Disconcerting to say the least

[bigwrm]

...

ukeface:

...

ukeface:

You know it might be more conducive to discussion if you responded thoughtfully to those you disagreed with rather than posting puking emojis whenever someone is critical of Russell Wilson. Just a thought.

 

[HuskerHawk]

NE played us the same way they played Rodgers late in the regular season. Mush rush and blanket the receivers. Only difference is, our Oline was way worse than GB's as were our receivers. There was nobody open. A quarterback without his play extension skills wouldn't have had a chance. Look at what happened to Luck two weeks prior. And yes, if he throws that touchdown to Lockette, it's a legendary performance. The drive before half to score and the drive to win it, answering Brady's own amazing drive. I don't know how that can even be argued. Tom Brady was 16-27 for 145 yds and 1 td in his first SB. That drive, for a fg mind you, is legendary.

 

[Hawkpower]

Not how you start, it's how you finish. Sure he played pretty crappy for most of the game. Doesn't matter, he stepped it up when it mattered. I realize it's the new trend to get on every little thing that Wilson does and/or not give him credit when it's due. I guess I'm just in his corner, and proud of it.

And if he was a HUGE part of the comeback, why wouldn't he get credit for it???
Does Kearse not get credit for that catch to win it when the guy is all over him? We can agree to disagree, and that's cool. But, winning doesn't have to look a certain way, just sayin.

Plenty of QB's out there who put up 4K plus yards and a ton of TD's, and have nothing to show for it when it counts, the playoffs.

No, its how you start and how you finish.

Had our defense not bailed us out, or had Green Bay not crapped the bed, our offseason looks suddenly a lot different.

What are people saying if the miracles of miracles hadnt happened?

Fact is, our offense, in large part due to Russ, was terrible in that game and should have cost us a trip to AZ.

Luckily for him, he has the worlds best defense helping him out. That game should have been over at halftime.

ukeface:

Pointing out that we have one of the best defenses in NFL history makes one puke?

As a Seahawk fan first, and an individual player fan second, that makes me proud. Our defense was good enough to rescue us against all odds.

Perhaps some of us have a different pecking order.

 

[Anthony!]

...

ukeface:

...

ukeface:

You know it might be more conducive to discussion if you responded thoughtfully to those you disagreed with rather than posting puking emojis whenever someone is critical of Russell Wilson. Just a thought.

When they say the same thing over and over that is all they should get

 

[Anthony!]

Not how you start, it's how you finish. Sure he played pretty crappy for most of the game. Doesn't matter, he stepped it up when it mattered. I realize it's the new trend to get on every little thing that Wilson does and/or not give him credit when it's due. I guess I'm just in his corner, and proud of it.

And if he was a HUGE part of the comeback, why wouldn't he get credit for it???
Does Kearse not get credit for that catch to win it when the guy is all over him? We can agree to disagree, and that's cool. But, winning doesn't have to look a certain way, just sayin.

Plenty of QB's out there who put up 4K plus yards and a ton of TD's, and have nothing to show for it when it counts, the playoffs.

No, its how you start and how you finish.

Had our defense not bailed us out, or had Green Bay not crapped the bed, our offseason looks suddenly a lot different.

What are people saying if the miracles of miracles hadnt happened?

Fact is, our offense, in large part due to Russ, was terrible in that game and should have cost us a trip to AZ.

Luckily for him, he has the worlds best defense helping him out. That game should have been over at halftime.

ukeface:

Pointing out that we have one of the best defenses in NFL history makes one puke?

As a Seahawk fan first, and an individual player fan second, that makes me proud. Our defense was good enough to rescue us against all odds.

Perhaps some of us have a different pecking order.

no but taking away any credit to the QB who orchestrated the drive that got us into the SB, and then since giving all that credit to the defense not saying anything about how they gave up a 10 point lead with 9 minutes to go in the SB, but instead bringing up the last play actin like that is why we lost deserves a puke face.

 

[HuskerHawk]

Not how you start, it's how you finish. Sure he played pretty crappy for most of the game. Doesn't matter, he stepped it up when it mattered. I realize it's the new trend to get on every little thing that Wilson does and/or not give him credit when it's due. I guess I'm just in his corner, and proud of it.

And if he was a HUGE part of the comeback, why wouldn't he get credit for it???
Does Kearse not get credit for that catch to win it when the guy is all over him? We can agree to disagree, and that's cool. But, winning doesn't have to look a certain way, just sayin.

Plenty of QB's out there who put up 4K plus yards and a ton of TD's, and have nothing to show for it when it counts, the playoffs.

No, its how you start and how you finish.

Had our defense not bailed us out, or had Green Bay not crapped the bed, our offseason looks suddenly a lot different.

What are people saying if the miracles of miracles hadnt happened?

