all Defensive players and they allowed a TD which they supposedly practiced against during the week.”

    That doesn’t change the fact that it was a special teams touchdown and the defense did not give up a touchdown the entire game, pabuwal.

    “And while this defense is very good, it isn’t elite or even in the top 5. The Defense faced the number 1 passing game and was lit up (yardage) and then the next game faced the number 1 rushing attack and was again lit up.”

    “Lit up” to the tune of 23 and 13 points, respectively. This defense does more than it’s fair share to help us win. You can be unsatisfied with a couple individual aspects of their play but it is unrealistic to expect an overall better defense than this.

    “We saw the number 1 ranked defense a few nights ago and it took nearly 5 years to put together.”

    By your logic, nothing San Francisco’s defense did in that game should be elite considering that they faced one of the very worst passing attacks and one of worst scoring teams, and allowed Marshawn Lynch to rush for 100+ yards.

  16. sluggo42 says:

    pabs –

    agreed on “D”. We are getting there, but I think the youth needs a few years to get “seasoned”. Getting schooled with a trap run exposed on of the weaknesses that a premire O-line can do, fortunately not many teams have that line!

    I still think we are one O-lineman short of a good line. I think Gio just isn’t the long term player to hold down the right side. We have to leave a TE there to support the right side too often, and that depletes some options for the passing game as well. It’s too bad Miller is such a good blocker, it forces Cable to leave him blocking, instead of catching…

  17. Just realized that we get
    - the Vikings after they host the Bucaneers on a Thursday night game and
    - the Jets coming off of their bye week.

    Is it just me, or is this an unusual year schedule wise?

  18. thursday says:

    YES to the McGrath article, I have been saying to every Hawks fan I’ve talked to since Thursday that Rice needs to be the primary target. As far as I can see he’s the only one who can reliably not drop the ball for starters. Then if he starts drawing double or more coverage, then Wilson can choose someone else lol

  19. A few people have commented about Miller being ‘left in’ as a blocker.

    I noticed this too. I think its partly a function of running the empty backfield set so often. In the past, we have left in a FB to help with blocking (Mack Strong comes to mind).

  20. If 11 players who play Defense are on the field when a passing TD is scored, its the defense that allowed the score. That passing TD counts as yards against the defense as well as a TD against the Defense in the stat sheet. What’s so hard about this to understand?

    And what makes it worse is the Defense claims they practiced against that during the week.

  21. NYHawkFan says:

    My sentiments exactly Duke. I was hoping that Eric would have followed up on the posted rules. Then again, I have no way of knowing whether he’s deleted any posts, so maybe he has already done so. At any rate, I had recently cut back on visiting the site because of the rancor. Too many personal attacks and not enough talk about football. Hopefully things with improve, and if not, I would like to see Eric block a few regular violators of the rules.

    Wouldn’t it be reasonable to add at least one new play a week (from the playbook) to the offense? After the 7th week, we should expect to see things open up more. I think that Bevell has opened things up on occasion, but then it’s like he’s put on the brakes again. I assume he has a good reason, such as which team they’re facing that week. Just an impatient fan hoping for signs of improvement from week to week.

  22. bird_spit says:

    I think (what you are all thinking by now I hope) that seahawks are 1 to 3 drafts away from having an elite team capable of winning the ring. I think that is the calculus that PC used to start RW this year. I would still dis agree with him, because I think Flynn was young enough, and capable enough to game manage this team, and to step up and win a few with his arm, and game knowledge.

    I focussed a lot on the interception, where Rice is wide open. Rice throws a fit, because he has beaten his man. I dont want to to state the obvious, but I thing Flynn or Jackson makes that throw to Rice. All RW needed was to anticipate the position of Rice, and pass in to that space.

    I assume RW can step up and learn his position, so that in the future he anticipates where his receivers will be in the time it takes to pass the ball. I also assume RW has those skills from High School and College ball, but the speed of the game has him a little confused. I dont want to give up on this year, but if RW does not learn this in the next couple of games, I would join the chorus regarding Flynn. Much like they sat Sweezy without breaking his confidence, at this point they can sit RW. Is it the right time, NO. But the kid should be given the ultimatum, improve or sit.

    Flynn has as good a chance as any to win these games. RW needs to step up.

  23. I’m so tired of getting mad of getting mad that Sidney is not getting the ball enough that I could go crazy on gamedays! I realize I’m lacking confidence in all the other receivers these days (minus a healthy Baldwin – but I wouldn’t trust Baldwin in double coverage either) but sometimes you’ve just got to feed the guy, even if he’s doubled on some occasions. I know defensive coordinators know this, but give him the “damn” ball more often!

  24. Does anyone want to sit around the campfire and sing “Kumbaya” with me?

  25. re Rice getting the ball……

    I can’t tell if Rice isn’t getting the ball because Wilson is always looking check down or if Wilson and Rice haven’t established any QB / receiver chemistry (same problem with Baldwin?).

    QB / receiver match-ups are funny – sometimes they work right away, sometimes they take a while to grow and sometimes (Jackson / Williams) they never happen. I guess the only certainty here is that this situation should improve with Wilson’s increased experience and additional time working with Rice (and Baldwin).

  26. I am really looking forward to a Seahawks team that should continue to get better every week.

    Hows that for Kumbaya?

  27. I think Rice secretly longs for Jackson and is upset he was traded away.

  28. RussellWilsonIsTooSHORT says:

    Rice isn’t getting many touches because our midget QB can’t see him over the offensive line. Problem is, this whole city (PC/JS included) is so in love with this guy, that they refuse to acknowledge that Matt Flynn should be the starting Quarterback. With Flynn, Rice would have 2-3 times as many catches/yards.

  29. sluggo42 says:

    lol,

    Atta boy ACID ! Way to step up to the plate!

  30. Hawksince77 says:

    bird-spit writes: “I focussed a lot on the interception, where Rice is wide open. Rice throws a fit, because he has beaten his man. I dont want to to state the obvious, but I thing Flynn or Jackson makes that throw to Rice.”

