Is Wilson generally unhappy with the run-based offense

Rocket · May 21, 2015

I know what he says, but he seems to always say the "right" thing. I'm wondering what he's thinking and what actually motivates him when he's alone staring at the walls.

Is it possible that Russell Carrington Wilson genuinely longs for a pass-happy offense so he can put up gawd-awful gaudy massive passing numbers?? If so, might said desire be manifested by a little invisible to others dude on his shoulder in a red outfit with a horn hoodie and a bifurcated tail whispering HOLD OUT for a pass-happy offense???

SalishHawkFan · May 21, 2015

Is Rocket generally unhappy about the run based offense and is projecting his feelings on Wilson?

Is it possible Rocket secretly longs for a pass happy offense so he can enjoy watching Russell Wilson put up gawd awful gaudy numbers and is projecting that desire onto Russell Wilson?

Is it possible to have yet another offseason thread basesd on pure empty speculation without any backing evidence...a "what if" thread...to remind us just how terribly long the off season is?

Is it possible Russell Wilson got to the center of a tootsie roll pop in only two licks?

The world may never know.

Anthony! · May 21, 2015

Rocket":3r4jjpyx said:
I know what he says, but he seems to always say the "right" thing. I'm wondering what he's thinking and what actually motivates him when he's alone staring at the walls.

Is it possible that Russell Carrington Wilson genuinely longs for a pass-happy offense so he can put up gawd-awful gaudy massive passing numbers?? If so, might said desire be manifested by a little invisible to others dude on his shoulder in a red outfit with a horn hoodie and a bifurcated tail whispering HOLD OUT for a pass-happy offense???

It could be, I mean he must be tired of hearing how its all about the defense and lynch. I mean even a large number of Seahawks fans say that and devalue him. The reality is as long as we are a run first team with Lynch he will never get the credit he deserves. I mean we could be a run first team with 2 back each getting say 600 yards along with Wilson getting 500+ yards and he would get credit. But because it is Lynch and it is 1 back he never will.

vin.couve12 · May 21, 2015

I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

DavidSeven · May 21, 2015

Any response to that question would be 100% pure speculation, which I think is dangerous. I doubt his psychologist or his close friends post here, so how could anyone even begin to guess what drives him in this respect?

Anyway, he chose to play for Wisconsin, which has been one of the NCAA's most dominant "run-based" systems for nearly a decade now. I'm sure he understands the benefits of a run-heavy offense and what that means to his own game. Whether or not he is presently "happy" with it or the food they serve in the VMAC cafeteria is anyone's guess.

Sgt. Largent · May 21, 2015

I'm sure Russell would like to throw it around a little more, but no I don't think he's unhappy in our offense.

Wilson's about as selfless as a QB can be, and seems to only care about winning. So whether that's passing it 45 times a game, or passing it 15 times, I honestly don't think he cares.

Anthony! · May 21, 2015

vin.couve12":308bq2ua said:
I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

You do realize teams that have been pass happy meaning they throw way more than they run have won SBs right?

Tical21 · May 21, 2015

I would bet in an honest moment he would admit that he really likes the safety net it provides. He couldn't dance like he does much more.

vin.couve12 · May 21, 2015

Anthony!":rsinbb7i said:
vin.couve12":rsinbb7i said:

I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

Click to expand...

You do realize teams that have been pass happy meaning they throw way more than they run have won SBs right?

Have won at times, yes. It is not the standard, despite the myth. Just as the aforementioned QBs I mentioned are not the standard. They are the exception AND still didn't win the big one without having some semblance of balance.

Anthony! · May 21, 2015

vin.couve12":2wgr44ay said:
Anthony!":2wgr44ay said:

vin.couve12":2wgr44ay said:

I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

Click to expand...

You do realize teams that have been pass happy meaning they throw way more than they run have won SBs right?

Click to expand...

Have won at times, yes. It is not the standard, despite the myth. Just as the aforementioned QBs I mentioned are not the standard. They are the exception AND still didn't win the big one without having some semblance of balance.

Well lets say if you pass 100 time more than you run you are pass first

Well NE just did it
Ravens 2 years ago
Giants 3 years ago
GB 4 years ago
NO 5 years ago
Giants 7 years ago

So that is 6 of the last 8 I can go on but I think you get the point

kearly · May 21, 2015

I think it is pretty simple. Russell Wilson doesn't care about stats. He cares about winning games and winning championships.

He also wants to get paid handsomely for those wins and championships.

Hawks46 · May 21, 2015

vin.couve12":3uz3zv1o said:
I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

Spot on. Look at all the QBs that have a higher volume passing game, and most of the time, the good ones only win a Superbowl when their defense and/or run game pop into the top 10 in the league.

