How many weeks are the Haters going to be here

[DomeHawk]

I don't want to squander a quarterback that has SB potential because we have a stubborn coach that cannot adapt. Russ wants to be a HOF QB that won multiple SB's. Don't be too surprised if he isn't seeing the writing on the wall too and tests the free agent market.

Does Russell have any culpability in any of this, or are we just going to crucify Pete for the next six months for losing a playoff game with a team that he helped overachieve to a 10-6 record, that looking at the roster really had no business being in the playoffs this year.

- did Pete throw the ball too high in the SB allowing Butler to pick it off?
- did Pete get bitchslapped by Brandon Browner in the SB and not set the pick so Butler didn't get to Lockette?
- did Pete throw two pick sixes this year?
- did Pete fumble the snap at Denver and cost us two late game chances to win that game?

I mean, this notion that Russell is some QB God that we're squandering is downright laughable. Dude's on his way to the Hall of Fame here, why in the hell would he want to go to some middle of the road organization that may but probably won't protect him and have an offense better designed for him to have success in.

Or do you have inside information that Drew Brees is retiring early and Russell is going to slide in at NO and FINALLY be appreciated and "used properly", whatever that means.

Please tell me where all these amazing well run organizations that don't already have an elite QB with coaches, O-lines and coordinators where Russell would leave a top 2-3 organization that's in the playoffs every year to go and fare better?

Such BS, franchise QB's aren't automatically granted to NFL teams. If you have one, you have a shot at getting to the Super Bowl, without one, good luck.

Look at the four teams left.

New England: Guess who?

New Orleans: Drew Brees

Kansa City: Patrick Mahomes, the next great NFL QB.

LA Rams: Jared Goff

ALL franchise QB's

Get it?

MaHomes has had a little bit of a run but is not a Franchise guy yet, same could be said for Goff, remember everyone said 5 years of production to prove your not just getting the luck of the draw so to speak Luck is also a Franchise guy, what has he won so far?

Ossweiler, Paxton, RG III were labeled Franchise guys also when drafted. See how that works? Throw in Cutler and Flacco if you wish but I think most would agree they are not what you envision. Then we have Kaepernick who started off hot and faded. Why the Franchise tag can mean one thing from year to year but sustained success is really where you get to label a guy that on good and bad years.

I get what you are saying but c'mon, Goff and Mahomes ARE franchise quarterbacks whether they had had multi years success or not. It is generally regarded among those who are in the know..

 

[SoulfishHawk]

A matter of opinion. The book is still very much out on Goff.

 

[chris98251]

Does Russell have any culpability in any of this, or are we just going to crucify Pete for the next six months for losing a playoff game with a team that he helped overachieve to a 10-6 record, that looking at the roster really had no business being in the playoffs this year.

- did Pete throw the ball too high in the SB allowing Butler to pick it off?
- did Pete get bitchslapped by Brandon Browner in the SB and not set the pick so Butler didn't get to Lockette?
- did Pete throw two pick sixes this year?
- did Pete fumble the snap at Denver and cost us two late game chances to win that game?

I mean, this notion that Russell is some QB God that we're squandering is downright laughable. Dude's on his way to the Hall of Fame here, why in the hell would he want to go to some middle of the road organization that may but probably won't protect him and have an offense better designed for him to have success in.

Or do you have inside information that Drew Brees is retiring early and Russell is going to slide in at NO and FINALLY be appreciated and "used properly", whatever that means.

Please tell me where all these amazing well run organizations that don't already have an elite QB with coaches, O-lines and coordinators where Russell would leave a top 2-3 organization that's in the playoffs every year to go and fare better?

Such BS, franchise QB's aren't automatically granted to NFL teams. If you have one, you have a shot at getting to the Super Bowl, without one, good luck.

Look at the four teams left.

New England: Guess who?

New Orleans: Drew Brees

Kansa City: Patrick Mahomes, the next great NFL QB.

LA Rams: Jared Goff

ALL franchise QB's

Get it?