    The interception was a poor read and a poor throw. No doubt. When I originally watched Rice’s reaction, my interpretation was the same: he felt he should have had the ball.

    However, later comments by PC indicate that Rice’s frustration was leveled at the defender, who held him. Also, that same defender was with Rice during the entire play. Finally, Wilson gets hit a split second after releasing the ball, the protection having failed.
    So how is it ‘obvious’ that ‘Flynn or Jackson makes that throw to Rice.’? Given precisely the same circumstances, it’s certainly possible that Flynn or TJack throw a deep pass to Rice while he is being closely covered, and it’s also possible that if they did so, Rice makes the reception. But obvious? Hardly.

    And then this: “All RW needed was to anticipate the position of Rice, and pass in to that space.”

    You make it sound so simple, when the only thing that is simple is your analysis of the play.

    Should any QB throw a pick on 2nd and 8 under those game circumstances (near mid-field in a close game against a very good defense)? No. They shouldn’t. Was it a game-changing play? Hardly. In fact, far less impactful then any of the dropped passes, all of which would have gone for first downs and potential scores.

    Had it been 3rd and 8, I dial up that play every time, as the worst thiing that can happen is no different than a punt (as long as the offense covers any interception). On second down, you are giving up another chance to make a play, and that’s never acceptable.

    I wish they threw down the field on all 3rd and 8s when they are near mid-field (as long as the protection holds up). I wish they threw the ball on PA on all 2nd and 1s. I wish they threw the ball more aggressively early in games and played more aggressively for TDs and not FGs, but that’s just me. If I said so to PC he’d tell me (in so many words) to piss off.

    I would love to see RW play more aggressively, take more chances – you can see the results late in games when he does. He generally makes good decisions and accurate throws. Will he throw more pics playing more aggressively? Sure, but the payoff would be worth it, in my opinion. That’s actually what happened in the NE game, when playing aggressively became a necessity. It also helped that the NE defense was closer to average, whereas the Cards and Niners defense is somewhere in the top ten.

  31. bird_spit says:

    ACID..I think you need to shorten that name..but love the name change.. I literally ignore your posts because I have a long displeasure/disappointment in Aaron Curry. He is dead to me, so your constant reminder sucks.

  32. sluggo42 says:

    Now we can call you rancid for short! hehe

    But, we Know your position…clearly…. so no need to reiterate 30 times today…

  33. Dukeshire says:

    Late game situations and the corresponding defenses are not the same as what he faces at other times. These various situations are what dictate “taking more chances” or being more aggressive. Many time it’s the conservative play that is allowing opportunities to be more aggressive to present themselves.

  34. bird_spit says:

    I would bet you a steak dinner that if we could get the honest answer from Rice,HawkSince77, he would be pissed that RW didnt throw it to him. The guy covering Rice is never with in 5 ft of him. PC coverng his ass, so he can have a peaceful press conference is not covering the facts. If RW had throw it into that space, the space would have been clear. Or if RW looked off of Edwards, the safety would have covered Rice. I dont apologize for RW, so I really wish you would not either. The boy needs to play a smart game. RW at time shows he is learning the game, but on that play it is obvious he is just a rookie.

    I have the Coaches film, and am playing that play in a loop..it just is not what PC says happened.

  35. Hawksince77 says:

    BobbyK writes: “but sometimes you’ve just got to feed the guy, even if he’s doubled on some occasions.

    I agree – I would love to see more throws that give the WR an opportunity to make a play, but the problem is, RW is being coached specifically NOT to throw anywhere near a covered receiver. PC has said so, in no uncertain terms, when questioned about it by people like Eric.

    You only see those throws late in games when there are no more options: the several throws in the endzone in the Cards game; the laser to Rice for 22 yards late in the Cards game; the throw the Edwards in the endzone against the niners that was knocked out of his hands as he came down; the 4th and 17 throw to Obo on the last play of the game against the niners; the fade to Edwards in the endzone against NE (it was pure awesome route running and terrible safety play in the NE that left Rice so wide open on the winning TD throw, a play, by the way, that counts as the most beautiful thing I have seen since the Vermeer exhibit at the National Gallery in the mid-nineties).

    RW can make those contested throws, and I would love to see him encouraged to do so earlier in games. But like I said, PC thinks otherwise…

  36. sluggo42 says:

    We don’t really throw the ball enough to get those “connections” set up after just a few games. It’s not like we throw it 38-58 times a game like Brady or Rogers do. They throw almost every play, and they set up as such. We Run more often, and depend on play action to give a few moments of time to RW.

    I think the entire structure of the offense isn’t condusive for RW to have early and immediate success. If we were a pass first offense maybe, but not the way it’s currently structured…

  37. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “RussellWilsonIsTooSHORT” is not me, and a perfect example of the immaturity I deal with because I have an unpopular opinion.

  38. RussellWilsonIsSHORT says:

    The fact is, what so many of you define as “tight coverage” is not in the NFL. A real NFL QB would find Rice and get the ball to him. Look at the good ones, Rodgers, Brady, Romo, we’ve seen them all this year, and they got the ball to receivers who were covered like a blanket by our stud secondary. RW can’t do it, he doesn’t have the accuracy. Flynn can.

  39. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    Here is my analysis of this particular play in question that I posted in the previous entry:

    “I watched that play again and here is what happens:

    Edwards is on the far left, Rice is on the far right. Wilson takes the snap, it’s a playaction fake. Edwards and Rice both start sprinting straight ahead. Wilson glances at Rice, who is still running in a straight line and hasn’t finished his route yet. Wilson then looks left towards Edwards, and then locks on despite obvious double coverage. Meanwhile, Rice has sharply turned left, almost at a 90 degree angle, and is running towards the middle of a field like a drag route, and he is absolutely open, with single coverage. But Wilson ignores this and lofts that horrendous arm-punt of a pass into what becomes triple coverage. There is pressure on the play but it arrives after Wilson has already thrown the ball.

