Confirmation that Jim Harbaugh = Massengill

[RolandDeschain]

Carroll's 3rd year of team-building resulted in the greatest season for a rookie QB ever, and our team is incredibly young overall. While we all hope to reach the Super Bowl this year, if we don't, nobody will be calling for Carroll's head. The few morons that might will get drowned out by the masses.

Also, yes, I did just say greatest season for a rookie QB ever. Show me a rookie QB that went 11-5 or better (.687 win % for pre-16-game season eras) with a road playoff win and 26+ TDs with a better-than-2-1 TD-int ratio if you want to refute it.

 

[samwize77]

I would think Pete has a wide margin of lee-way here. Would we be disappointed with a 9-7 season?...sure, of course. Would there be people calling for his job? Of course, but probably very few.
Something would have to go terribly wrong for that to happen. That something would almost assuredly have to be injuries, something Pete doesn't have much control over.
Roland makes a great analogy here with the college kid. Pretty much sums it up...but I have to add to it Pete didn't do it in a conventional manner either. Moving Red to end,finding talent where few others look and changing the idea of what a cb should be. He has his own vision and knows how to make it work.
I've never argued that Harbs wasn't a good coach, for me, I just don't think he's a great coach, but thats just me. And at this point I'd much much much rather have Pete at the helm than Harbs, for about every reason I can think of. Especially professionalism!
I would also have to think, and its only my opinion, that if BOTH teams meltdown, Harbs head would be on the chopping block before Petes. Jimmays head would certainly be closer to exploding for sure..lol

 

[Disp]

The difference to me is that Pete rebuilt our team from scratch, and turned us into a competitor in record time. Schneider obviously helped, but ultimately Pete has the final say in things.

Sure we were 7-9 two years in a row before Wilson but go and ask a non-biased Bills or Browns fan which coach is better. I bet they would say the coach that envisions the recipe, helps buy the groceries AND cooks the meal is the one to have (I miss Bill Parcells sometimes).

Carroll and Schneider have done a fine job building a talented team. My response was directed to the guy saying Harbaugh didn't have a lot of success at Stanford until he got a great quarterback in Andrew Luck, and because of that he doesn't believe he's a great head coach. Wilson was clutch as hell when it mattered in a few games last season. Is it unrealistic to say that the Hawks don't win a few of the games they did last season without his clutch play? Do they win the games vs. the Packers, Bears, and Patriots with any of the lesser quaterbacks on the roster like Matt Flynn? Because if Matt Flynn can't come through in the clutch like Wilson did in those 3 games, then the Hawks finish the season at 8-8 or worse. Is Carroll still a great coach if the Seahawks never draft Wilson and end up going 7-9, 7-9, and then 8-8?

 

[Scottemojo]

The difference to me is that Pete rebuilt our team from scratch, and turned us into a competitor in record time. Schneider obviously helped, but ultimately Pete has the final say in things.

Sure we were 7-9 two years in a row before Wilson but go and ask a non-biased Bills or Browns fan which coach is better. I bet they would say the coach that envisions the recipe, helps buy the groceries AND cooks the meal is the one to have (I miss Bill Parcells sometimes).

Carroll and Schneider have done a fine job building a talented team. My response was directed to the guy saying Harbaugh didn't have a lot of success at Stanford until he got a great quarterback in Andrew Luck, and because of that he doesn't believe he's a great head coach. Wilson was clutch as hell when it mattered in a few games last season. Is it unrealistic to say that the Hawks don't win a few of the games they did last season without his clutch play? Do they win the games vs. the Packers, Bears, and Patriots with any of the lesser quaterbacks on the roster like Matt Flynn? Because if Matt Flynn can't come through in the clutch like Wilson did in those 3 games, then the Hawks finish the season at 8-8 or worse. Is Carroll still a great coach if the Seahawks go 7-9, 7-9, and then 8-8?

I love Pete Carroll (the visionary more than the coach), and if Flynn starts all 16 games last year I think the conversation Seattle fans are having this year is should Pete be allowed to finish his 5 year deal. So yeah, Disp, you are right. Though I would venture that most great coaches have had great quarterbacks. However, they empowered those QBs. So yeah, coaches rightly get the credit. Most media faces roasted Pete for the QB competition last year. It took big balls to start the 3rd round rookie over the money contract guy, and a few games into the season after the Rams loss those same dolts were spouting I told you so like crazy. It took big coaching balls to start the rook and stick with him. Just like it took big balls for Harbs to bench Smith.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Disp, we can play that game all day, the "what if?" game. You guys had two wins by two points or less in 2011, and another two wins by 3-6 points. One last-minute TD in those 4 games and you're 9-7. Last year, if the officials hadn't called that highly questionable delay-of-game penalty on the field goal attempt at the end against the Rams, they'd have won in overtime; and you had another two games decided by 7 points or less. What if those 3 had swung a little differently, and Harbaugh's first two seasons were 9-7 then 8-8?

