Why all of the impatiences?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:20 pm
  • There are two different things being discussed here. The underlying debate is about Flynn vs. Wilson, and that colors every other viewpoint including the perception that being patient means sticking with the rookie Wilson and being "impatiences" would be going with Flynn. I suspect that Wilson vs. Flynn is the argument that the OP is really addressing, and not the issue of how pressing the desire to win should be for fans.

    When it comes to Wilson vs. Flynn it makes sense to leave it up to the coaching staff. They have more information and I think that PC is indeed doing his best to win now. The complete rebuild metaphor is misapplied to this team. PC kept many veterans as depth in his first year to give us a better chance to win. He put an injured TJack into a game when CW was struggling. Consider TJack's presence here last year at all as a high floor guy who knew the system. I am not at all worried that Carroll is intentionally sacrificing 2012.

    As for winning now vs. being patient and considering the future? Winning now is a very reasonable desire from a fan viewpoint. Tickets, parking and concessions are expensive. Some of the same people arguing for patience in this thread are the same types who have said they are not going to watch a game on their TV because things weren't going well at the time. When I hear somebody say they wouldn't mind finishing 8-8, all that signifies to me is that they don't very much invested in this season. There is nothing wrong with that but don't expect people with more invested to share your opinions.
    "Check out my 2012 NFL Draft Grades. I just gave the worst grade ever to Seattle." - WalterFootball.com
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2394
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:23 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Nunya wrote:
    If people thought that way, NOBODY would every draft a rookie QB until there was no other choice. A rookie QB needs time to develop. Some of them can come right onto the field and preform very well, but most can't.


    Right most can't, so you agree with me. There's a reason that in the history of the league, only a handful of rookie QB's have performed well right out of college.

    We can talk all day about upside and who gives us a better chance of winning in future years, but you'll never convince me that Wilson gives us the best chance to win now. This is evident by his poor passer rating, inability to score in the red zone and the Hawks #31 rank in passing.


    What evidence have you seen this year that would support the notion that Flynn would be playing better? The problem is, with the Flynn supporters is that their opinions are based on hopes, not any definable production from the preseason or anything else. Please don't bring his 2 (2.5 games total)starts as evidence. Those are irrelevant at this point in time. -- different, schemes, supporting cast, ect. If those 3 games were really an indication of his true ability than he should have won the job easily. He didn't so I consider the Lion's '11 game an outlier. Just as RW Chiefs game was an outlier.

    My take on this is simple. PC has the most comprehensive data on both of these QB's, dating back to OTA's. If anyone was qualified to decide who starts, it would be him. He knows all the factors and has weighed them and determined RW is the best man for the job. It's that simple. I support PC, because I beleive he would start whomever was best regardless of circumstance. In Pete I trust. Now in a few weeks if RW isn't averaging 200- 225 yards a game or is struggling to convert on 3rd down, or turning the ball over alot, I would expect and hope that PC would make a change if he felt that the QB play wasn't up to scratch.

    However, I was very encouraged by what I saw in the Carolina game. I would expect more improvement this week as PC allows the offense to open it up more.
    jlwaters1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2478
    Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:48 pm


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:23 am
  • Scottymojo, I can't quote big posts on my cell but to answer your question it is a simple no, I never trusted this coaching staff regarding the QB position
    So I have never said trust the coach's
    I've seen to many bad decisions by coach's over the years to ever take that stance.

    With Hasselbeck I simply believed he was the better QB just like Flynn right now. The only time I really didn't care was the choice between Tjack and Whity. It was just as bad either way. I do question why Carroll pulled Lynch for the Browns game
    Was he trying to ensure that Jackson looks like the better option?

    Hopefully that helps.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3057
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:44 am
  • RichNhansom wrote:Scottymojo, I can't quote big posts on my cell but to answer your question it is a simple no, I never trusted this coaching staff regarding the QB position
    So I have never said trust the coach's
    I've seen to many bad decisions by coach's over the years to ever take that stance.

    With Hasselbeck I simply believed he was the better QB just like Flynn right now. The only time I really didn't care was the choice between Tjack and Whity. It was just as bad either way. I do question why Carroll pulled Lynch for the Browns game
    Was he trying to ensure that Jackson looks like the better option?

    Hopefully that helps.

    Thanks for clearing that up.
    It still supports my contention that this isn't about Flynn/Wilson, but is about trust in Carroll.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11996
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:33 am
  • I agree, this is the opposite of Jackson vs Whitehurst. We know both of these QB's are much better. It's not even a question of who will be the better QB in the long run, it is (at least to me) the question of are we giving up a possible super bowl run to develop a rookie.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Flynn is the best QB in the world but as good as the rest of the team is even a top 15 QB might be enough and I do believe Flynn has a good shot at that.

    I also one that believes a rookie always benefits from watching for a while before getting thrust onto the field. I also don't believe even if Flynn won a super bowl that Wilson doesn't have a future here. His work ethic will get him his shot and Flynn becomes great trade bait.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3057
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:36 am
  • Other than using the word "impatiences," which isn't even a word unless you are speaking French, I thought you made a great first post Nunya. Spot on with every point.