    This is a problem that will almost certainly never go away; Wilson has to get extraordinary arc on his deep passes to compensate for his short height and get it over the linemen, and that leads to FAR too much loft under his passes, leaving defenders a lot of time to diagnose the play and react.

    I didn’t see any interference on Rice and this seems like posturing by Carroll to hide the frustration that Rice, and the rest of the team, is feeling due to a rookie making rookie mistakes. Just like how he was hiding Flynn’s injury as an excuse to shield Wilson from calls to be removed from his starting job.”

    Maybe I’m slightly wrong about “FAR too much loft under his passes”, but I do think a lot of his passes hang unnecessarily long in the air.

  40. Hawksince77 says:

    bird spit writes: “I would bet you a steak dinner that if we could get the honest answer from Rice,HawkSince77, he would be pissed that RW didnt throw it to him. The guy covering Rice is never with in 5 ft of him. PC coverng his ass, so he can have a peaceful press conference is not covering the facts. If RW had throw it into that space, the space would have been clear. Or if RW looked off of Edwards, the safety would have covered Rice. I dont apologize for RW, so I really wish you would not either. The boy needs to play a smart game. RW at time shows he is learning the game, but on that play it is obvious he is just a rookie.

    I have the Coaches film, and am playing that play in a loop..it just is not what PC says happened.”

    Perhaps you are right. I was surprised by PC’s answer in the presser as well, as it appeared that Rice was pissed he didn’t get the opportunity. So I guess you’d probably win that dinner, if I was inclined to bet, but I think you may be right.

    And I am not apologizing for RW on that play. It was a poor play on his part. But he also didn’t have time to look off Edwards – he either throws it or gets sacked. Another second in the pocket maybe he makes a different decision – who knows?

    Regardless, this play falls under the category of being a ‘poor’ one, one of three in my estimation in the game. A play a flawless NFL QB doesn’t make. A play that every good QB has made a bunch of times in a career, and a play even elite QBs make on occasion.

    You want to see a horrible QB pic, just consider Alex Smith’s in the same game. He misses seeing a wide-open Randy Moss running across the back of the endzone, where even his own player was pointing it out, before he threw that pic. Now THAT’S a terrible decision/throw by a QB that was picked number one overall, and has played for something like five full seasons.

    Or consider Cam’s throw into the ground in the endzone at the feet of his open receiver, a shitty throw that may have cost them the game.

    The point is, for some reason, Seahawk fans are holding Wilson to a ridicously high standard of excellence, for any NFL QB, let alone a rookie, and that’s what I find so strange.

    I haven’t charted Wilson’s second half against the niners, but everyone keeps calling out how only 3 of 9 passes were completed, and that fact in itself damns Wilson into an overall poor performance. What I would be interested to see, for all of those fans ready to shit on Wilson, to look in some detail at the plays he ran in the second half, and provide a detailed critique of his play.

    I recall 3 poor plays by RW that game: the interception; an over-throw for an incompletion (not on 3rd down, if memory serves); and his worst throw of the game, a completion thrown behind his receiver, a carbon-copy of the throw that was intercepted in the Panther game and returned for a TD. In this case, the defender didn’t break on the ball, and the receiver reached back and caught it near his hip for a first-down gain.

    So bring it, Wilson detractors: provide some detailed analysis of his poor play against the niners (we won’t even mention his near-perfect performance against NE, because there is so little there to critique, and so much more to laud).

  41. bird_spit says:

    ACID..there you go again.

    Your opinion is fine, your name sucks. Keep in mind all I see is “AaronCurry”, and a piece of my brain goes into rage.

    Please change it to RuskellSucks or something, anything. You could even use SeahawksWRsSuckBad and we would all be happy.

    1) Rice – please stay healthy
    2) Tate – please ask for a trade
    3) Baldwin – please get healthy
    4) Obo – sorry dude, times up
    5) Edwards – We need you in more often

    Dont get me started on TEs…we have one that can catch the ball, and he is also the only one that can block.

  42. sluggo42 says:

    ACID –

    I agree that he has a bit of arc on his passes. But I don’t think it has anything to do with his height, but rather the velocity. He throws a “soft” ball a lot, which is actually easier to catch. But when he needs to bring it, like the throw to Obo, or to Rice a few games ago, he throws the ball on a rope.

    A valid observation, but I don’t agree with your explanation..

  43. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    Hawksince77 I love your great comments even if I disagree with them so here are my rebuttals:

    - Yes, Wilson is being held to a high standard. Maybe it’s even unfair for a rookie. But I don’t see how Wilson can get the luxury of being compared to other rookies who are in worse situations than him, and do not have a promising backup behind them. We don’t have a proven commodity like Rex Grossman or Colt McCoy or something behind Wilson, we have Matt Flynn, who has a real possibility of being better than the play we are seeing from Wilson. We are being held at Pete’s ego that a 5’10″ rookie who is a developmental-type prospect is the QB that gives this team the best chance to win.

    - Alex Smith is a borderline bust who is being masked by a ludicrously talented team. I understand we should protect our rookie to the best of our ability but just because Alex Smith made terrible reads as well and generally sucks ass doesn’t excuse Wilson’s own play. I’m sure no Seahawks fan wants our long term starting QB to be on the level of a mediocre at best QB like Alex Smith.

    - Likewise, Cam Newton is having a big sophomore slump and regressing from his play last year.

    - In addition, Newton, Smith, Rodgers, Romo, and other QBs we made look silly this season have the tall task of facing our incredible defense. Excusing Wilson’s poor play because the opposing QBs also didn’t have good games doesn’t really hold water.

    - I disagree than Wilson’s performance was near perfect against New England. He gained a majority of his passing yards on a total of 3 or 4 throws, 1 of them being an unplanned scramble shot to Doug Baldwin. This may have worked against New England and their awful secondary, but this does not resemble a consistent passing attack in any way.