The "what if?" game is just pointless arguing.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Just like it took big balls for Harbs to bench Smith.

It did? Only people that know nothing about football thought Smith was as good of a QB as his stats suggested. A simple offense that never went deep let Smith have highly inflated numbers. I think you're considerably overstating the gumption it took to start Kaepernick. Hell, Harbaugh didn't even "start" him over Smith, Smith got injured and Kaepernick was put in and Smith never got back in.

How in the world do you equate that to taking a lot of balls on Harbaugh's part?

 

[samwize77]

There still seems to be a misunderstanding here as far as my idea of what a great couch is. Again...Lombardi, Shula, Walsh,Knoll and others are what I consider a great coach to be. Harbs is a good coach in my eyes. Same as Pete. I only say Pete is a great coach because I'm a homer. I do however stand behind my thinking that Pete IS a better coach. I could take the time to say why, but thats probably not necessary because its been said already over and over again.
If you're somewhat bothered by the fact that won't say Harbs is a great couch....I won't apologize for it. I don't think he is. If you are going to tie Petes success with Wilson...then lets tie Harbs with Luck. 2 losing seasons until he started Luck...is he still a great coach then? My friend, its an argument we can go round and round with but lets not. Most on this site already disagrees with me for thinking Petes not a great coach, yet. Lets get some rings and I'll be the first to carry that banner.
edit: I'm directing this post at the niners fan, my .net friends

 

[DTexHawk]

Carroll's 3rd year of team-building resulted in the greatest season for a rookie QB ever, and our team is incredibly young overall. While we all hope to reach the Super Bowl this year, if we don't, nobody will be calling for Carroll's head. The few morons that might will get drowned out by the masses.

Also, yes, I did just say greatest season for a rookie QB ever. Show me a rookie QB that went 11-5 or better (.687 win % for pre-16-game season eras) with a road playoff win and 26+ TDs with a better-than-2-1 TD-int ratio if you want to refute it.

No doubt RW had a fantastic season and one of best for rookies, but I don't think the W-L record is a main factor.

Old article from last year:

http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawksblog/2019835750_rookieqbrecords.html

Old, old article from 2004. Marino & Manning were outstanding rookies:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=list/rookieqbs

Of course, the league was different back then.

 

[samwize77]

Boy, this thread would have been alot shorter if we'd stayed on topic. Not much to argue there huh?

 

[Disp]

Just like it took big balls for Harbs to bench Smith.

It did? Only people that know nothing about football thought Smith was as good of a QB as his stats suggested. A simple offense that never went deep let Smith have highly inflated numbers. I think you're considerably overstating the gumption it took to start Kaepernick. Hell, Harbaugh didn't even "start" him over Smith, Smith got injured and Kaepernick was put in and Smith never got back in.

How in the world do you equate that to taking a lot of balls on Harbaugh's part?

Roland why do you constantly go so far out of your way to act simple minded just to spite a rival team? The coaching staff had doubts about Kaepernick ever developing into a starting caliber QB because he was so erratic in practice, let alone replacing a quarterback with the ridiculous efficiency Smith had to that point. Smith was in the top 3 in completion %, YPA, and rating when he was injured. If you're implying they could just plug anyone into that system and have that same success, then Harbaugh and Roman are actually significantly better than they get credit for. You don't have to like the team or coaches, but only people who know nothing about football would say that move didn't take balls, just like the move to start Wilson over Flynn.

Harbs is a good coach in my eyes. Same as Pete. I only say Pete is a great coach because I'm a homer. I do however stand behind my thinking that Pete IS a better coach. I could take the time to say why, but thats probably not necessary because its been said already over and over again.
If you're somewhat bothered by the fact that won't say Harbs is a great couch....I won't apologize for it.

I'm not bothered by it at all. I was just drawing attention to your point about Harbaugh not truly having a great season until Luck was on the Stanford team. Regardless of the other talent on the roster, the Seahawks probably would have been a .500 team or worse last year without the great quarterback they drafted. Great quarterbacks are just as important to a coach's legacy as the coach is to a great QB.

 

[Scottemojo]

Just like it took big balls for Harbs to bench Smith.

It did? Only people that know nothing about football thought Smith was as good of a QB as his stats suggested. A simple offense that never went deep let Smith have highly inflated numbers. I think you're considerably overstating the gumption it took to start Kaepernick. Hell, Harbaugh didn't even "start" him over Smith, Smith got injured and Kaepernick was put in and Smith never got back in.

How in the world do you equate that to taking a lot of balls on Harbaugh's part?

