Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:18 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 4272
Week 13 power rankings are out and Clayton has this to say:

Quote:
Andrew Luck might go down as the greatest rookie quarterback in NFL history. (Clayton)


And adding insult to injury, they've got the crap Colts ranked ahead of the Hawks.

_________________
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."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:21 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:12 pm
Posts: 2081
Colts are 8-4. Can't say that's not a good reason to rank them ahead of the Hawks.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:22 pm 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:03 pm
Posts: 445
Location: Mindianapolis, Idaho
It's okay. It really is.

_________________
'The bevell is in the details.' -BFS


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:22 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm
Posts: 3409
Colts were the worst team in football last year and Luck has positioned them to get a playoff spot... Its not really unheard of to say that. The man has done a unbelievable job with the limited supplies he has.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:23 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Online

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:12 pm
Posts: 1401
Location: Seattle (From Spokane)
jkitsune wrote:
Colts are 8-4. Can't say that's not a good reason to rank them ahead of the Hawks.

I haven't looked at their schedule, but someone said they've mostly beaten crappy teams.

But, then again, we've mostly lost to crappy teams, haha.

_________________
Tru2RedNGold25 wrote:
Us as Niners fan have every right to rep Niners all day everyday when we have the hardware to back it up do can u guys say that???


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:24 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:04 pm
Posts: 807
Location: Behind you
therealjohncarlson wrote:
Colts were the worst team in football last year and Luck has positioned them to get a playoff spot... Its not really unheard of to say that. The man has done a unbelievable job with the limited supplies he has.


This is false. This team was not the worst in football last year. This was a team that intentionally lost games. Sticking painter throughout the year was an obvious sign that they had no intention of going anywhere that year.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:36 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm
Posts: 3409
KitsapHawk wrote:
therealjohncarlson wrote:
Colts were the worst team in football last year and Luck has positioned them to get a playoff spot... Its not really unheard of to say that. The man has done a unbelievable job with the limited supplies he has.


This is false. This team was not the worst in football last year. This was a team that intentionally lost games. Sticking painter throughout the year was an obvious sign that they had no intention of going anywhere that year.


OK... splitting hairs. They were still really bad.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:36 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm
Posts: 1937
KitsapHawk wrote:
therealjohncarlson wrote:
Colts were the worst team in football last year and Luck has positioned them to get a playoff spot... Its not really unheard of to say that. The man has done a unbelievable job with the limited supplies he has.


This is false. This team was not the worst in football last year. This was a team that intentionally lost games. Sticking painter throughout the year was an obvious sign that they had no intention of going anywhere that year.



Thank you! I get so sick of hearing about how great Luck is because of them being 8-4 this season and so horrible last season while those same people blatantly overlook the fact that the Colts threw their season away so they could draft Luck. They were not even the worst team last season.

_________________
I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:37 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 5209
Location: Battle Ground, Washington
razgriz737 wrote:
jkitsune wrote:
Colts are 8-4. Can't say that's not a good reason to rank them ahead of the Hawks.

I haven't looked at their schedule, but someone said they've mostly beaten crappy teams.

But, then again, we've mostly lost to crappy teams, haha.


lol great point my friend. Only on the road though, at least. And all games have been close.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:44 pm 
* Master Chief *
* Master Chief *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
Posts: 7408
Location: CVN-68
For the life of me, I can't understand how people get excited about rankings.

Truly....who cares??

The only "ranking" that matters is who grabs the Lombardi and finishes #1. The rest is .... well ...

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

Image

"I will be thrilled with 10 wins.... If we win 14 games, I will tattoo my nuts green and blue!" --13thMan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:45 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:51 am
Posts: 662
Location: Auburn, Wa
The greatest rookie quarterback of all time? He's not even the greatest of this season!

He hasn't distanced himself from Russell Wilson or RG3 at all, and if I had to crown someone as the greatest rookie ever it would probably be RG3. Followed by Wilson, then Manning. Luck would definitely be on there... but not at the top.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:48 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7721
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
KitsapHawk wrote:
therealjohncarlson wrote:
Colts were the worst team in football last year and Luck has positioned them to get a playoff spot... Its not really unheard of to say that. The man has done a unbelievable job with the limited supplies he has.


This is false. This team was not the worst in football last year. This was a team that intentionally lost games. Sticking painter throughout the year was an obvious sign that they had no intention of going anywhere that year.



Thank you! I get so sick of hearing about how great Luck is because of them being 8-4 this season and so horrible last season while those same people blatantly overlook the fact that the Colts threw their season away so they could draft Luck. They were not even the worst team last season.


Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:

_________________
Image

Super Bowl XLVIII Champions


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:50 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm
Posts: 4272
FlyingGreg wrote:
For the life of me, I can't understand how people get excited about rankings.

Truly....who cares??

The only "ranking" that matters is who grabs the Lombardi and finishes #1. The rest is .... well ...

I'm just sick of the overblown Luck hyperbole. When even Clayton is falling for the hype, that gets annoying.

_________________
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."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:54 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 5209
Location: Battle Ground, Washington
Maybe it was kinda like what Whiz is doing with Lindley right now? Cause Lindley sucks, and Painter sucked. connection????


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:56 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Online

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:12 pm
Posts: 1401
Location: Seattle (From Spokane)
SilNWest wrote:
The greatest rookie quarterback of all time? He's not even the greatest of this season!

He hasn't distanced himself from Russell Wilson or RG3 at all, and if I had to crown someone as the greatest rookie ever it would probably be RG3. Followed by Wilson, then Manning. Luck would definitely be on there... but not at the top.

Agree with you there. I'll pretend RW is out of the running so my homerism doesn't factor into it, and I would rank RGIII ahead of Luck with no hesitation.

I understand that DangeRuss will most likely never be a "superstar" or whatever because he plays for Seattle, and I think this rookie class outstanding, but the over-glorification of Luck and RGIII just gets old.

Whatever. I'm just glad instead of "Wilson vs. Flynn" we can now have "Wilson vs. other really good rookies".

_________________
Tru2RedNGold25 wrote:
Us as Niners fan have every right to rep Niners all day everyday when we have the hardware to back it up do can u guys say that???


Last edited by razgriz737 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:00 pm 
*SILVER SUPPORTER*
*SILVER SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:16 pm
Posts: 3519
Location: Huntsville, Al
volsunghawk wrote:
Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:


Hey, quit bringing facts into this, it's uncalled for.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:07 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:08 pm
Posts: 904
Also too, also, also too.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:17 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:32 am
Posts: 1453
Location: Victoria BC
jkitsune wrote:
Colts are 8-4. Can't say that's not a good reason to rank them ahead of the Hawks.

welllllll gp look at their record and who they beat and where. I think thy have only played 2 maybe 3 games with winning teams

_________________
Seahawks + PC/JS + Russell Wilson = Superbowl XLVIII +


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:24 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm
Posts: 3181
And we've lost 3 games to teams with losing records, as stated above. What's the point ?

Oh by the way, we're also 0-3 in the division. Maybe that's a reason to rank us down a bit too.

That's the stat that really pisses me off. 0-fer in division.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:37 pm 
* The Doc *
* The Doc *
User avatar
Online

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8871
Location: Covington, Washington
Not sure if the OP is aware that Clayton may be located in the Seattle/Tacoma area but he originally cut his teeth writing about/following the Pittsburgh Steelers. He will tell you that he was a Steelers fan when he cheered for a team. He is just like Sando. They live in the region but hold no allegiance to the Seahawks.

He hasn't been a beat writer for the Seahawks in decades. If Claire Farnsworth or Tony Ventrella are saying the same thing, then one might feel betrayed.

Clayton isn't in the bag for the Seahawks. He just has a local show on the weekend so JB and Irish Minky can talk about god knows what.

_________________
Image
Leon Washington 2010-2012 Red Bryant 2008-2013 Chris Clemons 2010-2013 Golden Tate 2010-2013
Brandon Browner 2011-2013 Breno Giacomini 2011-2013 - Gone but not forgotten.
Wilson will sign for $18M+ (3/4/2014)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:40 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:16 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: Hamilton
Their strength of victory is .396. They are in no way better than the Hawks by any measure other than wins. But if you just rank teams by wins in the power rankings - what is the point of them in the first place?

Hawks are a top 5 team this year - without a doubt. We have one of the hardest schedules and the second best strength of victory other than the Eagles.

_________________
Driver of the PC/JS Super Bowl wagon since 2010
Image
Sherman looks like a ballet master in grand jeté –
a trash-talking, dreadlocked Baryshnikov suspended
impossibly above the turf – pro football's paean to
wanton human destruction slips into the sublime.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:42 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:16 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: Hamilton
Just to add - the Luck comment is a joke. He is the third best rookie QB this year. Behind both RGIII and Wilson.

_________________
Driver of the PC/JS Super Bowl wagon since 2010
Image
Sherman looks like a ballet master in grand jeté –
a trash-talking, dreadlocked Baryshnikov suspended
impossibly above the turf – pro football's paean to
wanton human destruction slips into the sublime.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:45 pm 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11102
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
taz291819 wrote:
volsunghawk wrote:
Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:


Hey, quit bringing facts into this, it's uncalled for.