    - In addition, Mark Sanchez also posted some of his best numbers of the season against the same Patriots secondary, giving some context of why Wilson suddenly looked good for once.

  44. bird_spit says:

    Hawks77 – Its ok, I went vegan anyway. One of those last ditch efforts to avoid the inevitable.

    I am a real fan of the hawks, and RW..so dont get me wrong. That said, I dont agree with some of the others that say it would be bad for RW to sit, therefore we cant bring Flynn into the game. In my opinion, rushing a rookie QB is bad. Giving the ball to Flynn could provide RW enough space to recognize how he can improve. Also, I am not saying the Hawks need to do it now. But another performance like Thursday, then It has to be in the conversation. But look at Hass’. He gets benched by Holmy (a master QB trainer) and the next opportunity to play, he is a different guy. Confidence is way up, after he sits.

    I think at some point we want this for RW. Time to reflect on his game, and learn that he does not have to exit the pocket so soon. He needs time to age, like a good cigar.

  45. sluggo42 says:

    77 –

    I have been looking for a second half “time of possession” stat somewhere, but I can’t find one. I do know the 49ers won the overall TOP 32 to 28 minutes, and I also know that we won the first half TOP, so I’m guessing that SF totally dominated the TOP for the second half. Even the announcers commented on the drops coming back to haunt us, and they really did. We totally lost our “mo”, and rhythm for the second half. We wen’t into “el predicto” same offense that the Beve falls into, so our few possessions were snuffed out quickly, then they came back with another long march that the “D” couldn’t slow down. Sure they “bent” and kept the score reasonable, but they did not get off the field for a significant amount of time in the 2ond half..

  46. Dukeshire says:

    Wilson has a live arm to be sure. But any throw over the middle has to be thrown “softer”, unless there are wide open passing lanes. It’s simply a matter of height. This is why so many of his passes to TEs running the seam are high and why he has a difficult time with quick slants from the slot, and shallow crossers. There are some real limitations to what he’s capable in the 3-5 step passing game.

  47. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    Here is an example of what I mean about Wilson getting too much loft under his passes and being generally inaccurate:

    http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000054604/Wilson-to-Winslow-for-Seahawks-TD

    Wilson does a good job identifying a badly blown coverage by Eric Berry, but that ball hangs in the air and is nearly out of bounds, forcing Winslow to adjust to that pass and nearly step out of bounds. He had to contort to get the ball and break the goal line. This is a HUGE reason in my opinion why our WRs appear to struggle, because poor passes that Wilson throws like this one simply do not work unless the receiver is wide open and there is no DB around to play the ball or receiver.

  48. Hawksince77 says:

    bird spit wrote: “But another performance like Thursday, then It [sitting Wilson and starting Flynn] has to be in the conversation.”

    See, it’s generalizations like this that I don’t understand. “…another performance like Thursday…” What about that performance? Nobody has provided any analysis (outside of quoting the box score) to support the idea that Wilson peformed poorly against the niners.

    Further: “I think at some point we want this for RW [to be benched]. Time to reflect on his game, and learn that he does not have to exit the pocket so soon. He needs time to age…”

    These kind of comments truly baffle me. What I have seen this season (obviously different then many of you) is one of the most impressive starts to a rookie career, ever. Not only that, if you put Wilson’s in-game performance – play for play – against ANY starting QB this year, I think you’d find he compares favorably. For example, in the game last night, I thought both Dalton and Rothlesberger looked bad by comparison: Dalton missing reads and throws, Rothlesberger displaying poor pocket presence.

    I realize I am making some unsupported generalizations, but when I get a moment, I will take a detailed look at the second half of the niners game and grade every play Wilson makes. When I first watched it, I recall being impressed with his consistent competence, but I will take a closer look and report back later.

  49. sluggo42 says:

    TJack would have thrown it OB, and Flynn would have been sacked because of his concrete filled shoes. That throw was close to perfect…

  50. orbeavhawk says:

    Hawksince77: RIGHT ON! And besides that it has been prophsied:

    “and a midget will lead them!”

    GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHawks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  51. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “TJack would have thrown it OB, and Flynn would have been sacked because of his concrete filled shoes. That throw was close to perfect…”

    “Matt Flynn can’t throw deep”, “Matt Flynn has no mobility”. Those are all myths propagated by Wilson supporters (not accusing you of being one though sluggo42) In fact, Flynn has deep ball adequate enough for a secondary to respect it. And he is definitely more mobile than most QBs, just not as mobile as Jackson or Wilson. But whereas Jackson would stand there holding onto the ball, Flynn gets rid of it quickly. The same arguments against Flynn’s physical tools literally apply exactly to prime Matt Hasselbeck, does that mean he should have been benched?

    Matt Hasselbeck:

    - Great pre-snap ability to change plays at the line
    - Excellent coverage identification
    - Outstanding touch and accuracy
    - Good enough arm to not be a one-dimensional short passer
    - Could burn blitzes

    Seneca Wallace:

    - Stronger arm than Hasselbeck
    - More mobile than Hasselbeck
    - Not very good at making reads
    - Not very accurate
    - Not a great decision maker

    Should Seneca Wallace have been starting over Matt Hasselbeck because he had superior physical tools?

  52. bird_spit says:

    Hawks77 – I have to commend you for your arguments on behave of RW. Lets say we agree to disagree..

    I tire of the broken record. I’d like a more explosive offense. I dont like to see the low yards on offense, or the pathetic 3 and out percentages. It may have nothing to do with RW, but damn it, tweak something in this offense to get something going. Our D cant be on the field continuously and expect the same excellence from them.

    That said..I have stated my opinion. RW should have a good game against Detroit Sunday, and I’ll go back to enjoying his play. Otherwise, I’ll be back to bitch with the rest of the mob in the street. Call me a fan of the Seahawks, but a good fan wouldn’t argue that this offense is doing anything approaching optimal with the personnel on the team. Something has to change.