MaHomes has had a little bit of a run but is not a Franchise guy yet, same could be said for Goff, remember everyone said 5 years of production to prove your not just getting the luck of the draw so to speak Luck is also a Franchise guy, what has he won so far?

Ossweiler, Paxton, RG III were labeled Franchise guys also when drafted. See how that works? Throw in Cutler and Flacco if you wish but I think most would agree they are not what you envision. Then we have Kaepernick who started off hot and faded. Why the Franchise tag can mean one thing from year to year but sustained success is really where you get to label a guy that on good and bad years.

I get what you are saying but c'mon, Goff and Mahomes ARE franchise quarterbacks whether they had had multi years success or not. It is generally regarded among those who are in the know..

Goff sucked under Fisher and thrived under McVay so far. McNabb thrived under Reid but sucked in Washington, somehow Flacco got paid and sucked afterwards and was being called a Franchise guy. Body of work and if they can continue under different circumstances in my mind makes a QB a Franchise guy.

 

[mrt144]

Such BS, franchise QB's aren't automatically granted to NFL teams. If you have one, you have a shot at getting to the Super Bowl, without one, good luck.

Look at the four teams left.

New England: Guess who?

New Orleans: Drew Brees

Kansa City: Patrick Mahomes, the next great NFL QB.

LA Rams: Jared Goff

ALL franchise QB's

Get it?

MaHomes has had a little bit of a run but is not a Franchise guy yet, same could be said for Goff, remember everyone said 5 years of production to prove your not just getting the luck of the draw so to speak Luck is also a Franchise guy, what has he won so far?

Ossweiler, Paxton, RG III were labeled Franchise guys also when drafted. See how that works? Throw in Cutler and Flacco if you wish but I think most would agree they are not what you envision. Then we have Kaepernick who started off hot and faded. Why the Franchise tag can mean one thing from year to year but sustained success is really where you get to label a guy that on good and bad years.

I get what you are saying but c'mon, Goff and Mahomes ARE franchise quarterbacks whether they had had multi years success or not. It is generally regarded among those who are in the know..

Goff sucked under Fisher and thrived under McVay so far. McNabb thrived under Reid but sucked in Washington, somehow Flacco got paid and sucked afterwards and was being called a Franchise guy. Body of work and if they can continue under different circumstances in my mind makes a QB a Franchise guy.

So Franchise QBs are actually kind rare then?

 

[Jville]

In addressing the titled question "How many weeks are the Haters going to be here", I think the term "Haters" is a misnomer for "Chronic Complainers". And to answer the question, Chronic Complainers have always been present week after week. Their volume may go up or down with wins and losses, but they're always complaining .

The Difference Between Negative People and Chronic Complainers

When somebody is constantly complaining, it’s easy to think that they just have a negative outlook on life in the same way that a pessimist might. The truth is, chronic complainers are a whole different breed. They may not have a negative outlook on life at all, but they still want you to know that nothing is ever quite good enough. Guy Winch, Ph.D. at Psychology Today explains the difference perfectly:

Optimists see: A glass half full.

Pessimists see: A glass half empty.

Chronic complainers see: A glass that is slightly chipped holding water that isn’t cold enough, probably because it’s tap water when I asked for bottled water and wait, there’s a smudge on the rim, too, which means the glass wasn’t cleaned properly and now I’ll probably end up with some kind of virus. Why do these things always happen to me?! [urltargetblank]https://lifehacker.com/how-to-deal-with-chronic-complainers-1668185689[/urltargetblank]

P.S. Chronic Complainers don't fit in with Pete Carroll's program. However, seahawks.net has a long history of tolerance ...... some would say to a fault ..... but tolerance never the less up to a point.

 

[Smellyman]

In addressing the titled question "How many weeks are the Haters going to be here", I think the term "Haters" is a misnomer for "Chronic Complainers". And to answer the question, Chronic Complainers have always been present week after week. Their volume may go up or down with wins and losses, but they're always complaining .