I don't necessarily think it is was intentional (because you've right, it cost Polian and Coach Wassisname their jobs) but as Mike Salk pointed out, there was CLEARLY no plan B to Payton manning. Seriously, Charlie Whitehurst or Seneca Wallace would have been a MASSIVE upgrade over the people they rolled out as starting qb's last year and that is very sad. There was no way in he'll they were winning anything last year regardless of the supporting cast (which wasn't that awful). They'd have done better with a pylon playing quarterback.

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:56 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am
Posts: 6410
CANHawk wrote:
taz291819 wrote:
volsunghawk wrote:
Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:


Hey, quit bringing facts into this, it's uncalled for.


I don't necessarily think it is was intentional (because you've right, it cost Polian and Coach Wassisname their jobs) but as Mike Salk pointed out, there was CLEARLY no plan B to Payton manning. Seriously, Charlie Whitehurst or Seneca Wallace would have been a MASSIVE upgrade over the people they rolled out as starting qb's last year and that is very sad. There was no way in he'll they were winning anything last year regardless of the supporting cast (which wasn't that awful). They'd have done better with a pylon playing quarterback.


Reported for racism.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:00 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:52 pm
Posts: 1937
volsunghawk wrote:
CurryStopstheRuns wrote:
KitsapHawk wrote:
This is false. This team was not the worst in football last year. This was a team that intentionally lost games. Sticking painter throughout the year was an obvious sign that they had no intention of going anywhere that year.



Thank you! I get so sick of hearing about how great Luck is because of them being 8-4 this season and so horrible last season while those same people blatantly overlook the fact that the Colts threw their season away so they could draft Luck. They were not even the worst team last season.


Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:


Yeah, I think the owner directed the coach to play Painter knowing that he gave them the worst possible chance to win. It was likely under the guise of, "develop him this year so we know what we have for the future." Except, they already knew what they had in Painter.

_________________
I am a firm believer in luck, and I found that the harder I work the more I have of it.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:01 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm
Posts: 3409
-The Glove- wrote:
CANHawk wrote:

I don't necessarily think it is was intentional (because you've right, it cost Polian and Coach Wassisname their jobs) but as Mike Salk pointed out, there was CLEARLY no plan B to Payton manning. Seriously, Charlie Whitehurst or Seneca Wallace would have been a MASSIVE upgrade over the people they rolled out as starting qb's last year and that is very sad. There was no way in he'll they were winning anything last year regardless of the supporting cast (which wasn't that awful). They'd have done better with a pylon playing quarterback.


Reported for racism.


Charlie's black?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:05 pm 
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
*TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 6:14 pm
Posts: 1733
SalishHawkFan wrote:
Week 13 power rankings are out and Clayton has this to say:

Quote:
Andrew Luck might go down as the greatest rookie quarterback in NFL history. (Clayton)


And adding insult to injury, they've got the crap Colts ranked ahead of the Hawks.

NO WAY! NO...WAY!!!!!!

Oh my God! What is going on here?! Hasn't he ever heard of Russell Wilson?? RUSSELL WILSON!?!?

I have never felt outrage this deep and violent! Damn it! I just punched my son! Clayton you are a dead man!!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:11 pm 
NET Starter
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:50 am
Posts: 396
I'm as big a Russell Wilson fan as anyone, and I really enjoy watching RGIII, but to denigrate what Andrew Luck is doing is ridiculous. Do you realize he's on track for one of the top 10 passing yard seasons in NFL history...with an outside shot at sneaking in the top 5?

He's not perfect, but he (along with RW and RGIII) is amazing, and when a rookie throws for 4500+ in a season, the hyperbole is to be expected.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:18 pm 
*Host of .NET Awards*
User avatar
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:51 pm
Posts: 8950
Location: With a white girl
ESPN also has the Bears ahead of us in the power rankings. So much for rankings being based on who would beat who on a neutral field when we just spanked the Bears at their house.

_________________
Legal Notice: Only a very small percentage of the things I do and say can be taken seriously. If ever.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:23 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 5209
Location: Battle Ground, Washington
drrew wrote:
I'm as big a Russell Wilson fan as anyone, and I really enjoy watching RGIII, but to denigrate what Andrew Luck is doing is ridiculous. Do you realize he's on track for one of the top 10 passing yard seasons in NFL history...with an outside shot at sneaking in the top 5?

He's not perfect, but he (along with RW and RGIII) is amazing, and when a rookie throws for 4500+ in a season, the hyperbole is to be expected.