Fact is, our offense, in large part due to Russ, was terrible in that game and should have cost us a trip to AZ.

Luckily for him, he has the worlds best defense helping him out. That game should have been over at halftime.

If the defense doesn't let Brady shred em to pieces down the stretch, this offseason is suddenly different. Same with Matty Ice in 2012. Just playing devil's advocate. Russ was terrible against GB, and the defense/luck let us advance.

 

[jack_patera]

for all the gloom and doomers, after all i've seen from other teams, i'd still rather be down with the seahawks than any other team right now in the league...i not worried, this thing will work itself out once the flow of the season starts...kam will eventually be back, offense will eventually click, and d will get their groove back...it's a marathon, not a sprint...many superb owl champs had shaky augs and septs...even into octs for that matter...you guys panic, i'm not there...thats a fact, from jack

 

[Hawkpower]

...

ukeface:

...

ukeface:

You know it might be more conducive to discussion if you responded thoughtfully to those you disagreed with rather than posting puking emojis whenever someone is critical of Russell Wilson. Just a thought.

When they say the same thing over and over that is all they should get

Irony at its best.

 

[KiwiHawk]

But what used to be a 20-yard backpedal followed by a little shake-and-bake and a long pass to Baldwin for a big gain is now a 20-yard backpedal followed by an intentional grounding penalty.

Which is exactly why I am troubled. I haven't seen this from Wilson before. This is new. What else is new? His fame, fortune, celebrity, and divorce. Are those factors causing him trouble and/or distracting him from adequate preparation? Is that not a valid question in light of a string of bad outings that coincide with the events?

No, I don't think it is honestly. Are you referencing the play in preseason where a defender was right in his face on a naked boot? I mean that was kinda a perfect storm of a play not really some horrible play by RW. You've never seen that before? C'mon now. On his 15 yard run he had to escape several defenders and did it just fine. Why does the bad scramble hold more weight or meaning than a good scramble? Almost none of the things you listed are new at all. He literally had to address his "blackness" in the middle of a season last year. I mean "distractions" are not new in the least. There have been no reports of diminished work ethic so this is kinda just you throwing ideas around with the tenuous correlation/causation argument that has little merit without a lot more correlation. "string of bad outings" meaning 5 Q's in preseason because if you are going back to last season then that list doesn't make as much sense.

I just find it really odd to weigh a small sample size against a huge sample size and treat them as equivalent. Seems like bad logic.

I am going back to last season because his performance in the last 2 games was uncharacteristically bad. He had help from some tip-drill interceptions, but he also made some pretty terrible throws including the famous one at the end of the Super Bowl which never should have been thrown, and which, if thrown, should have been thrown low and inside rather than medium-high and away where a defender had a chance on it.

It would be bad logic to weigh a small sample against a large body of work, which in part is why I am merely concerned and not panicking. What causes my concern is that the small sample suggests a trend, and that trend is not pretty.

I have a daughter who is very good at school. Top of her class, and even goes up a year for maths. If she suddenly left the group of top students she normally hangs around with in favour of the cool kids and at the same time her test scores started to drop, should I attribute it to a small sample compared to her years of brilliant work, or should I have concern that her new friends may be a negative influence on her performance?

Funny how when it's put that way it's natural to have concern, but when an athlete divorces his wife and heads into the spotlight dating a celebrity, changes his agent, and scores a large chunk of cash, we shouldn't be concerned about distractions.

Seems like bad logic.

 

[Hawkpower]

Not how you start, it's how you finish. Sure he played pretty crappy for most of the game. Doesn't matter, he stepped it up when it mattered. I realize it's the new trend to get on every little thing that Wilson does and/or not give him credit when it's due. I guess I'm just in his corner, and proud of it.

And if he was a HUGE part of the comeback, why wouldn't he get credit for it???
Does Kearse not get credit for that catch to win it when the guy is all over him? We can agree to disagree, and that's cool. But, winning doesn't have to look a certain way, just sayin.

Plenty of QB's out there who put up 4K plus yards and a ton of TD's, and have nothing to show for it when it counts, the playoffs.

No, its how you start and how you finish.

Had our defense not bailed us out, or had Green Bay not crapped the bed, our offseason looks suddenly a lot different.

What are people saying if the miracles of miracles hadnt happened?

Fact is, our offense, in large part due to Russ, was terrible in that game and should have cost us a trip to AZ.

Luckily for him, he has the worlds best defense helping him out. That game should have been over at halftime.

If the defense doesn't let Brady shred em to pieces down the stretch, this offseason is suddenly different. Same with Matty Ice in 2012. Just playing devil's advocate. Russ was terrible against GB, and the defense/luck let us advance.

Its a team game, no question about it.