  53. HeinieHunter says:

    The receivers obviously did not look good on Thursday night. I personally think that the passing game suffered when Baldwin went out with the bad ankle. When he is an option, especially on third downs, they other receivers seem to have better games. He was our leading receiver last year and has been hurt all season long. Wish he could stay healthy and build chemistry with Wilson. That said, a WR in the first round of the draft next year seems likely. Although I would love to get in the playoffs this year, I think PC is looking at a window starting a year from now, that’s why he started the rookie QB.

  54. HeinieHunter says:

    I liked Hasselbeck but he was a journeyman QB. Shawn Alexander’s running, Big Walt, Hutch, and The Big Shows offense were bigger factors in winning back in those days. Nobody likes Alexander but he had some huge years for the Hawks. Hass was never a top ten QB in the league (unless the vote was held in Seattle). Flynn and Wilson both have more physical skills than Hass, but have not had time to develop the “shrewdness” that he learned over time.

  55. Hawksince77 says:

    bird spit writes: “I’d like a more explosive offense. I dont like to see the low yards on offense, or the pathetic 3 and out percentages. It may have nothing to do with RW, but damn it, tweak something in this offense to get something going. Our D cant be on the field continuously and expect the same excellence from them.”

    Couldn’t agree more. We need to see more wins like the Dallas one; fewer like GB. More big-time plays like NE; fewer last minute misses like the Cards and Rams, games where the offense failed to put up enough points to keep from having to depend on last second scores.

    Passing attacks are complex and fragile: a combination of o-line play; QB competence; scheme and play-calling; capable WRs/TEs, along with a credible rush attack. If all these things don’t come together, the passing attack falters.

    This is actually the flip side of PC’s philosophy on defense. His defense is designed to wreck an opponent’s passing game, by shutting down the run, aggressive coverage downfield, and putting pressure on the QB.

    On offense, he counters such attacks by putting the rush game as top priority: if you can run the ball effectively, you can do whatever you want on offense.

  56. Seattle is the second worst in the NFL in scoring (16 1/2), only beating out Jacksonville. If that doesn’t scare you, shit, I just don’t know then. With this D and Lynch, why are we putting up the growing pains with this offense. Change something, anything, oppurtunities like this just don’t come around.

  57. NYHawkFan says:

    I had to laugh when I read the comment from RusselWillsonIsShort, namely: “Look at the good ones, Rodgers, Brady, Romo, we’ve seen them all this year, and they got the ball to receivers who were covered…”

    It’s funny because Seattle and its short QB beat all three of them!

  58. Hawksince77 says:

    bird spit, I can agree with any general criticism of the Seahawks offense as a unit – no doubt they need to be better, to score more points. The complex relationship between offensive philosophy, scheme, play-calling, offensive line play, the rushing game, QB play, the ability of the WRs/TEs to get open and catch the ball – as an entire group, we all want to see better performance (= score more points).

    On the flip side, I have nothing but praise for the defense, and feel like they have been the absolute stars of the team this year. They don’t get enough credit, IMO.

  59. sluggo42 says:

    Bird-spit –

    “I tire of the broken record. I’d like a more explosive offense. I dont like to see the low yards on offense, or the pathetic 3 and out percentages. It may have nothing to do with RW, but damn it, tweak something in this offense to get something going. Our D cant be on the field continuously and expect the same excellence from them.”

    I don’t think anyone on this board would disagree with that. I think the entire team would like that too! I think PC/JS and PA would like that too!
    ACID, RADE, XC, Duke, 77, me, all of the entire Pacific NW would like that!

    We also know that many feel that Flynn would be able to do so. Maybe? maybe not… But if Pete and John are playing for next year, we will never see Flynn, short of injury, or a massive remission. But that hasn’t happened yet. So I just don’t understand all of the analysis of RW’s game by bloggers in here. A daily , multi daily, actually every post, one after another will not change the fact the Pete loves him some Russ. Why is everyone in here acting like liberals and democrats over a topic that we don’t get to vote on?

    We don’t get a vote guys, so why waste every days finding just one more reason Russ should sit down.?

    Why don’t we comment about what is really happening, rather than what you want to be happening? Because until Paul Allen pays you to make that call, it’s a moot point in our world.

  60. It’s called venting bro, sometimes it’s easier to do it on here then at work out loud.

  61. mojjonation says:

    NYHawk….I pointed out that we beat star to superstar QB’s and lose to virtual nobodies or questionable busts. Which leads me to believe we will beat up on Stafford, and make Cutler look like whiny Cutler and not Pro Bowl Cutler. Then we lose to Minnesota at home because they have a second year guy. The Jets. I can’t make heads or tails of that team. Sanchez can beat anyone on any given Sunday, but he looks absolutely horrible at times. So maybe I will wait to see how he does in the game before they play us to say whether we will beat them or not. It’s a huge mystery.

  62. The teams we beat with the good QB’s have suspect D. As you know, our D comes out to play every game, but our O is sometimes a no show. I think I sad this earlier, but I rather take on every elite QB out thier than to play agaist a team with even a descent D.

  63. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “I liked Hasselbeck but he was a journeyman QB. Shawn Alexander’s running, Big Walt, Hutch, and The Big Shows offense were bigger factors in winning back in those days. Nobody likes Alexander but he had some huge years for the Hawks. Hass was never a top ten QB in the league (unless the vote was held in Seattle). Flynn and Wilson both have more physical skills than Hass, but have not had time to develop the “shrewdness” that he learned over time.”

    Matt Hasselbeck was not a journeyman QB by any stretch. He was what, an 8 or 9 year starter? A 3 time Pro Bowler. 1 time All-Pro. I’d say he was a lock for top 10 from 2003-2007, and arguably top 5 in 2005 and 2007. You can’t diminish his own talents because he was on a good team in his prime. Alexander was great and productive, but so is Marshawn Lynch. Our defense as it stands is easily better than any unit Hasselbeck ever had.