The Difference Between Negative People and Chronic Complainers

When somebody is constantly complaining, it’s easy to think that they just have a negative outlook on life in the same way that a pessimist might. The truth is, chronic complainers are a whole different breed. They may not have a negative outlook on life at all, but they still want you to know that nothing is ever quite good enough. Guy Winch, Ph.D. at Psychology Today explains the difference perfectly:

Optimists see: A glass half full.

Pessimists see: A glass half empty.

Chronic complainers see: A glass that is slightly chipped holding water that isn’t cold enough, probably because it’s tap water when I asked for bottled water and wait, there’s a smudge on the rim, too, which means the glass wasn’t cleaned properly and now I’ll probably end up with some kind of virus. Why do these things always happen to me?! [urltargetblank]https://lifehacker.com/how-to-deal-with-chronic-complainers-1668185689[/urltargetblank]

P.S. Chronic Complainers don't fit in with Pete Carroll's program. However, seahawks.net has a long history of tolerance ...... some would say to a fault ..... but tolerance never the less up to a point.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

And yes "get it?" means that some of you guys can't seem to comprehend what HOF quarterbacks and other players as well as Super Bowl winning coaches have all echoed about that game.

Tell me please, who should I listen to, them, or you?

You should listen to Pete and Russell, who both said after the Dallas game that we probably should have opened it up a little more after halftime.

So not sure what your point even is, you and others are trying to apply some larger problem because of one playoff game. So yes, for MAYBE that one game we squandered Russell, but overall he's well on his way to the Hall of Fame and will have multiple opportunities if Pete and John can continue to rebuild our defense to get to one or two more SB's.

To think he can go elsewhere and be more successful? Sure, he can maybe be another Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan or Matt Stafford, throw for a bazillion yards, throw picks all over the place and deal with major injuries all year because he's getting pounded constantly from throwing the ball 40+ times a game......................OR he can stay here, stay healthy and get to go to the playoffs every year, AND play for another 10 years.

Squandered, lol.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

And yes "get it?" means that some of you guys can't seem to comprehend what HOF quarterbacks and other players as well as Super Bowl winning coaches have all echoed about that game.

Tell me please, who should I listen to, them, or you?

You should listen to Pete and Russell, who both said after the Dallas game that we probably should have opened it up a little more after halftime.

So not sure what your point even is, you and others are trying to apply some larger problem because of one playoff game. So yes, for MAYBE that one game we squandered Russell, but overall he's well on his way to the Hall of Fame and will have multiple opportunities if Pete and John can continue to rebuild our defense to get to one or two more SB's.

To think he can go elsewhere and be more successful? Sure, he can maybe be another Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan or Matt Stafford, throw for a bazillion yards, throw picks all over the place and deal with major injuries all year because he's getting pounded constantly from throwing the ball 40+ times a game......................OR he can stay here, stay healthy and get to go to the playoffs every year, AND play for another 10 years.

Squandered, lol.

You forgot Sam Bradford....the GOAT...at something..... :stirthepot:

 

[TwistedHusky]

The hard part with this is that you cannot take the strengths of someone without taking the weaknesses too.

They are a package.

Carroll is going to find and develop great players. He is always going to fall short in using them as well as makes sense.

He is always going to hire substandard coordinators that literally hold the program back.

But he will also always find ways of doing football arbitrage that result in additional wins over what the roster suggests.

Overall, the program will still be better, because he is also always going to find producing players out of nowhere. I think the days of 5 HOF quality players on the roster are never repeating, and certainly a SB makes no sense to project - but just because there is reason to be frustrated that our gameplan makes no sense or we lost the game (given the tremendous opportunity to win had we just let our best players win it for us). We will still be a good team to watch.

Carroll is always going to put the game on his defense. Even though his defense is now nothing special if not outright mediocre, (and even if his defense is a dumpster fire, which would be unlikely given his defensive acumen), we are going to win and lose by putting the game on the backs of the defense. That is how Carroll coaches.