Don't mean to burst your bubble, but passing yards are highly overrated. Highly.

If they really mattered a whole bunch, Matt Stafford would have won a few SB's, and Troy Aikman would be a giant bust.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:30 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8836
Location: Granite Falls, WA
The Colts arnt that good. Wait till next year when the schedule is not so generous to them.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:43 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 5209
Location: Battle Ground, Washington
Tech Worlds wrote:
The Colts arnt that good. Wait till next year when the schedule is not so generous to them.


Yeah, they have a really good record in close games too at 7-1. I expect that to drop soon.

I really can't wait till our schedule is filled with horrible teams (AKA Falcons). That is when we will get a perfect/near perfect record.

It's just too dang hard when you actually play good teams. Lol.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:50 am 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 440
Location: United Kingdom
Watch Wilson kick ass and lead us to the Lombardi, with an 80 yard drive in the final seconds of the game, intentionally leaving no time on the clock for our defense to balls it up. Then they'll change their tune.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:10 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm
Posts: 2269
volsunghawk wrote:
CurryStopstheRuns wrote:

Thank you! I get so sick of hearing about how great Luck is because of them being 8-4 this season and so horrible last season while those same people blatantly overlook the fact that the Colts threw their season away so they could draft Luck. They were not even the worst team last season.


Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:


I think they were nudged in that direction by the owner. And I think the players had it in the back of their minds too.
Take the game against Detroit on Sunday. If the Lions took the field with 2.30 left last year and the Colts only had 2 time outs, do you think the defense would have stepped up and made the stop with enough time to give Painter a chance (albeit one he was unlikely to convert) to win?
No way.
I don't care how good your QB is, you don't go from a 10-6 team to a team that flat out isn't competitive in one off-season when he gets injured. If the talent around Manning was that bad and he made them competitive, then going to a team with the talent the Broncos have should result in a 19-0 season - I mean, Luck is 2 games away from matching the 10-6 result that Manning had in 2010, and only one game behind him in the AFC right now. Basically we're saying the talent of the Colts was SO bad and still IS SO bad that Luck must be a better QB than Peyton Manning.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:20 am 
* Mr Random Thought *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am
Posts: 9839
volsunghawk wrote:
Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:


TBH, I have my suspicions about the Colts that season. Bill Polian was one of the premiere GMs in the game- it's not unthinkable that he could have believed himself capable of surviving one 2-14 season after a decade of playoff berths. The head coach wasn't very well established and always stuck me as a stopgap similar to Romeo Crennel in KC. When Kyle Orton became available that season Indy didn't even flinch, despite the fact that Painter was having the worst season by a QB since the QBs Seattle threw out there in 1992. If we are to believe that they were more about saving their jobs than jobbing for a draft pick, then there is no explaining their insistence of sticking with Painter when an abundance of superior options were available. If they grab Orton, then they would probably finish 5-11 or 6-10, and Polian probably keeps his job. And Manning stays in Indy (he's still a very good QB).

There were also some really, really bad coaching decisions during some of their close losses that honest to god felt like self-sabotage too.

Also, it wasn't until they had essentially secured the #1 pick before they won their first game. Once they had the pick all but locked up, they actually won 2 straight games before losing the finale.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:59 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7721
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
themunn wrote:
volsunghawk wrote:
CurryStopstheRuns wrote:

Thank you! I get so sick of hearing about how great Luck is because of them being 8-4 this season and so horrible last season while those same people blatantly overlook the fact that the Colts threw their season away so they could draft Luck. They were not even the worst team last season.


Yup, the Colts coaches instructed their players to throw the season so they could get Luck. Those coaches are probably really enjoying coaching him.

What? They were all fired?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' front office that came up with the plan and forced the coaches and players to go along with it. Good job, front office.

What? They were all fired, too?

Oh, then it must have been the Colts' ownership that convinced the front office, the coaching staff, and the players to all go against everything they work for each season and throw games so they could get Luck for the team and kiss their jobs goodbye as a result.

Yeah, that makes total sense. :roll:


I think they were nudged in that direction by the owner. And I think the players had it in the back of their minds too.
Take the game against Detroit on Sunday. If the Lions took the field with 2.30 left last year and the Colts only had 2 time outs, do you think the defense would have stepped up and made the stop with enough time to give Painter a chance (albeit one he was unlikely to convert) to win?
No way.
I don't care how good your QB is, you don't go from a 10-6 team to a team that flat out isn't competitive in one off-season when he gets injured. If the talent around Manning was that bad and he made them competitive, then going to a team with the talent the Broncos have should result in a 19-0 season - I mean, Luck is 2 games away from matching the 10-6 result that Manning had in 2010, and only one game behind him in the AFC right now. Basically we're saying the talent of the Colts was SO bad and still IS SO bad that Luck must be a better QB than Peyton Manning.