    I don’t see why this team can’t contend right NOW if we had better quarterback play. This isn’t like 2009 where we had the tattered remains of Ruskell’s disaster or 2010 where Pete was just getting started shipping out Ruskell’s poop and beginning to acquire talent. Our defense is the envy of the league. Our rushing game may not quite be #1 but Lynch just may be one of the consistent RBs in the NFL. He is practically always good for a consistent 4.0 YPC and 100 yards, not a bunch of negative runs and one looooong run like Jamaal Charles or Chris Johnson.

  64. sluggo42 says:

    ACID -

    save some ink and finger cramps, just write:

    “Same thing I just said again”

  65. You could write the same thing everytime you respond.

  66. NYHawkFan says:

    mojjonation — Fair point. Doesn’t make sense that we can beat powerhouse teams, yet fall to supposedly lesser teams. Then again, that seems to be what’s happening around the NFL this season. Parity has resulted in any team winning or loosing on ‘Any given Sunday.’

  67. Sluggo – I get that you like Wilson better than Flynn but . . .

    “TJack would have thrown it OB, and Flynn would have been sacked because of his concrete filled shoes.”

    is just not plain true – he isn’t Fast but escaped pressure multiple times during the preseason. But the Tjack Reference are my thoughts exactly

  68. sluggo42 says:

    I don’t particularly prefer RW over Flynn, I think Flynn could actually be doing well right now if he were the starter.

    But he isn’t, I just don’t feel the need to scream about it post after post, day after day…

  69. Ewalters7354 says:

    Sluggo,

    You seem to always tell us about the bickering and same topic everyday, but yet you always comment and say the exact same things you always say…I just don’t get it

  70. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “You know, 9-of-23 isn’t good enough for us. We gotta do better than that.” – Pete Carroll

  71. sluggo42 says:

    Good try Ewalt -

    The only thing I repeat, is that we are sick of the same crap out of the 3 or 4 of you.

    Please feel free to look at the other posts talking about everything else, like game planning, Oline play, draft thoughts, play calling, Gtate, Breno, linebackers, team youth, and so on. I am not the myopia king like the others who post NOTHING other than we want Flynn with EVERY post.

    Does that clear it up for you?

  72. Ewalters7354 says:

    Sluggo,

    I’m sorry but it doesn’t.Because from your post the last few days, it has been the same exact things said.

  73. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    In other news, the Kansas City Chiefs benched Matt Cassell today in favor of Brady Quinn.

    “I’m changing the quarterback. Brady Quinn will be the starter. Matt will be the backup,” Crennel said”

    I wish our coach had the stones to do the same.

  74. So I want to try and keep it real for just a second, before anyone gets all bent out of shape on me. Our O-line is decent and young and growing, but they are not great yet, just average to above average. Run blocking is WAY WAY easier than pass blocking, especially in this zone blocking scheme once initiated. Average young linemen take quite a bit to “learn” how to pass block in the NFL. By learn I mean not just the physical execution of the play, but the pre-snap assignments then the post-snap reaction to the D, then the physical mechanics. They are still learning, period.

    That being said, the QB and the offensive play call can assist them in this role. The QB’s pre-snap read and post-snap are just as important, redirecting protection or the direction of the play (on a run), or a hot route call. Now I’m quite sure most of you already realize this, I’m not trying to imply that you don’t. It’s just important to point out that this harmony of things needs to occur to successfully beat the defensive play call, and sometimes somebody misses or “mis-reads”. Or a terrible play is called and adjustments aren’t made. MANY things can occur before or just as the ball is being snapped that can make a play look gross and unsuccessful. By the way, none of these things have to do with the height of the QB.

    So before ACiB and RADEON announce “flame on”, the thing that tempers most of the above is experience. Which our current QB (and by my own accounting, our OC) lacks or is learning. All but like four QBs in the league miss reads or open receivers most snaps from time to time. So focusing on one bad play isn’t that instructive, unless its something that happens on a consistent basis. As far as “reads” go, QBs get graded for choosing the correct target then executing the throw to get the ball there. Once the ball is there, I think the expectation is that it will be caught.

    Its one game out of many. While not wild about starting the rook either, my sample size for judging him is still too low. The “alternative” in Flynn is nearly laughable. A 27 year old that is nearly as unproven, that had a couple good games in one of the best offensive systems of all time in the NFL, and he will light it up with this O-line? The idea that he would fare better against some of these mad-dog Ds while simultaneously not lighting up vanilla defenses in the preseason? I just don’t see the clear argument that he’s a better choice.

    I just want our team to succeed, and I’m willing (for now at least), to give the kid some more rope. Btw, the thing least mentioned here is the non-physical tools between the two. Intelligence, charisma and leadership in the huddle and on the sideline are qualities that RW has inherently that I haven’t seen since Hass. Though of course I’m in zero of those places as a fan, I get a much better vibe from RW than I do from any other QB on our roster, for what it’s worth lol.

    Anywho, GO HAWKS

    PS — Sorry for the huge post lol

  75. Hawksince77 says:

    For what it’s worth:

    The second half versus the SF Niners, Thursday October 18, 2012.

    First series:
    run,
    run,
    run,
    run,
    3rd/4, run. Penalty, first down.
    PA drop back, screen to Lynch, covered, throw away (0/1)
    Run
    Slant to Tate dropped (0/2)

    Second series:
    PA, scrambles for 9 yards
    Run (2nd and 1)
    Run
    Interception (0/3)

    Third series:
    Run,
    run,
    3rd/4, Lynch drops the pass (0/4)

    Fourth series:
    Run,
    run,
    run
    Bubble screen to Obo complete (1/5) for negative 2 yards. Tate misses key block.
    Throw to Rice, a little late, hits him in the hands, defender knocks it away, incomplete (1/6)

    Fifth and final series
    Complete pass (2/8) to Rice for 5 yards.
    Sack (2.1 seconds after the ball is snapped)
    False start on 3rd and 12, makes it 3rd and 17 throw away (2/9)
    4th and 17, beautiful throw to Obo six inches short of the 1st.