Because Alex had only had a couple of bad games all year. He had just gone 19 for 20 passing in a game. He was one of the leaders in passer rating, and was averaging almost 8 yards a pass. I agree, the numbers were inflated a bit, but Alex was playing pretty good. I don't think most coaches would have had the sac to keep Alex on the sidelines. Alex was ready to play two weeks after the injury, and Harbs handled the media part of the decision with no class or grace, but it was a gutsy decision. They got within a bad special teams play of going to the SB in 2011 with Smith, it isn't like he sucks.

Sticing with the guy who has no starting experience for a playoff run was ballsy.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Not sure what to think about Smith but I guess I will see up close and personal this year. If he is successful this year there's no question that he's a top flight quarterback because Kansas City is no San Francisco.

 

[samwize77]

I don't know about a "ballsy" move, but it certainly wasn't a no-brainer either. It pretty much changed how they were going to run their offense. That wasn't an easy decision to make for sure. But it wasn't without its upside. Harbs saw what was happening elsewhere for sure. He also knew he could go downfield with Kap. Can a calculated risk be called ballsy? If so, yeah, then maybe it was ballsy.

 

[samwize77]

The thing here in regards to Pete starting Wilson over Flynn, and Harbs staying with Kap over Smith is that with Kap, Harbs had a chance(no real choice really) to see how Kap would do in a real game scenario. And while Smith was getting better Kap showed he was up to the challenge. With Pete, he had to make his decision with basically unknowns. Petes move was the riskiest of the 2 teams.
In the end the decision each coach made was probably for the same reason. To much upside to ignore.

 

[RolandDeschain]

No doubt RW had a fantastic season and one of best for rookies, but I don't think the W-L record is a main factor.

I'd agree with that, and Roethlisberger is the other end of the debate as far as rookie years go, even though he played 14 games in his rookie year and did not start the season in his rookie year, Rich Glennon did. Roethlisberger also had 98 fewer passing attempts than Wilson. 295. Like, a historically low rookie passing attempt number in the modern era for a QB playing 14 games. They had a sick defense and run game.

Roland why do you constantly go so far out of your way to act simple minded just to spite a rival team? The coaching staff had doubts about Kaepernick ever developing into a starting caliber QB because he was so erratic in practice, let alone replacing a quarterback with the ridiculous efficiency Smith had to that point. Smith was in the top 3 in completion %, YPA, and rating when he was injured. If you're implying they could just plug anyone into that system and have that same success, then Harbaugh and Roman are actually significantly better than they get credit for. You don't have to like the team or coaches, but only people who know nothing about football would say that move didn't take balls, just like the move to start Wilson over Flynn.

Wait, adding a reply that took all of 30 seconds to type is "going out of my way"? How do you figure? Also, what I said is true. Harbaugh never even made Kaepernick a starter, Kaepernick started games because Smith got injured, and Harbaugh kept him in after Kaepernick looked good for his first two starts. Where's the big-balls risk here? What, it was risky making a career average QB who only looked better than that once you had a stupid-simple offense that only worked because of a great defense and a powerful running game lose his job due to injury?

Seriously, I want to see someone explain, in detail, how it was risky. Scotte, you say he was blunt with the media about not bringing Smith back; so what? Harbaugh has always been media-unfriendly in San Francisco. What'd you expect him to say to the press once he started getting asked about it? "I'm tired of keeping half of the playbook on a shelf gathering dust because that's all Smith can handle"? No, saying that would have taken balls. I'd actually have given Harbaugh major props if he had found a way to say something like that. In other words, the truth. Don't misunderstand me, I don't fault him for not saying that, it's just that I can't fathom why anyone considers it a ballsy move for Harbaugh to not have put Smith back in. It was absolutely the right move for the team. He did the right thing. The only thing was, it wasn't a ballsy thing. He was handed an excuse on a silver platter; Smith got injured and had to be out two games, and Kaepernick was the new young guy and he looked good in the two starts. What more could you ask for if you wanted to transition QBs mid-season?

 

[Scottemojo]

I didn't say he was blunt, I said Harbs had no class or grace in the way he handled the starter question. Harbs sounded like a stuttering autistic kid every time he was asked anything about who would start.

Ok, so if you think he lacked scrote in KEEPING Kaepernick the starter, how much fortitude did it take to have Kaepernick throwing all over the place in his first start against the Bears stellar secondary?

 

[HansGruber]

Carroll and Schneider have done a fine job building a talented team. My response was directed to the guy saying Harbaugh didn't have a lot of success at Stanford until he got a great quarterback in Andrew Luck, and because of that he doesn't believe he's a great head coach. Wilson was clutch as hell when it mattered in a few games last season. Is it unrealistic to say that the Hawks don't win a few of the games they did last season without his clutch play? Do they win the games vs. the Packers, Bears, and Patriots with any of the lesser quaterbacks on the roster like Matt Flynn? Because if Matt Flynn can't come through in the clutch like Wilson did in those 3 games, then the Hawks finish the season at 8-8 or worse. Is Carroll still a great coach if the Seahawks never draft Wilson and end up going 7-9, 7-9, and then 8-8?