Its the 2% of the Seahawk fans that are so starstruck they refuse to allow deserved critical talk about Wilson that generates these responses. Every other Seahawk is fair game, but Wilson has some creepy odd shield around him for these 4 or 5 guys.

Considering how awful he has been lately, its confusing to see this shield persist.

 

[Hawkpower]

But what used to be a 20-yard backpedal followed by a little shake-and-bake and a long pass to Baldwin for a big gain is now a 20-yard backpedal followed by an intentional grounding penalty.

Which is exactly why I am troubled. I haven't seen this from Wilson before. This is new. What else is new? His fame, fortune, celebrity, and divorce. Are those factors causing him trouble and/or distracting him from adequate preparation? Is that not a valid question in light of a string of bad outings that coincide with the events?

No, I don't think it is honestly. Are you referencing the play in preseason where a defender was right in his face on a naked boot? I mean that was kinda a perfect storm of a play not really some horrible play by RW. You've never seen that before? C'mon now. On his 15 yard run he had to escape several defenders and did it just fine. Why does the bad scramble hold more weight or meaning than a good scramble? Almost none of the things you listed are new at all. He literally had to address his "blackness" in the middle of a season last year. I mean "distractions" are not new in the least. There have been no reports of diminished work ethic so this is kinda just you throwing ideas around with the tenuous correlation/causation argument that has little merit without a lot more correlation. "string of bad outings" meaning 5 Q's in preseason because if you are going back to last season then that list doesn't make as much sense.

I just find it really odd to weigh a small sample size against a huge sample size and treat them as equivalent. Seems like bad logic.

I am going back to last season because his performance in the last 2 games was uncharacteristically bad. He had help from some tip-drill interceptions, but he also made some pretty terrible throws including the famous one at the end of the Super Bowl which never should have been thrown, and which, if thrown, should have been thrown low and inside rather than medium-high and away where a defender had a chance on it.

It would be bad logic to weigh a small sample against a large body of work, which in part is why I am merely concerned and not panicking. What causes my concern is that the small sample suggests a trend, and that trend is not pretty.

I have a daughter who is very good at school. Top of her class, and even goes up a year for maths. If she suddenly left the group of top students she normally hangs around with in favour of the cool kids and at the same time her test scores started to drop, should I attribute it to a small sample compared to her years of brilliant work, or should I have concern that her new friends may be a negative influence on her performance?

Funny how when it's put that way it's natural to have concern, but when an athlete divorces his wife and heads into the spotlight dating a celebrity, changes his agent, and scores a large chunk of cash, we shouldn't be concerned about distractions.

Seems like bad logic.

Very unique to the area.

We love our "superstars" in Seattle and some, many of which have grown up in the NW and don't know any different, have latched on tight.

Russ would be getting scorched in most other markets right now....between the weird stuff he says and his awful play of late

Seattle? A slow grumble at most. And plenty of strange, fierce defending.

 

[Anthony!]

ukeface:

You know it might be more conducive to discussion if you responded thoughtfully to those you disagreed with rather than posting puking emojis whenever someone is critical of Russell Wilson. Just a thought.

When they say the same thing over and over that is all they should get

Irony at its best.

ukeface:

 

[Anthony!]

But what used to be a 20-yard backpedal followed by a little shake-and-bake and a long pass to Baldwin for a big gain is now a 20-yard backpedal followed by an intentional grounding penalty.

Which is exactly why I am troubled. I haven't seen this from Wilson before. This is new. What else is new? His fame, fortune, celebrity, and divorce. Are those factors causing him trouble and/or distracting him from adequate preparation? Is that not a valid question in light of a string of bad outings that coincide with the events?

No, I don't think it is honestly. Are you referencing the play in preseason where a defender was right in his face on a naked boot? I mean that was kinda a perfect storm of a play not really some horrible play by RW. You've never seen that before? C'mon now. On his 15 yard run he had to escape several defenders and did it just fine. Why does the bad scramble hold more weight or meaning than a good scramble? Almost none of the things you listed are new at all. He literally had to address his "blackness" in the middle of a season last year. I mean "distractions" are not new in the least. There have been no reports of diminished work ethic so this is kinda just you throwing ideas around with the tenuous correlation/causation argument that has little merit without a lot more correlation. "string of bad outings" meaning 5 Q's in preseason because if you are going back to last season then that list doesn't make as much sense.

I just find it really odd to weigh a small sample size against a huge sample size and treat them as equivalent. Seems like bad logic.

I am going back to last season because his performance in the last 2 games was uncharacteristically bad. He had help from some tip-drill interceptions, but he also made some pretty terrible throws including the famous one at the end of the Super Bowl which never should have been thrown, and which, if thrown, should have been thrown low and inside rather than medium-high and away where a defender had a chance on it.

It would be bad logic to weigh a small sample against a large body of work, which in part is why I am merely concerned and not panicking. What causes my concern is that the small sample suggests a trend, and that trend is not pretty.