It makes no sense to complain that Carroll did not make adjustments, because we know that coming in. Carroll is a HORRIBLE tactician and gameday coach. But he is good at a lot of things before the kickoff so you have to just accept what you have.

If we could ever kick Carroll upstairs, still have him involved with player development, but let another person coach the players he finds and develops? I think we would win multiple Super Bowls. We certainly would participate in more of them. But for now, his strengths in building and developing a roster are still going to be mitigated by his weaknesses in how he uses that roster.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Carroll is going to find and develop great players. He is always going to fall short in using them as well as makes sense..

You mean guys like Wagner, Kam, Bennett, Lynch, Lockett, Baldwin, KJ, Sherman, Sweezy, Fluker, Britt, Carson, Flowers............and yes Russell.

All who were either raw unmolded athletes or busts that other coach's couldn't figure out how to unlock their desire and potential elsewhere? Or in Russell's case, fell to the 3rd round because other coaches and GM's didn't even want to bother with drafting, let alone think they could turn into a Hall of Fame QB?

Pete might be stubborn in his football philosophy, but make no mistake he is one of the greatest developers and teachers of football the game has ever known.

If not for Pete, half the guys on my list above would be selling cars or sitting at home on their couches wondering what happened to their football careers, now some of them are going to Pro Bowls and headed to the hall of fame.

 

[Seymour]

And yes "get it?" means that some of you guys can't seem to comprehend what HOF quarterbacks and other players as well as Super Bowl winning coaches have all echoed about that game.

Tell me please, who should I listen to, them, or you?

You should listen to Pete and Russell, who both said after the Dallas game that we probably should have opened it up a little more after halftime.

So not sure what your point even is, you and others are trying to apply some larger problem because of one playoff game. So yes, for MAYBE that one game we squandered Russell, but overall he's well on his way to the Hall of Fame and will have multiple opportunities if Pete and John can continue to rebuild our defense to get to one or two more SB's.

To think he can go elsewhere and be more successful? Sure, he can maybe be another Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan or Matt Stafford, throw for a bazillion yards, throw picks all over the place and deal with major injuries all year because he's getting pounded constantly from throwing the ball 40+ times a game......................OR he can stay here, stay healthy and get to go to the playoffs every year, AND play for another 10 years.

Squandered, lol.

It is a fair criticism IMO.

squan·der
/ˈskwändər/
verb
past tense: squandered; past participle: squandered

waste (something, especially money or time) in a reckless and foolish manner.
"entrepreneurs squander their profits on expensive cars"
synonyms: waste, misspend, misuse, throw away, dissipate, fritter away, run through, lose, lavish, spend recklessly, spend unwisely, make poor use of, be prodigal with, spend money like water;

Make poor use of and misuse are pretty accurate for that last game and other periods of time when he is forced into having the leagues worst passing protection under Carroll. You pay him Rodgers $$, you need to make better use of those skills. IMO Carroll doesn't deserve a $32-34 million QB to begin with.

 

[mrt144]

The hard part with this is that you cannot take the strengths of someone without taking the weaknesses too.

They are a package.

Carroll is going to find and develop great players. He is always going to fall short in using them as well as makes sense.

He is always going to hire substandard coordinators that literally hold the program back.

But he will also always find ways of doing football arbitrage that result in additional wins over what the roster suggests.

Overall, the program will still be better, because he is also always going to find producing players out of nowhere. I think the days of 5 HOF quality players on the roster are never repeating, and certainly a SB makes no sense to project - but just because there is reason to be frustrated that our gameplan makes no sense or we lost the game (given the tremendous opportunity to win had we just let our best players win it for us). We will still be a good team to watch.

Carroll is always going to put the game on his defense. Even though his defense is now nothing special if not outright mediocre, (and even if his defense is a dumpster fire, which would be unlikely given his defensive acumen), we are going to win and lose by putting the game on the backs of the defense. That is how Carroll coaches.

It makes no sense to complain that Carroll did not make adjustments, because we know that coming in. Carroll is a HORRIBLE tactician and gameday coach. But he is good at a lot of things before the kickoff so you have to just accept what you have.