    In summary:

    Offensive plays in the half: 25
    Called running plays in the half: 13
    Sacks: 1
    Scrambles: 1

    Pass attempts: 10 (not sure why I have one more than the official 9)
    Completions: 3
    Interceptions: 1
    Throw-aways: 2
    Drops: 2
    Tipped: 1
    Pass defensed: 1

  76. sluggo42 says:

    EWalt – If I can produce three posts from today, that talk about different subjects, will you stop your endless QB posts??

  77. sluggo42 says:

    77 –

    Do you have a time of possession for the half?

  78. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “Its one game out of many. While not wild about starting the rook either, my sample size for judging him is still too low. The “alternative” in Flynn is nearly laughable. A 27 year old that is nearly as unproven, that had a couple good games in one of the best offensive systems of all time in the NFL, and he will light it up with this O-line? The idea that he would fare better against some of these mad-dog Ds while simultaneously not lighting up vanilla defenses in the preseason? I just don’t see the clear argument that he’s a better choice.”

    - It is hypocritical to say your sample size for judging Wilson is too low yet you can definitely toss out Flynn’s even smaller sample size.

    - 27 is not old at all. It’s more laughable that our “starter” is a 5’10″ QB who literally can’t make all of the throws.

    - “A couple of good games” is a deceptive way of saying he threw for the second most highest yardage of ALL TIME for a QB’s first 2 starts.

    - Rodgers and Favre also played in this same exact offensive system and yet they never put up the same numbers that Flynn did.

    - Flynn also didn’t play with Greg Jennings and James Starks (starting WR and RB) in that game.

    - This OL is GOOD. Just like Lynch makes the OL look better than it is at run-blocking, Wilson makes the OL look worse than it is in pass-blocking with his garbage pocket presence, early scrambling, and poor reads.

    - Preseason means NOTHING. Charlie Whitehurst did better than Tarvaris Jackson in the preseason, does that mean he was a better QB? We saw him play and the answer was no. Flynn faced starters and did fine, Wilson faced vanilla defenses and garbage players soon cut. When Flynn got to face backups like Wilson did in the Raiders game, Flynn did great while Wilson was awful against the Raiders starters.

    - You don’t see the clear argument? How’s this: A 5’10″ QB has never had been a successful starter in NFL history.

  79. sluggo42 says:

    eWalt?? hello??

  80. Ewalters7354 says:

    Sluggo,

    Once I see improvement from game to game, I will not stop anything.

  81. ACiB,

    Yeah I still don’t see the clear argument that Flynn is any better. I think that all those points you just made make it even more clear why its a muddled choice. I didn’t toss Flynn out, if I wasn’t clear my point was that quite a few QBs have had entire years starting in proven offensive systems with outstanding supporting casts, then gone on to become unremarkable “pure starting QBs” elsewhere (see Matt Cassel). He had nearly an entire season of work to parse through, rather than just a few games. I wasn’t sold on how sweet he was either, but the Chiefs were. So I see Flynn in a similar light, but with a smaller body of work to go on. You’re right, I shouldn’t put as much credence in the preseason, but the fact remains he didn’t set the world on fire. This is what I was hoping for, a clear and decisive winner.

    So no clear and decisive winner provided, so who do you choose? The guy with better physical tools and more intelligence and leadership (supposition on my part) who’s a rook with zero experience? Or a guy that seems fine, though unremarkable, who spent years learning an offense where he had a couple number popping games with a rock solid O line, offensive system and coaches and the best receiving corps in the league sans Jennings?

    Well, most football folks would say roll the rook, take our lumps and see if we can muddle through and have him learn on the job. Again, we signed Flynn to big guaranteed money and still didn’t start him out of the chute. Only two possible answers to that. The upside of the unproven guy is bigger for the team, or Flynn was not as productive as they thought, whether due to legitimate injury or skill-set.

    I know Flynn had one amazing game, but as I’m sure you know, thats one game. Of course the rookie is going to have bad games, he’s a rookie. If he improves week to week over the course of the season, and in week 11 is better than week 1, we win. By improve of course I mean him making the correct reads, executing the play on his end as it’s intended. Not just stats in a vacuum with no context. If his reads are always wrong, and he consistently doesn’t execute the play, well he’ll get pulled.

    At that point, I will be happy to sit down with you and re-visit this discussion. It’s a moot point until then. Flynn won’t get the nod unless RW gets hurt or has back to back cataclysmically bad games.

    So until the, GO HAWKS!

  82. I heard somewhere that in play action, Wilson has the most time out of any other team. I know he got overwhelmed a couple of times, but that was the predicable play calling that caused that.

  83. Probably heard it from Hugh Millen or something.

  84. sluggo42 says:

    Kudaddy-

    Exactly!!!
    It’s a moot point.

    So lets post 35 more times today why Flynn should be playing, because it surely will sway coach to put him in! Because we are brilliant!!, and coach Carroll is stupid.

  85. At the behest of ACiB, I will include some dubious contextual stats for Matt Flynn’s regular season:

    2010: First NFL start against the vaunted 5-11 Lions:

    15/26 57.7% 177 yards, 6.8avg, 0 TDs, 1 INT, 2 sacks

    They lost the game 7-3. Sound at all familar? Except this was his third year in the offense, and the Packers. It was a road game it should be added, but third year guy, not a rookie. There may have been dropped passes, missed blocks, guys hurt, lasers from aliens, whatever.

    2010: Second start against the Patriots, the next week:

    24/37, 64.9%, 251 yards. 6.8 avg, 3 TDs, 1 INT, 5 sacks

    Not too shabby, definite improvement, but they still lost 27-31. So 0-2, but both games on the road. Same unknowns may have lead to the loss.

    2011: The famous Detroit game at the end of the season!

    31/44, 70.5%, 480 yards, 10.9avg, 6 TDs, 1 INT, 3 sacks

    Sublime numbers to be sure and a win! Though it was at home, and is now Flynn’s fourth year in the offense.