I have a daughter who is very good at school. Top of her class, and even goes up a year for maths. If she suddenly left the group of top students she normally hangs around with in favour of the cool kids and at the same time her test scores started to drop, should I attribute it to a small sample compared to her years of brilliant work, or should I have concern that her new friends may be a negative influence on her performance?

Funny how when it's put that way it's natural to have concern, but when an athlete divorces his wife and heads into the spotlight dating a celebrity, changes his agent, and scores a large chunk of cash, we shouldn't be concerned about distractions.

Seems like bad logic.

110+ QB rating is far from bad and that is a fact

 

[Anthony!]

Not how you start, it's how you finish. Sure he played pretty crappy for most of the game. Doesn't matter, he stepped it up when it mattered. I realize it's the new trend to get on every little thing that Wilson does and/or not give him credit when it's due. I guess I'm just in his corner, and proud of it.

And if he was a HUGE part of the comeback, why wouldn't he get credit for it???
Does Kearse not get credit for that catch to win it when the guy is all over him? We can agree to disagree, and that's cool. But, winning doesn't have to look a certain way, just sayin.

Plenty of QB's out there who put up 4K plus yards and a ton of TD's, and have nothing to show for it when it counts, the playoffs.

No, its how you start and how you finish.

Had our defense not bailed us out, or had Green Bay not crapped the bed, our offseason looks suddenly a lot different.

What are people saying if the miracles of miracles hadnt happened?

Fact is, our offense, in large part due to Russ, was terrible in that game and should have cost us a trip to AZ.

Luckily for him, he has the worlds best defense helping him out. That game should have been over at halftime.

If the defense doesn't let Brady shred em to pieces down the stretch, this offseason is suddenly different. Same with Matty Ice in 2012. Just playing devil's advocate. Russ was terrible against GB, and the defense/luck let us advance.

Its a team game, no question about it.

Its the 2% of the Seahawk fans that are so starstruck they refuse to allow deserved critical talk about Wilson that generates these responses. Every other Seahawk is fair game, but Wilson has some creepy odd shield around him for these 4 or 5 guys.

Considering how awful he has been lately, its confusing to see this shield persist.

wrong it is the 2% of fans that will always be critical of Wilson, and blame him for any and everything while giving the defense, and run game a pass at all times. Also gain lately last real game he played he had a Qb rating over 110 that is far from aweful.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

It's a lot more than 2 percent that are critical of Wilson. A hell of a lot more. Of course he only wins because of the Defense and the running game. He clearly has nothing to do with the team winning :roll:

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

It's a lot more than 2 percent that are critical of Wilson. A hell of a lot more...........

Yes it is.

 

[themunn]

You don't credit Wilson for comebacks when he caused the necessity to come back.

Then you have to give Aaron Rodgers credit for keeping the Packers ahead against such a stifling defense for 58 minutes.

Tell you what. 100% of the time I'll take the guy who plays shit for 58 minutes if it's only the last 2 minutes that he wins games. You can have your "plays well for 58 minutes but can't close out the game" QB

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Talk to Cowboys fans about a QB who plays well for 58 minutes.

 

[erik2690]

I have a daughter who is very good at school. Top of her class, and even goes up a year for maths. If she suddenly left the group of top students she normally hangs around with in favour of the cool kids and at the same time her test scores started to drop, should I attribute it to a small sample compared to her years of brilliant work, or should I have concern that her new friends may be a negative influence on her performance?

Funny how when it's put that way it's natural to have concern, but when an athlete divorces his wife and heads into the spotlight dating a celebrity, changes his agent, and scores a large chunk of cash, we shouldn't be concerned about distractions.

Seems like bad logic.

But you just ruined your whole story. You are complaining about 2 playoff games and then connecting them to a bunch of events that came later. That's very confusing. This "changed his agent" is a dumb narrative. Rodgers has always been the trusted adviser whether there was a point where he wasn't officially the agent or not is a silly thing to hang on. It's semantics at best.

And yes I don't think that's a great comparison at all. You are at least seemingly implying with the analogy a diminished work ethic or focus a thing you have zero evidence for.

So what changed between Carolina and GB because you seem very insistent that this is a trend from GB until now (SB wasn't a very bad performance, but we'll ignore that argument). So the question then is what changed? He was killer vs. Carolina, but now 2 games and 5 Q's of preseason and he's in a tailspin. What happened? He was divorced all last season too. You're reasons listed are just odd. You are attaching negative consequences on the field to things that have no inherent consequence on the field.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Because for some people, it matters HOW it looks when the team wins. Makes zero sense. The W or the L, the only thing that matters. Does the guy win? Has he been clutch in the playoffs? Clearly he is a very clutch QB.