If we could ever kick Carroll upstairs, still have him involved with player development, but let another person coach the players he finds and develops? I think we would win multiple Super Bowls. We certainly would participate in more of them. But for now, his strengths in building and developing a roster are still going to be mitigated by his weaknesses in how he uses that roster.

How did you intercept my thoughts like this? Big clap for articulating what I haven't been able.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Well Largent nailed it too.

Pete is one of the greatest developers of talent the game has known.

He is also tremendous at making strategic decisions that change the game. The entire structure of today's defenses has changed because of innovations that Pete pioneered or massively improved on.

He would probably be one of the greatest front office people ever, creating some of the greatest teams of all time - (he already has done this anyway)...if we could just kick him upstairs.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Make poor use of and misuse are pretty accurate for that last game and other periods of time when he is forced into having the leagues worst passing protection under Carroll. You pay him Rodgers $$, you need to make better use of those skills. IMO Carroll doesn't deserve a $32-34 million QB to begin with.

I know what the word means.

Two things;

1. How can you consider a player's skills "squandered" when he's a top 5 QB, is at the top of the league every year in every statistical category that matters (TD/Int ration, QBR, completion percentage) and if Russell stays healthy will be putting on a gold jacket in about 15 years?

2. How can Russell himself think he's being squandered when all he cares about is winning, and that's all he's done here, win. Where else could his situation possibly be better?

You guys love this narrative, but sorry it doesn't fly in any sense of the word "squandered." Maybe..........just maybe Pete and his coaches know EXACTLY the type of QB Russell is, and are getting the most out of that skill set.

But no, we lost in Dallas and that sets off this false groupthink, when in reality it was just as much on the defense as it was the offense. But there aren't a dozen threads about that. Why? After seeing what the Rams did to the Cowboys, no one's asking why our defense stunk so bad stopping Dallas pedestrian offense with a mediocre QB?

 

[DomeHawk]

So not sure what your point even is, you and others are trying to apply some larger problem because of one playoff game. So yes, for MAYBE that one game we squandered Russell, but overall he's well on his way to the Hall of Fame and will have multiple opportunities if Pete and John can continue to rebuild our defense to get to one or two more SB's.

That's right, it was one PLAYOFF game. It's a single elimination tournament. You might be able to get away with that in the regular season BUT in the playoffs it is inexcusable.

That was the worst coaching decision I have seen since the Super Bowl fiasco and truthfully, this was worse because it went on for many plays encompassing an entire half.

You guys want to turn this into something it is not, nobody is saying that Pete hasn't done some great things but you can negate all that by this BS that he is trying to pass this off as a "formula."

And, that is the thought around the league, Pete Carroll is a very good franchise coach who has the tendency to shoot himself in the foot at crucial times.

Until we change that so-called formula that refuses to adapt we are destined to 9-7 10-6 season with one playoff win or one-and-out.

 

[Seymour]

Make poor use of and misuse are pretty accurate for that last game and other periods of time when he is forced into having the leagues worst passing protection under Carroll. You pay him Rodgers $$, you need to make better use of those skills. IMO Carroll doesn't deserve a $32-34 million QB to begin with.

I know what the word means.

Two things;

1. How can you consider a player's skills "squandered" when he's a top 5 QB, is at the top of the league every year in every statistical category that matters (TD/Int ration, QBR, completion percentage) and if Russell stays healthy will be putting on a gold jacket in about 15 years?

2. How can Russell himself think he's being squandered when all he cares about is winning, and that's all he's done here, win. Where else could his situation possibly be better?

You guys love this narrative, but sorry it doesn't fly in any sense of the word "squandered." Maybe..........just maybe Pete and his coaches know EXACTLY the type of QB Russell is, and are getting the most out of that skill set.

But no, we lost in Dallas and that sets off this false groupthink, when in reality it was just as much on the defense as it was the offense. But there aren't a dozen threads about that. Why? After seeing what the Rams did to the Cowboys, no one's asking why our defense stunk so bad stopping Dallas pedestrian offense with a mediocre QB?

