If last night was Pet-ball

[SoulfishHawk]

Not a chance in hell.

 

[John63]

Peteball can be played with Ryan Tinnihill.

This is a capped league. Either you find an old elite QB making 15 million per or you take your chances with a Dak type on a rookie deal.

If Pete traded Wilson to the Giants for Sequan, along with a first and second rounder this team would still be 11-5 10-6.

It is based on the math of salary cap and deminiahing returns. Don’t pay a QB 30 million if he is going to throw the ball less than 25 times a game. You can win in the NFL running the ball, just use the strategic advantage of low pass attempts to save money at the QB position.

I can't tell you how much I disagree with this. This offense is SUPPOSED to be predicated on running the ball first and foremost and then using that to be effective passing the ball DOWNFIELD. Russell Wilson is (if not the best) one of the two or three best deep ball passers in the NFL. You think that Ryan Tannehill could have had the same success, throwing for 35 touchdowns, with the limited amount of passing opportunities that Wilson had? You think Tannehill could have made plays outside the pocket when the O Line breaks down the way that Russell does? That's kind of a ridiculous way to think in my opinion.

The 2018 Seahawks would have been 5-11 with Ryan Tannehill behind center instead of Russell Wilson. And we'd have a top ten pick in the draft with a focus on finding somebody to replace Tannehill.

And if Peteball could be played with Ryan Tannehill, then every team would be playing Peteball, because Tannehill's are a dime a dozen in the NFL.

What makes our offense dangerous is the combo of a physical run game AND Russell's explosiveness, accuracy to burn you downfield if you pack the box and his allusiveness.

This is the NFL, you can't be one dimensional, you need a QB that can make plays consistently to win. To think this offense would be anywhere near what it is with an average QB is naive.

Tannehill's are not a dime a dozen.... He isn't a top tier QB for sure, but he isn't a replacement tier QB either, or at least he wasn't before this season. He was just outside the top 10 QB's in the NFL before this season. The dime a dozen QB's are your Fitzpatricks, and Bridgewaters.

HIs career Qb rating is 87. 85 is avg. he is a dime a dozen. FYI Wilsons is 100.3. There are 29 qbs will a higher career Qb rating. His highest season Qb rating was 93. His TD to Int ratio is 1.64 which is the bottom half of active Qbs. Wilsons is 3.11 and you really think He could replace Wilson and we could still win LOL best joke of the year,

FYI You mention Fitzpatrick Lets look Qb rating 81.1 1.3 td-int ratio. So worse the same ballpark so guess what that makes Tannehill a dime a dozen. Now Bridgewater career Qb rating 86 hmmm, 1.26 td/int ratio so again right around Tannehill is. So sorry Tannehill is a dime a dozen, maybe the better of the dime a dozen QBs but still a dime a dozen, and would not have gotten us where we want. And one more thing Tannehill cam in the league same year as Wilson, that means 7 years which is 112 games of which he has played in 88 or 79%. Wilson played in 100% being available matters too.

 

[mrt144]

You don't think you could run this offense with Fitzpatrick?

I can think of it conditionally but to the point where there are so many conditions that it feels like a 'no'.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I can't tell you how much I disagree with this. This offense is SUPPOSED to be predicated on running the ball first and foremost and then using that to be effective passing the ball DOWNFIELD. Russell Wilson is (if not the best) one of the two or three best deep ball passers in the NFL. You think that Ryan Tannehill could have had the same success, throwing for 35 touchdowns, with the limited amount of passing opportunities that Wilson had? You think Tannehill could have made plays outside the pocket when the O Line breaks down the way that Russell does? That's kind of a ridiculous way to think in my opinion.

The 2018 Seahawks would have been 5-11 with Ryan Tannehill behind center instead of Russell Wilson. And we'd have a top ten pick in the draft with a focus on finding somebody to replace Tannehill.

And if Peteball could be played with Ryan Tannehill, then every team would be playing Peteball, because Tannehill's are a dime a dozen in the NFL.

What makes our offense dangerous is the combo of a physical run game AND Russell's explosiveness, accuracy to burn you downfield if you pack the box and his allusiveness.

This is the NFL, you can't be one dimensional, you need a QB that can make plays consistently to win. To think this offense would be anywhere near what it is with an average QB is naive.