That starts a different conversation though, one that is a little scary:

If you're paying Wilson 20 mil/year (or more), the temptation is to have him pass more to earn that paycheck. I mean, you're paying the guy all this money, he needs to justify it right ?

The converse is that if you go with a heavy run based offense, coupled with a historically good defense, and hesitate to pay top dollar to the QB position, do you really need a top tier QB to compete for and win a SB ? Once again, the numbers state that a top flight defense, coupled with a top flight run offense can get it done more often than not.

One thing I'm sure of: if Wilson is going to get top money, he has to start having a top money-esque arm and passing attack. He can run the ball for 800 yards a season for only so long. When he slows down a step, he's going to get hit more. I still think he can be elusive and scramble a lot but into his early 30's, the threat of him taking off down field is going to be gone. Can he do it with mostly his arm ?

justafan · May 21, 2015

I am sure every QB has a selfish side but i would bet every QB would answer yes if asked whether he wanted Lynch in his backfield or not.QBs know they cant do it alone

Anthony! · May 21, 2015

Hawks46":2tay199k said:
vin.couve12":2tay199k said:

I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

Click to expand...

Spot on. Look at all the QBs that have a higher volume passing game, and most of the time, the good ones only win a Superbowl when their defense and/or run game pop into the top 10 in the league.

That starts a different conversation though, one that is a little scary:

If you're paying Wilson 20 mil/year (or more), the temptation is to have him pass more to earn that paycheck. I mean, you're paying the guy all this money, he needs to justify it right ?

The converse is that if you go with a heavy run based offense, coupled with a historically good defense, and hesitate to pay top dollar to the QB position, do you really need a top tier QB to compete for and win a SB ? Once again, the numbers state that a top flight defense, coupled with a top flight run offense can get it done more often than not.

One thing I'm sure of: if Wilson is going to get top money, he has to start having a top money-esque arm and passing attack. He can run the ball for 800 yards a season for only so long. When he slows down a step, he's going to get hit more. I still think he can be elusive and scramble a lot but into his early 30's, the threat of him taking off down field is going to be gone. Can he do it with mostly his arm ?

Hate to tell you the facts do not show that having a top Defense and run game without a top QB more often than not wins you a SB. Les just look at the last 10 SB winning QBS

Brady
WIlson
Flacco
E Manning x2
ROdgers
Brees
Roths
P Manning

Hmm seems like 10 top line QBs to me.

You have to go back to SB 37 last time a non top line QB won a SB. In fact in the last 20 years it has only happened 2 times

MontanaHawk05 · May 21, 2015

End.

This.

Offseason.

Hawks46 · May 21, 2015

Anthony!":31xmpg2q said:
Hawks46":31xmpg2q said:

vin.couve12":31xmpg2q said:

I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

Click to expand...

Spot on. Look at all the QBs that have a higher volume passing game, and most of the time, the good ones only win a Superbowl when their defense and/or run game pop into the top 10 in the league.

That starts a different conversation though, one that is a little scary:

If you're paying Wilson 20 mil/year (or more), the temptation is to have him pass more to earn that paycheck. I mean, you're paying the guy all this money, he needs to justify it right ?

The converse is that if you go with a heavy run based offense, coupled with a historically good defense, and hesitate to pay top dollar to the QB position, do you really need a top tier QB to compete for and win a SB ? Once again, the numbers state that a top flight defense, coupled with a top flight run offense can get it done more often than not.

One thing I'm sure of: if Wilson is going to get top money, he has to start having a top money-esque arm and passing attack. He can run the ball for 800 yards a season for only so long. When he slows down a step, he's going to get hit more. I still think he can be elusive and scramble a lot but into his early 30's, the threat of him taking off down field is going to be gone. Can he do it with mostly his arm ?

Click to expand...

Hate to tell you the facts do not show that having a top Defense and run game without a top QB more often than not wins you a SB. Les just look at the last 10 SB winning QBS

Brady
WIlson
Flacco
E Manning x2
ROdgers
Brees
Roths
P Manning

Hmm seems like 10 top line QBs to me.

You have to go back to SB 37 last time a non top line QB won a SB. In fact in the last 20 years it has only happened 2 times

You're only taking one little stat and using it to make your point. For example:

NO, the year they won....yes, they passed more than they ran it, but their run game was in the top 10 in the league, whereas it was ranked 25th the year before. Also, their defense was markedly improved from the year before.

Aaron Rodgers is pretty good, right ? He has a lot more pass attempts than the team has rush attempts, and every year. The one year he won it was the one year he's had a top 10 defense. The passing attempts haven't fluctuated much, but his defense was much better that year.