Only you would consider " maybe Pete and his coaches know EXACTLY the type of QB Russell is, and are getting the most out of that skill set" when Wilson has put up with historically poor pass protection and suspect / archaic route concepts.

I'll post the pass protection reminder that went on for 6 years one more time for you. This tells anyone with an once of common sense that Wilson could not reach his full potential. And neither could any other QB.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So not sure what your point even is, you and others are trying to apply some larger problem because of one playoff game. So yes, for MAYBE that one game we squandered Russell, but overall he's well on his way to the Hall of Fame and will have multiple opportunities if Pete and John can continue to rebuild our defense to get to one or two more SB's.

That's right, it was one PLAYOFF game. It's a single elimination tournament. You might be able to get away with that in the regular season BUT in the playoffs it is inexcusable.

That was the worst coaching decision I have seen since the Super Bowl fiasco and truthfully, this was worse because it went on for many plays encompassing an entire half.

You guys want to turn this into something it is not, nobody is saying that Pete hasn't done some great things but you can negate all that by this BS that he is trying to pass this off as a "formula."

And, that is the thought around the league, Pete Carroll is a very good franchise coach who has the tendency to shoot himself in the foot at crucial times.

Until we change that so-called formula that refuses to adapt we are destined to 9-7 10-6 season with one playoff win or one-and-out.

So you don't think building another dominant defense will turn this team from 10-6 to 13-3 and vying for division titles and HFA again, which if you haven't noticed is HOW you get to SB's?

Not sure how you can arrive at that conclusion. We just went 10-6 with a mediocre defense. So your solution is to spend more money on the offense and change entirely our offensive philosophy and playcalling..................in order to do what? The exact same thing Pete's doing now, which is get us back to one of the top 2-3 teams in football with another nasty dominant defense, of which he's proven he can do, and IS doing as we speak?

No, don't do that, do a complete 180 Pete and do something you've never tried or feel comfortable with in your 40 year coaching career. Insane.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Make poor use of and misuse are pretty accurate for that last game and other periods of time when he is forced into having the leagues worst passing protection under Carroll. You pay him Rodgers $$, you need to make better use of those skills. IMO Carroll doesn't deserve a $32-34 million QB to begin with.

I know what the word means.

Two things;

1. How can you consider a player's skills "squandered" when he's a top 5 QB, is at the top of the league every year in every statistical category that matters (TD/Int ration, QBR, completion percentage) and if Russell stays healthy will be putting on a gold jacket in about 15 years?

2. How can Russell himself think he's being squandered when all he cares about is winning, and that's all he's done here, win. Where else could his situation possibly be better?

You guys love this narrative, but sorry it doesn't fly in any sense of the word "squandered." Maybe..........just maybe Pete and his coaches know EXACTLY the type of QB Russell is, and are getting the most out of that skill set.

But no, we lost in Dallas and that sets off this false groupthink, when in reality it was just as much on the defense as it was the offense. But there aren't a dozen threads about that. Why? After seeing what the Rams did to the Cowboys, no one's asking why our defense stunk so bad stopping Dallas pedestrian offense with a mediocre QB?

Only you would consider " maybe Pete and his coaches know EXACTLY the type of QB Russell is, and are getting the most out of that skill set" when Wilson has put up with historically poor pass protection and suspect / archaic route concepts.

I'll post the pass protection reminder that went on for 6 years one more time for you. This tells anyone with an once of common sense that Wilson could not reach his full potential. And neither could any other QB.

......and our O-line is still not very good at pass pro. So your solution is to try to do something we're not very good at, pass pro to throw the ball more. Or you're saying to totally revamp our O-line AGAIN with new players who might or might not be any better at pass pro? There's a reason guys like Sweezy and Fluker didn't work out in Tampa and NY, and why Ifedi stunk until this year. They don't pass pro well, but they do runblock very well.