Tannehill's are not a dime a dozen.... He isn't a top tier QB for sure, but he isn't a replacement tier QB either, or at least he wasn't before this season. He was just outside the top 10 QB's in the NFL before this season. The dime a dozen QB's are your Fitzpatricks, and Bridgewaters.

HIs career Qb rating is 87. 85 is avg. he is a dime a dozen. FYI Wilsons is 100.3. There are 29 qbs will a higher career Qb rating. His highest season Qb rating was 93. His TD to Int ratio is 1.64 which is the bottom half of active Qbs. Wilsons is 3.11 and you really think He could replace Wilson and we could still win LOL best joke of the year,

FYI You mention Fitzpatrick Lets look Qb rating 81.1 1.3 td-int ratio. So worse the same ballpark so guess what that makes Tannehill a dime a dozen. Now Bridgewater career Qb rating 86 hmmm, 1.26 td/int ratio so again right around Tannehill is. So sorry Tannehill is a dime a dozen, maybe the better of the dime a dozen QBs but still a dime a dozen, and would not have gotten us where we want. And one more thing Tannehill cam in the league same year as Wilson, that means 7 years which is 112 games of which he has played in 88 or 79%. Wilson played in 100% being available matters too.

I'm not saying we replace Wilson with Tannehill, nor am I comparing the two. I'm saying that Tannehill is right above journeyman level. He's played for some really bad Miami teams his whole career, and hasn't had much in the way of support. He's put up multiple 4000 yard seasons, and has gotten pretty close to throwing 30 TDs in a few seasons. That is something that your run of he mill Fitzpatricks, and Teddy Bridgewaters have never been able to accomplish, nor are capable of especially in Miami. He is also a mobile QB, and has had some decent success on the ground.

Tannehill is a cut above your Bridgewaters and Fitzpatricks.

 

[John63]

And if Peteball could be played with Ryan Tannehill, then every team would be playing Peteball, because Tannehill's are a dime a dozen in the NFL.

What makes our offense dangerous is the combo of a physical run game AND Russell's explosiveness, accuracy to burn you downfield if you pack the box and his allusiveness.

This is the NFL, you can't be one dimensional, you need a QB that can make plays consistently to win. To think this offense would be anywhere near what it is with an average QB is naive.

Tannehill's are not a dime a dozen.... He isn't a top tier QB for sure, but he isn't a replacement tier QB either, or at least he wasn't before this season. He was just outside the top 10 QB's in the NFL before this season. The dime a dozen QB's are your Fitzpatricks, and Bridgewaters.

HIs career Qb rating is 87. 85 is avg. he is a dime a dozen. FYI Wilsons is 100.3. There are 29 qbs will a higher career Qb rating. His highest season Qb rating was 93. His TD to Int ratio is 1.64 which is the bottom half of active Qbs. Wilsons is 3.11 and you really think He could replace Wilson and we could still win LOL best joke of the year,

FYI You mention Fitzpatrick Lets look Qb rating 81.1 1.3 td-int ratio. So worse the same ballpark so guess what that makes Tannehill a dime a dozen. Now Bridgewater career Qb rating 86 hmmm, 1.26 td/int ratio so again right around Tannehill is. So sorry Tannehill is a dime a dozen, maybe the better of the dime a dozen QBs but still a dime a dozen, and would not have gotten us where we want. And one more thing Tannehill cam in the league same year as Wilson, that means 7 years which is 112 games of which he has played in 88 or 79%. Wilson played in 100% being available matters too.

I'm not saying we replace Wilson with Tannehill, nor am I comparing the two. I'm saying that Tannehill is right above journeyman level. He's played for some really bad Miami teams his whole career, and hasn't had much in the way of support. He's put up multiple 4000 yard seasons, and has gotten pretty close to throwing 30 TDs in a few seasons. That is something that your run of he mill Fitzpatricks, and Teddy Bridgewaters have never been able to accomplish, nor are capable of especially in Miami. He is also a mobile QB, and has had some decent success on the ground.

Tannehill is a cut above your Bridgewaters and Fitzpatricks.