    I think the reaction is in part because we aren't really used to a situation like this. Pete and John have created progress so fast that we've taken it for granted already. Now it's as if those two aren't creating progress fast enough. Amazing right? A few people that just hoped to have a decent team five years down the road in 2010 are now besides themselves that we are "wasting" a top 3 defense. Notice that I said a few. I don't think they represent most Seahawks fans. I think it's really just a case of a "vocal minority."

    Not that anything is wrong with that. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Me? I'm just going to sit back and enjoy what's coming around the corner. It's going to be glorious. Hell, can you imagine if this was happening in the NFC West from two years ago? We'd be like the Texans of the NFC.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11559
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:45 am
  • What gets to me is the whole "instant gratification" thing. We're Seahawks fans. We're one of the most long suffering fandoms out there. To accuse us of wanting instant gratification is like telling an innocent man who's been behind bars 20 years that he's in a hurry to get out or a 30 year old virgin that he's only interested in sex.

    This team can win this year. We as Seahawks fans know all too well how rarely things come together like this season has and how easily it can all evaporate away. No one understands the vaporous nature of future potential like a Seahawks fan. You grab your chances when they present themselves and they are presenting themselves THIS season. So you take your shot NOW, while you can. The future holds promise, but the future holds unknowns as well. Injuries, bad schedules, upsets, bad bounces and bad refereeing. and that's just scraping the top of the iceberg of things that could rob us of the potential that the future holds. No one even is willing to mention that Wilson, like every rookie QB, could turn out to be a bust. At which point we wasted this golden opportunity.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4950
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:53 am
  • Impatient? We have far too patient.

    This fan base has been subjected to 35 years of mediocrity.

    I think it's time to win.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9895
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:53 am
  • RichNhansom wrote:Scottymojo, I can't quote big posts on my cell but to answer your question it is a simple no, I never trusted this coaching staff regarding the QB position
    So I have never said trust the coach's
    I've seen to many bad decisions by coach's over the years to ever take that stance.

    With Hasselbeck I simply believed he was the better QB just like Flynn right now. The only time I really didn't care was the choice between Tjack and Whity. It was just as bad either way. I do question why Carroll pulled Lynch for the Browns game
    Was he trying to ensure that Jackson looks like the better option?

    Hopefully that helps.


    Why do you not trust this regime on QBs? If Matt Hasselbeck was still here, would you start him over Wilson or Flynn? And before you say "yes", which man I hope you don't, keep in mind that Russell Wilson has a higher 2012 passer rating than Hasselbeck does so far. Wilson also has something Hasselbeck does not: a future in the NFL.

    I see a FO and coach that values the QB position tremendously and is always at work to improve the position, not just at the starting job but at the backup spots as well. I thought before the draft that Russell Wilson was a homerun pick by some team. When that team was the Seahawks, it solidified my opinion that this regime "gets it" when it comes to QBs, too. The Eagles are strongly believed to have badly wanted Wilson too later in the same round. Would anyone dispute Andy Reid's QB credentials?

    And even if they are wrong on both Flynn and Wilson, the truth is that the resources they spent on both combined is roughly the same as what the team has spent on Brandon Mebane. If they felt they had to, they could easily move on to the next option on the table- a loaded 2013 draft class for QBs.
    Last edited by kearly on Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11559
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:55 am
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:What gets to me is the whole "instant gratification" thing. We're Seahawks fans. We're one of the most long suffering fandoms out there. To accuse us of wanting instant gratification is like telling an innocent man who's been behind bars 20 years that he's in a hurry to get out or a 30 year old virgin that he's only interested in sex.


    And this right here is why it is an absolute godsend that fans aren't involved in the running of the team's business. WE may have been suffering for 35 years. This current regime, however, isn't burdened by that. They're not going to be forced into knee-jerk decisions based on an emotional reaction to that history. They inherited a crap team 2.5 years ago and have set about implementing a plan to change the philosophy, culture, and direction of the team. They're not 35 long years into a fruitless quest. They're just over the halfway point in implementing their plan. For them, a QB failing to pan out isn't suddenly a long slog into memories of Mirer, Stouffer, McGwire, etc. It's just a QB failing to pan out, spurring the team to go with "plan B". It doesn't carry the same weight (and therefore, isn't panic-inducing for them).
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8486
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:08 am
  • Scottemojo wrote:
    Sarlacc83 wrote:So, did everything switch? Those who wanted to see Whitehurst (me included) are now onboard with keeping Wilson playing while the ardent supporters of Matt want to see the back up?

    Bizarro world.