That's what we're talking about when we say BALANCE. You know, there's actually more than 11 starters on the team....there's actually a DEFENSE. And it can win games.

AbsolutNET · May 21, 2015

I'm sure he likes winning, but what QB wouldn't want to throw more? They'd throw 98% of the time if it was up to them

Anthony! · May 21, 2015

Hawks46":3odq7ctg said:
Anthony!":3odq7ctg said:

Hawks46":3odq7ctg said:

vin.couve12":3odq7ctg said:

I would certainly hope he's not unhappy with it. Unless you have a Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, with or without squishy balls, you don't go pass happy and EVER expect to win a superbowl. And even when you have one of those QBs you still have to have some semblance of balance to get said ring.

If he's unhappy with it, he may as well just shoot himself in the foot with a real gun instead of just figuratively.

Click to expand...

Spot on. Look at all the QBs that have a higher volume passing game, and most of the time, the good ones only win a Superbowl when their defense and/or run game pop into the top 10 in the league.

That starts a different conversation though, one that is a little scary:

If you're paying Wilson 20 mil/year (or more), the temptation is to have him pass more to earn that paycheck. I mean, you're paying the guy all this money, he needs to justify it right ?

The converse is that if you go with a heavy run based offense, coupled with a historically good defense, and hesitate to pay top dollar to the QB position, do you really need a top tier QB to compete for and win a SB ? Once again, the numbers state that a top flight defense, coupled with a top flight run offense can get it done more often than not.

One thing I'm sure of: if Wilson is going to get top money, he has to start having a top money-esque arm and passing attack. He can run the ball for 800 yards a season for only so long. When he slows down a step, he's going to get hit more. I still think he can be elusive and scramble a lot but into his early 30's, the threat of him taking off down field is going to be gone. Can he do it with mostly his arm ?

Click to expand...

Hate to tell you the facts do not show that having a top Defense and run game without a top QB more often than not wins you a SB. Les just look at the last 10 SB winning QBS

Brady
WIlson
Flacco
E Manning x2
ROdgers
Brees
Roths
P Manning

Hmm seems like 10 top line QBs to me.

You have to go back to SB 37 last time a non top line QB won a SB. In fact in the last 20 years it has only happened 2 times

Click to expand...

You're only taking one little stat and using it to make your point. For example:

NO, the year they won....yes, they passed more than they ran it, but their run game was in the top 10 in the league, whereas it was ranked 25th the year before. Also, their defense was markedly improved from the year before.

Aaron Rodgers is pretty good, right ? He has a lot more pass attempts than the team has rush attempts, and every year. The one year he won it was the one year he's had a top 10 defense. The passing attempts haven't fluctuated much, but his defense was much better that year.

That's what we're talking about when we say BALANCE. You know, there's actually more than 11 starters on the team....there's actually a DEFENSE. And it can win games.

The point was pass first offense were they pass more than they run. Now you want to change the criteria fine but that does not change the fact that team with pass first offenses have won SBS a lot.

onanygivensunday · May 21, 2015

Anthony!":2ti02qk3 said:
The point was pass first offense were they pass more than they run. Now you want to change the criteria fine but that does not change the fact that team with pass first offenses have won SBs a lot.

Isn't that just a different way of saying that are very few effective run-first offenses in the league?

Generally thinking, that's a true statement.

Hawks46 · May 21, 2015

onanygivensunday":rubolasy said:
Anthony!":rubolasy said:

The point was pass first offense were they pass more than they run. Now you want to change the criteria fine but that does not change the fact that team with pass first offenses have won SBs a lot.

Click to expand...

Isn't that just a different way of saying that are very few effective run-first offenses in the league?

Generally thinking, that's a true statement.

Technically you're right, as there's much fewer offenses that run more, or even equal to, the amount of times they pass.

I'm not even sure if originally the statement was meant as a balanced offense, or a balanced team, but the old adage that "defense wins championships" is proven true year in and year out. The top offense vs. the top defense in the SB has about a 20% win rate, going back 20 years.

Having a good QB and throwing the ball a lot tends to win a lot of regular season games, thus giving teams an easier chance to get into the playoffs (where anything can happen), but it's not a proven path to get deep into the playoffs or win Superbowls.

It reinforces my original point: if you have a QB you're paying 20mil/year + , you are tempted to put the game in his hands more and justify the salary. Then you want to get him star play makers, and the money tips towards the offensive side of the ball. Then you meet a team in the playoffs that can easily run the ball on your average to poor defense, and it easily negates your high powered offense by keeping it off the field.

Is Wilson generally unhappy with the run-based offense

Active member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Similar threads