Fits has thrown for over 30 tds something Tannehill has not. Saying Tann almost threw 30 is at best a stretch the most he ever through was 27 and that was once. Then 24 twice and then 19 or less. As I said Fitz threw for over 30 once, and 23 or more 3 times. and has a better td/int ratio. Also again be available matters, Tann played in 79% of the games he was the designated starter. Teddy 90%, Fitz over 86%. So sorry the facts show Tann to this point in his career is in the same ballpark as Teddy and Fitz. A middle of the road QB will not get us were we need to be.

 

[sdog1981]

Pete got his teams to go 7-9 with Tavaris Jackson as his QB. Remember that.

 

[WarHawks]

And Pete got two superbowl appearances because he had an excellent defense. This extremely predictable run run pass offense is not going to work in the playoffs with the defense and oline we have now, that much is obvious. If having the league leading rushing attack gets you the distinction of being the only wild card team bounced out of the first round, then either strengthen the defense to match, or you're toast against playoff teams.

 

[John63]

Pete got his teams to go 7-9 with Tavaris Jackson as his QB. Remember that.

oh so because of that he is untouchable and you can't criticize him got it. He did a great job then, a bad job in the last game. I am not saying get rid of him, just h needs to adjust sooner.

 

[justafan]

When the narrative is we got outcoached,to me that means the most talented team lost. I see it as Dallas had the better D,the better Oline,the better RB,better special teams and home field advantage.

This team played more talented teams tough the whole year and won many games with heart against better talent. Thats the team this organisation built and got them to buy into the program. Thats great coaching.

IMO our coaching staff and team went in there with the bigger heart and that was about it. I am proud of the way this team pulled together all year and busted ass to accomplish what they did.

 

[mrt144]

When the narrative is we got outcoached,to me that means the most talented team lost. I see it as Dallas had the better D,the better Oline,the better RB,better special teams and home field advantage.

This team played more talented teams tough the whole year and won many games with heart against better talent. Thats the team this organisation built and got them to buy into the program. Thats great coaching.

IMO our coaching staff and team went in there with the bigger heart and that was about it. I am proud of the way this team pulled together all year and busted ass to accomplish what they did.

I don't think anyone will dispute that one of the great aspects of PC et al is what you mentioned vis a vis heart.

On the other hand, it feels like they can't or won't develop the tactical aspects of their game when heart, grit and talent isn't enough. I think the NFL isn't so homogenious in how to build a winning team, especially evidenced by the new entries with fresh faces and some of the old heads doing their thing, so I'm not gonna say Pete doesn't have a winning formula but...this most recent iteration just felt tactically out of its depth at times. Both sides of the ball.

Which could be confused or interpreted for talent gaps and surely some of that is injuries as well but...

Maybe the coaching staff can work on a few things that will give the sensation of a better fighting chance in high leverage situations next season.

I am much more optimistic for next season but I'd like to see a flex of the cognitive muscles by the staff to really work on better situational football.

 

[justafan]

When the narrative is we got outcoached,to me that means the most talented team lost. I see it as Dallas had the better D,the better Oline,the better RB,better special teams and home field advantage.

This team played more talented teams tough the whole year and won many games with heart against better talent. Thats the team this organisation built and got them to buy into the program. Thats great coaching.

IMO our coaching staff and team went in there with the bigger heart and that was about it. I am proud of the way this team pulled together all year and busted ass to accomplish what they did.

I don't think anyone will dispute that one of the great aspects of PC et al is what you mentioned vis a vis heart.

On the other hand, it feels like they can't or won't develop the tactical aspects of their game when heart, grit and talent isn't enough. I think the NFL isn't so homogenious in how to build a winning team, especially evidenced by the new entries with fresh faces and some of the old heads doing their thing, so I'm not gonna say Pete doesn't have a winning formula but...this most recent iteration just felt tactically out of its depth at times. Both sides of the ball.

Which could be confused or interpreted for talent gaps and surely some of that is injuries as well but...

Maybe the coaching staff can work on a few things that will give the sensation of a better fighting chance in high leverage situations next season.

I am much more optimistic for next season but I'd like to see a flex of the cognitive muscles by the staff to really work on better situational football.