    So what to take from this? Well, looking at the lines alone, it seems that he improved every start, and if we extrapolate his numbers, his next start he should throw for around 600 yards and 10 TDs!

    That doesn’t seem reasonable though. Had it not occurred over a two season period, but rather over three back to back games, there might be some room to connect the dots. But it didn’t, it was a guy who had one nice game, one good game, and one bad one. In a offense he had been in for three/four years.

    I’m pretty sure the coaches not only looked up these same stat lines, but actually broke down every play of every game in every situation. Then looked at him in our practice, then the preseason, and then made the RW decision based on that.

    So no, I still don’t see how Flynn was the clear choice based on the information I have access to. I do know there is lots of stuff I don’t know, like his pre-snap calls and reads and delivery of certain throws. But the coaches do have that information.

    Until RW has the floor fall out from beneath him, I’m willing to roll the pain and wait and see.

    GO HAWKS!

  86. I like him for our D. The O, not so much.

  87. MoSeahawk12 says:

    stats and facts should repel hacks and attacks, but you can’t fix wack. Nice work kudaddy. You will probably need to repost these numbers about another 10,000 times as some of the folk here are slow with tiny minds and big mouths.

  88. Hawksince77 says:

    sluggo,

    No, I don’t know how to look up the TOP for the second half of the game. I didn’t chart the Niners plays, but I would guess they ran considerably more offensive plays than the Seahawks. They had a couple of long drives and had the ball a long time.

    kudaddy,

    I’ll be damned, I didn’t know that Flynn had a significant game before the NE one. I had trouble finding it, too, as if it was some kind of secret.

    Anyway, a pretty sad outing, that 7-3 loss to Detroit. Wow.

    And while you provided the box score for the second Detroit game, you might have provided some details on those record breaking 6 TDs and all those yards, ala:

    1 – bubble screen to Nelson, evades CB for an 11 yard TD
    2 – medium pass to the middle of the field to Nelson, underthrown: Nelson catches it on his hip and runs the rest of the way for a score
    3 – offsides called, free play, Flynn puts it up to a covered Nelson, who makes a great play for a TD
    4 – screen pass to Grant, 2 yards past the line of scrimmage, he goes 80 more for the TD
    5 – slant about 15 yards down field to Driver who takes it the rest of the way to the house
    6 – short slant for a TD, set up by the one truly fine throw of Flynn’s all game: a 40 yard bomb to Jones that he catches in stride to go out of bounds at the 7

    Aside from the throw to Jones, none of these plays are particularly impressive. We have already seen much finer throws from Wilson this season. More touch, distance, ball placement, and throws under far more pressue.

    But that’s what happens when you limit your view to the top-line box score, and refuse to dig any deeper.

  89. Hawksince77 says:

    Funny thing about that first Detroit game, I have never seen it, nor heard it mentioned before. Did Flynn come into the game after Rodgers started it?

    Anyway, while Flynn’s NE numbers were good enough in the box score, he didn’t play a very solid game, if you were to break it down. As I watched it, I had to keep telling myself it was his first start, even though he’d been in the league several years, and for all I knew, looked really good for a first start.

    But in absolute terms, not very impressive.

  90. Ewalters7354 says:

    77,

    Rodgers got knocked out of the Detroit game due to a concussion.

  91. Hawksince77 says:

    Ewalters,

    That makes sense, because that game was never listed as a start for Flynn.

    Which means that Flynn came off the bench cold, with no first-team prep (or very little) the week before.

    It doesn’t get any harder than that.

  92. Hawksince77,

    Yeah I wasn’t trying to be very elaborate at all with my analysis, just trying to point out that stats without context don’t really mean anything. Like that first Detroit game, I was pretty sure he subbed for an injured Rogers, but without that “excuse”, the numbers tell a pretty poor picture. Poor attempt I guess lol.

    By the way, where do you get coaches tape?! I want that too lol! Is there some kind of mailing list I can get on or something?

    Carry on and GO HAWKS!

  93. Hawksince77 says:

    kudaddy,

    Most people just quote the box score without looking at the actual plays. More info on that game: GB had everything locked up, weren’t playing for anything while it was an important game for Detroit.

    Starting CBs for Detroit were injured and didn’t play.

    Rodgers was the play-caller for Flynn.

    It was a shoot out with multiple lead changes, requiring GB to throw to keep up.

    GB runs a spread offense unlike Seattle’s offense. Flynn didn’t do a lot of play action in GB.

    Jennings was out that game, so they featured Nelson.

    IMO, Flynn could be a good starting QB. I hope he gets the chance someplace else. I just don’t see it in anyone’s interest to keep Flynn as a career back-up, if he is indeed starting material. But for that to help him, somebody else has to rate him as starting material, and make Seattle an offer.

    If Rodgers gets hurt, Seattle will win the draft-stock lottery, as Flynn is the only player in the league who might step in and lead GB to any chance of victory.

  94. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “Aside from the throw to Jones, none of these plays are particularly impressive. We have already seen much finer throws from Wilson this season. More touch, distance, ball placement, and throws under far more pressue.”

    This is absolutely 100% false.

  95. Some good posts about actual game performance, rather than supposition and guessing. One other point, sitting behind a really good player does not guarantee future performance. Where are P. Manning’s back-ups playing now?
    Most likely everyone here wants better QB play and production by the O, there just is no reason to go for blood over who is better when it is speculation. As regards physical issues, there are more than a few “prototypical” QB’s no longer in the NFL for lack of work ethic and/or understanding of the game. On the other hand, that Drew fellow in NOLA has done pretty good for a little guy.

  96. MoSeahawk12 says:

    speaking of 100% Lame………

  97. AaronCurryIsBUST says:

    “On the other hand, that Drew fellow in NOLA has done pretty good for a little guy.”

    Yeah, and Brees may stand as the lone exception in NFL history of a short QB being successful. You’re counting on Wilson to do the same?

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0