    Speaking just for myself, I don't actually find it all that strange. Whitehurst was easily the better QB in the 2011 preseason (Tjack was a disaster). Wilson was easily the better QB in the 2012 preseason. In my case, I was simply supporting the QB who had done more to earn the starting job. When Whitehurst did get his chance in the regular season, boy did he suck. That put things to rest. If Flynn was named the starter, but got hurt and Wilson came in for one game and played like Whitehurst did in Cleveland last year, I promise you that the very next day you wouldn't find a bigger Flynn supporter than me.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11559
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:12 pm
  • We have one of the best defenses Seattle has ever had. The running game is solid. Our rookie QB is having issues, but he really hasn't had a bad game yet....at least not compare to the Seahawks normal fare at QB of late.


    This is exactly why we should not be playing a rookie QB. This team is good enough to win NOW. This is the best team since the Super Bowl season in 2005. We have a QB on the bench who wowed America with his 2 starts and we're starting a short rookie QB who is learning on the job and is no lock to become a future star.
    Fearless Frog
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 12
    Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:02 pm


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:15 pm
  • Fearless Frog wrote:
    We have one of the best defenses Seattle has ever had. The running game is solid. Our rookie QB is having issues, but he really hasn't had a bad game yet....at least not compare to the Seahawks normal fare at QB of late.


    This is exactly why we should not be playing a rookie QB. This team is good enough to win NOW. This is the best team since the Super Bowl season in 2005. We have a QB on the bench who wowed America with his 2 starts and we're starting a short rookie QB who is learning on the job and is no lock to become a future star.


    Yeah let's put in the guy who couldn't win the starting job from a rookie. Good thinking.
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 15335
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:22 pm
  • Zebulon Dak wrote:
    Fearless Frog wrote:
    We have one of the best defenses Seattle has ever had. The running game is solid. Our rookie QB is having issues, but he really hasn't had a bad game yet....at least not compare to the Seahawks normal fare at QB of late.


    This is exactly why we should not be playing a rookie QB. This team is good enough to win NOW. This is the best team since the Super Bowl season in 2005. We have a QB on the bench who wowed America with his 2 starts and we're starting a short rookie QB who is learning on the job and is no lock to become a future star.


    Yeah let's put in the guy who couldn't win the starting job from a rookie. Good thinking.


    So if Wilson continues to be among the very worst passers in football, you continue to unconditionally start him because he "won" the job? Preseason is useless. If it actually meant anything, than Wilson would be some unstoppable dynamo. But it doesn't mean anything and he hasn't looked like an unstoppable dynamo because he is no longer facing 3rd string backups and vanilla defenses. Flynn's 2 starts blow Wilson's entire body of work (preseason and regular season) out of the water.
    Fearless Frog
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 12
    Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:02 pm


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:42 pm
  • Fearless Frog wrote:
    Zebulon Dak wrote:
    Fearless Frog wrote:
    This is exactly why we should not be playing a rookie QB. This team is good enough to win NOW. This is the best team since the Super Bowl season in 2005. We have a QB on the bench who wowed America with his 2 starts and we're starting a short rookie QB who is learning on the job and is no lock to become a future star.


    Yeah let's put in the guy who couldn't win the starting job from a rookie. Good thinking.


    So if Wilson continues to be among the very worst passers in football, you continue to unconditionally start him because he "won" the job? Preseason is useless. If it actually meant anything, than Wilson would be some unstoppable dynamo. But it doesn't mean anything and he hasn't looked like an unstoppable dynamo because he is no longer facing 3rd string backups and vanilla defenses. Flynn's 2 starts blow Wilson's entire body of work (preseason and regular season) out of the water.


    Coach picks the starting QB. Not you, not me. You don't like who he picked? Write him a letter. I'm sure you can be persuasive enough.
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 15335
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:56 pm
  • Coach picks the starting QB. Not you, not me. You don't like who he picked? Write him a letter. I'm sure you can be persuasive enough.


    Obviously this is true but it does not mean the entire fanbase has to willingly shut their eyes and put their hands over their ears and willfully ignore any evidence that Wilson is not getting the job done and Flynn should be starting.
    Fearless Frog
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 12
    Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:02 pm


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 2:22 pm
  • Fearless Frog wrote:
    Coach picks the starting QB. Not you, not me. You don't like who he picked? Write him a letter. I'm sure you can be persuasive enough.


    Obviously this is true but it does not mean the entire fanbase has to willingly shut their eyes and put their hands over their ears and willfully ignore any evidence that Wilson is not getting the job done and Flynn should be starting.


    As far as evidence goes, we're still dealing with a fairly small sample size. Give it some time, doll face.
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 15335
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 2:50 pm
  • The Seattle Seahawks consist of 53 men that play football.
    Status: Active lieutenant in the 12th Man Army
    User avatar
    12thMan1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 723
    Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:19 am


Re: Why all of the impatiences?
Thu Oct 11, 2012 3:51 pm
  • The Radish wrote:Always best to read the forum a bit before posting and you appear to be one of the few that's noticed that. :D

    Welcome to Seahawks.net, glad to have you.

    :les:



    Les, how nice of you not to get impatiences with him.
    User avatar
    morgulon1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3654
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 10:07 am
    Location: Spokane, Wa


Next


It is currently Sat Dec 20, 2014 7:18 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information