But Dallas beat us playing Pete ball. A talented tougher physical D,a more talented tougher physical Oline,a QB that makes enough big plays and running the ball down our throat.26 carries 5.3 yrds. Those are combinations that win in the NFL.

 

[PateratoWilson]

:snack:

 

[John63]

When the narrative is we got outcoached,to me that means the most talented team lost. I see it as Dallas had the better D,the better Oline,the better RB,better special teams and home field advantage.

This team played more talented teams tough the whole year and won many games with heart against better talent. Thats the team this organisation built and got them to buy into the program. Thats great coaching.

IMO our coaching staff and team went in there with the bigger heart and that was about it. I am proud of the way this team pulled together all year and busted ass to accomplish what they did.

So again the coaches are untouchable to you, despite the facts and the HC himself saying otherwise

 

[John63]

When the narrative is we got outcoached,to me that means the most talented team lost. I see it as Dallas had the better D,the better Oline,the better RB,better special teams and home field advantage.

This team played more talented teams tough the whole year and won many games with heart against better talent. Thats the team this organisation built and got them to buy into the program. Thats great coaching.

IMO our coaching staff and team went in there with the bigger heart and that was about it. I am proud of the way this team pulled together all year and busted ass to accomplish what they did.

I don't think anyone will dispute that one of the great aspects of PC et al is what you mentioned vis a vis heart.

On the other hand, it feels like they can't or won't develop the tactical aspects of their game when heart, grit and talent isn't enough. I think the NFL isn't so homogenious in how to build a winning team, especially evidenced by the new entries with fresh faces and some of the old heads doing their thing, so I'm not gonna say Pete doesn't have a winning formula but...this most recent iteration just felt tactically out of its depth at times. Both sides of the ball.

Which could be confused or interpreted for talent gaps and surely some of that is injuries as well but...

Maybe the coaching staff can work on a few things that will give the sensation of a better fighting chance in high leverage situations next season.

I am much more optimistic for next season but I'd like to see a flex of the cognitive muscles by the staff to really work on better situational football.

But Dallas beat us playing Pete ball. A talented tougher physical D,a more talented tougher physical Oline,a QB that makes enough big plays and running the ball down our throat.26 carries 5.3 yrds. Those are combinations that win in the NFL.

they can win in the NFL but they did something we did not do. They let their QB play from the beginning. Let's look again at our first drive

run, run, 3rd and long punt

Lets look at theirs
run, pass, run, pass, pass, run, pass, run, pass FG So Dak got more passes in 1 series than Wilson got in 3. In fact Dak got half the # of passes in the 1st series of the game than Wilson did the whole 1st half.

In fact, by their 2nd series he had thrown more than Wilson and still got 4 more series

Teh definition of stupidity is trying the same thing over and over again expecting different results. After 3 series that had a pattern of run, run, long 3rd, punt most HC would have said let's mix it up more and keep it mixed. Here is the kicker the next 3 possessions we mixed it up and either scored or had a missed FG. Then came Halftime, I thought Okay they got to have it figured out mix in the pass more and early in downs. Nope run, run 3rd and long punt. That is an example of bad play calling and stupidity going back to what was not working instead of staying with what was working. Also, the 2 Fgs we made, we had to take because our run game either failed twice on first and 2nd down getting nothing or lost yards. In other words, we got down there passing but went back to what was not working. LIke I said PC himself already said they should have thrown more, so he knows

 

[Seymour]

Pete got his teams to go 7-9 with Tavaris Jackson as his QB. Remember that.

That is a pretty good point. Nahhh. :twisted:

 

[misfit]

Pete got his teams to go 7-9 with Tavaris Jackson as his QB. Remember that.

With the LOB and Lynch. So Russ was the difference.

Remember that

 

[Smellyman]

Pete got his teams to go 7-9 with Tavaris Jackson as his QB. Remember that.

With the LOB and Lynch. So Russ was the difference.

Remember that

RW has had to put on the superman cape so many times to will the team to victory. No other QBs could pull those rabbits out of the hat.

It would be nice if they tried to win in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd qtr once in a while.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Tannehill's are not a dime a dozen.... He isn't a top tier QB for sure, but he isn't a replacement tier QB either, or at least he wasn't before this season. He was just outside the top 10 QB's in the NFL before this season. The dime a dozen QB's are your Fitzpatricks, and Bridgewaters.