So we finally have a cohesive O-line with all five guys playing well..........and you'd like to switch it up again in order to install some unproven pass heavy playcalling that may or may not result in any better results other than guaranteeing Russell gets hit more and throws more picks because his attempts will be way up?

Brilliant idea Seymour.

 

[Seymour]

Make poor use of and misuse are pretty accurate for that last game and other periods of time when he is forced into having the leagues worst passing protection under Carroll. You pay him Rodgers $$, you need to make better use of those skills. IMO Carroll doesn't deserve a $32-34 million QB to begin with.

I know what the word means.

Two things;

1. How can you consider a player's skills "squandered" when he's a top 5 QB, is at the top of the league every year in every statistical category that matters (TD/Int ration, QBR, completion percentage) and if Russell stays healthy will be putting on a gold jacket in about 15 years?

2. How can Russell himself think he's being squandered when all he cares about is winning, and that's all he's done here, win. Where else could his situation possibly be better?

You guys love this narrative, but sorry it doesn't fly in any sense of the word "squandered." Maybe..........just maybe Pete and his coaches know EXACTLY the type of QB Russell is, and are getting the most out of that skill set.

But no, we lost in Dallas and that sets off this false groupthink, when in reality it was just as much on the defense as it was the offense. But there aren't a dozen threads about that. Why? After seeing what the Rams did to the Cowboys, no one's asking why our defense stunk so bad stopping Dallas pedestrian offense with a mediocre QB?

Only you would consider " maybe Pete and his coaches know EXACTLY the type of QB Russell is, and are getting the most out of that skill set" when Wilson has put up with historically poor pass protection and suspect / archaic route concepts.

I'll post the pass protection reminder that went on for 6 years one more time for you. This tells anyone with an once of common sense that Wilson could not reach his full potential. And neither could any other QB.

......and our O-line is still not very good at pass pro. So your solution is to try to do something we're not very good at, pass pro to throw the ball more. Or you're saying to totally revamp our O-line AGAIN with new players who might or might not be any better at pass pro? There's a reason guys like Sweezy and Fluker didn't work out in Tampa and NY, and why Ifedi stunk until this year. They don't pass pro well, but they do runblock very well.

So we finally have a cohesive O-line with all five guys playing well..........and you'd like to switch it up again in order to install some unproven pass heavy playcalling that may or may not result in any better results other than guaranteeing Russell gets hit more and throws more picks because his attempts will be way up?

Brilliant idea Seymour.

My solution is don't make make it easier for them with run, run, pass on 5 of your 6 3 and outs!!! :177692:

They know when to rush and when to run stuff, and that folks is piss poor coaching. ukeface:

They have to still run the ball, yes, this is not about all passing!! It is about keeping the defense guessing and mixing it up better. The run slows the pass rush and has to continue to be used at a fairly high rate.

We could make a large gain in this area with signing a top 15 guard in FA (+ Fluker if the price is right) or the draft and hoping year 2 under Solari improves more.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

My solution is don't make make it easier for them with run, run, pass on 5 of your 6 3 and outs!!! :177692:

Everyone's admitted this, including Pete, Schotty and Russell. So why do you and other's keep beating this one game dead horse. It's about first downs, get a couple first downs and it opens up the play action and downfield passing. That's what our offense is predicated on. Pete knows he was too predictable trying to establish the run.........but that doesn't mean opening it up and passing = we win. Just as easily could have resulted in turnovers and more stalled drives.

They know when to rush and when to run stuff, and that folks is piss poor coaching. ukeface:

They have to still run the ball, yes, this is not about all passing!! It is about keeping the defense guessing and mixing it up better. The run slows the pass rush and has to continue to be used at a fairly high rate.

We could make a large gain in this area with signing a top 15 guard in FA (+ Fluker if the price is right) or the draft and hoping year 2 under Solari improves more.

I agree, and I said I want to see a more balanced approach and get closer to 50/50 run/pass next year with playcalling, and not be so predictable at times.

But if you and others want to see some sort of wholesale change in offensive philosophy? Better just start rooting for another team, cause it's not happening here.