Sorry, but that's a stupid question. Carroll and Schneider planned to draft Wilson all along. They almost drafted him in the second round. So it's extremely pointless and rather dumb to ask what happens if they don't draft him. They're still smart, because they still wanted to draft arguably the best rookie QB in the NFL last season when every other team, including SF, didn't.

Also your statement assumes Flynn was the plan at starter, and Wilson was just a lucky fluke of a late-round pick. Which couldn't be further from the truth.

Pete Carroll and John Schneider repeatedly told the media that Matt Flynn wasn't hired as a starter and wasn't the official starter. That it would be decided in training camp. Then they went out and drafted the guy they'd been wanting badly for months - Russell Wilson. Again, they told the media Wilson was in competition as well (and were heavily criticized for that, even by the Seattle media). So the plan all along was to have multiple options at QB, and let them duke it out. You're taking credit away from them for a plan working out exactly as they intended.

The same thing happened in SF with Kaepernick. Harbaugh went into the season with Smith as the starter, with a ton of media criticism about that. Everyone was criticizing the Kaepernick pick as well. Then Smith proceeds to have his best season ever, and put SF on a winning spree. When he was injured, Kaep came in, played well, and Harbaugh decided to go with "the hot hand". So your argument would be like asking a 49ers fan what would happen if Smith failed and the 49ers failed to make the playoffs. That didn't happen because Coach Harbaugh planned for just that scenario. That's what makes him a great coach.

One of the biggest joys for me as a Seahawks fan is realizing that we are now seeing a legendary matchup between two great football minds in this rivalry. It's like having Parcells and Shula coaching against each other in the same division. It's gonna be a lot of fun to watch.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Ok, so if you think he lacked scrote in KEEPING Kaepernick the starter, how much fortitude did it take to have Kaepernick throwing all over the place in his first start against the Bears stellar secondary?

I'd have to watch the game to answer this for sure. Looking at the quick stats from that game, though, Kaepernick was 16 of 23. Since when is 23 passing attempts "throwing all over the place"? I just watched the highlights from that game, and there was exactly one deep pass in it. I have NFL Game Rewind if you want to tell me where to look to see other deep passes in that game. Also, knowing Jason Campbell was quarterbacking the Bears that night probably didn't scare Harbaugh off much, just a thought.

I get the feeling you're a little anxious to credit Harbaugh, Scotte.

 

[Scottemojo]

Ok, so if you think he lacked scrote in KEEPING Kaepernick the starter, how much fortitude did it take to have Kaepernick throwing all over the place in his first start against the Bears stellar secondary?

I'd have to watch the game to answer this for sure. Looking at the quick stats from that game, though, Kaepernick was 16 of 23. Since when is 23 passing attempts "throwing all over the place"? I just watched the highlights from that game, and there was exactly one deep pass in it. I have NFL Game Rewind if you want to tell me where to look to see other deep passes in that game. Also, knowing Jason Campbell was quarterbacking the Bears that night probably didn't scare Harbaugh off much, just a thought.

I get the feeling you're a little anxious to credit Harbaugh, Scotte.

You should watch it. I was surprised at the time, and the times I have watched since, just how well they attacked that secondary. A lot of midrange stuff, but at the time I had been watching a handcuffed Wilson all year and Kaepernick had way more trust placed in him immediately.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Ok, so if you think he lacked scrote in KEEPING Kaepernick the starter, how much fortitude did it take to have Kaepernick throwing all over the place in his first start against the Bears stellar secondary?

I'd have to watch the game to answer this for sure. Looking at the quick stats from that game, though, Kaepernick was 16 of 23. Since when is 23 passing attempts "throwing all over the place"? I just watched the highlights from that game, and there was exactly one deep pass in it. I have NFL Game Rewind if you want to tell me where to look to see other deep passes in that game. Also, knowing Jason Campbell was quarterbacking the Bears that night probably didn't scare Harbaugh off much, just a thought.

I get the feeling you're a little anxious to credit Harbaugh, Scotte.

You should watch it. I was surprised at the time, and the times I have watched since, just how well they attacked that secondary. A lot of midrange stuff, but at the time I had been watching a handcuffed Wilson all year and Kaepernick had way more trust placed in him immediately.

Well he should have given he was a 2nd year quarterback. NOT a rookie like the media desperately wants to paint it out like. That is a world of difference in the NFL and really any professional elite level athletic situation.