HIs career Qb rating is 87. 85 is avg. he is a dime a dozen. FYI Wilsons is 100.3. There are 29 qbs will a higher career Qb rating. His highest season Qb rating was 93. His TD to Int ratio is 1.64 which is the bottom half of active Qbs. Wilsons is 3.11 and you really think He could replace Wilson and we could still win LOL best joke of the year,

FYI You mention Fitzpatrick Lets look Qb rating 81.1 1.3 td-int ratio. So worse the same ballpark so guess what that makes Tannehill a dime a dozen. Now Bridgewater career Qb rating 86 hmmm, 1.26 td/int ratio so again right around Tannehill is. So sorry Tannehill is a dime a dozen, maybe the better of the dime a dozen QBs but still a dime a dozen, and would not have gotten us where we want. And one more thing Tannehill cam in the league same year as Wilson, that means 7 years which is 112 games of which he has played in 88 or 79%. Wilson played in 100% being available matters too.

I'm not saying we replace Wilson with Tannehill, nor am I comparing the two. I'm saying that Tannehill is right above journeyman level. He's played for some really bad Miami teams his whole career, and hasn't had much in the way of support. He's put up multiple 4000 yard seasons, and has gotten pretty close to throwing 30 TDs in a few seasons. That is something that your run of he mill Fitzpatricks, and Teddy Bridgewaters have never been able to accomplish, nor are capable of especially in Miami. He is also a mobile QB, and has had some decent success on the ground.

Tannehill is a cut above your Bridgewaters and Fitzpatricks.

Fits has thrown for over 30 tds something Tannehill has not. Saying Tann almost threw 30 is at best a stretch the most he ever through was 27 and that was once. Then 24 twice and then 19 or less. As I said Fitz threw for over 30 once, and 23 or more 3 times. and has a better td/int ratio. Also again be available matters, Tann played in 79% of the games he was the designated starter. Teddy 90%, Fitz over 86%. So sorry the facts show Tann to this point in his career is in the same ballpark as Teddy and Fitz. A middle of the road QB will not get us were we need to be.

My bad, just looked at Fitzpatricks stats, he ain't so bad, one year was shockingly good.

A middle of the road QB will not get us where we need to be, but I'm not so sure a Russell Wilson will either. I say this not as a slight to Wilson, but rather to the cost of Wilson when paired with this offensive scheme.

 

[John63]

My bad, just looked at Fitzpatricks stats, he ain't so bad, one year was shockingly good.

A middle of the road QB will not get us where we need to be, but I'm not so sure a Russell Wilson will either. I say this not as a slight to Wilson, but rather to the cost of Wilson when paired with this offensive scheme.

NP on fitz. On the 2nd part. I went back and forth on it. I even said it in a thread on this forum. Then I went and relooked at the games this season, and our SB season. And in at least 5 games or more in both seasons there were plays, and throws that Wilson made that were essential to our winning, that only a small handful of QBs can make, all ouur top QBs and get paid. So unless we get lightning in a bottle again we need Wilson and those 40 or so plays a year that only a very few can do. With him we are perennial playoff team who if things go right can win it all. Without him we are one of a lot of teams that are or have been looking for that QB. So the question becomes do we have a better chance of getting that QB in the draft, or of getting a DB, LB, and or Olineman in the draft or FA. The history says DB, LB, or olineman.

 

[mrt144]

Can Pete-ball work with a lower cost QB and money spent on other positions?

Is it wise to spend 15% of your team's salary cap on a player that will only be asked to throw 25 times a game?

Yes, we already know the answer because we went to two SB's with a cheap QB. But we also had an all time elite defense. So if you like that scenario, you better hope Pete can build another elite defense like the 2013-2015 to make up for your new QB being less productive and explosive than Russell is now in his prime.

I'm more for paying Russell and not having to try and assemble another all time elite defense. I'd rather it be a VERY good defense and a VERY good offense that can pound the rock and make explosive plays with a top 5 QB in his prime..........and I think that's where we're headed in the next 2-3 years.

Just weren't there yet this year.

A cheap QB alone or a cheap QB who also happens to be the best QB to ever play for the Hawks?