First off, yes, Manning is THAT good. And Polian built that Colts team - the ENTIRE team philosophy - off of what Manning brought to the table. That Indy defense was never built to force stops and come from behind. It was built for speed and on the premise that Manning and his offense would put the other team in a hole. And since Manning had only ever missed one SNAP to injury in his career, it was a gamble that paid off for years.

When Manning was finally unavailable, the whole thing fell apart. Polian deserved the lion's share of the blame for failing to build a more flexible roster, but the coaching staff deserves some as well. Caldwell was never a HC in anything but name. Manning still ran things there. So the team lost essentially its key player AND its leadership in one fell swoop.

For the record, the Broncos are now 9-3, and it's a legit winning record - not the smoke and mirrors they had last season with Tebow. And that's after he recovered from four neck/spinal surgeries. No, they're not on pace for 19-0, but they've won 7 in a row and Manning is playing dominant football. That's what he's done his whole career, and he'll probably do it for at least a handful more years.

As for Luck, the Colts are benefiting from an easier schedule than they normally play, better coaching (Arians is a good QB developer), and the added emotional kick they get from playing for their cancer-stricken HC. If you think that the only new thing on the Colts is Luck, then you haven't been paying attention.

My wife is from Indiana, and I am surrounded by Colts fans every holiday when we visit. I've paid pretty close attention to the Colts franchise over the years, and I'll tell you right now that your conspiracy theory is ridiculously off base. Polian wouldn't have gone for it in any way because it cost his kid a job and made both of them look incompetent.

Additionally, you remember that complete lack of quality QBs that led to us trading for Whitehurst and signing Jackson the last couple of years? That's one big reason the Colts didn't have a suitable backup available other than Curtis Painter and Dan Orlovsky. They've been drafting low for a decade and never had a shot at a guy to develop behind Manning. With Manning in the house, they were perpetually in "win now" mode, so the future always took a back seat to reloading the offense and patching up the D.

_________________
Image

Super Bowl XLVIII Champions


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:16 am 
*Scott of Smacksville*
*Scott of Smacksville*
User avatar
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 10062
The Colts last year are a difficult team to describe as tanking, because there is so much evidence on both sides. But the truth is Manning hid a ton of flaws on that team, just like Luck is hiding a ton of flaws on that team. There is a lot of pro Russell Wilson jealousy of the attention Luck is getting, but that is statistical hooey. Luck puts pressure on opposing offenses before the first snap. He is a running threat in the red zone. Yeah, a lot of the hype is about his upside, but that #1 tag is there for his whole life, and he is carrying the weight well. Just ask Alex Smith how heavy that tag can be. Yes, he doesn't have to earn the hype as much as Wilson, but the failures won't weigh as heavy for Wilson either.

It isn't just the media. The teams we beat seem genuinely surprised when Russell does his thing. Ex Players who are in the media still doubt the little guy. And for the next year or two, I still expect opposing DC's to think stopping Seattle's run game and making Russell beat them will be the way to go.

Also, something nobody has mentioned, and it will sound stupid, but damn near everyone is playing fantasy football these days. Russell isn't a big yards guy, he doesn't post 4 or 5 touchdown games. It isn't all of the reason he is still an afterthought, but it is part of the equation.

Anyway, Eff em. Our players have their leader, I don't think there is one player on this squad isn't a believer anymore. I don't know if we could say that just one month ago. And that is all that matters.

_________________
SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:26 am 
* Gangnameister *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 11102
Location: PoCompton, BC Canada
My comments were insensitive. I apologize to pylons everywhere.

_________________
I <3 Nunchucks


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:22 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Online

Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:39 pm
Posts: 1599
Dan Marino was the best rookie qb of all time.

Luck has been good but nowhere near as good as Marino. Marino was favored to win the SuperBowl his rookie season and was destroying every secondary in the NFL. He was the first passing machine, the prototype big-yardage QB that would lead teams to start developing guys like Manning, Brees, Rodgers, etc. Marino is the reason scouts started looking for cannon arms. Before him, a QBs job was to hand the ball off, basically. A 2000 yard season was unheard of. Marino is the one that blew that whole system up and created the 3000 yard watermark, as a rookie.

Its just that America has no cultural memory. Anything that happened 5+ years ago is forgotten, especially in the NFL.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:13 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:18 pm
Posts: 1443
hawksfan515 wrote:
Maybe it was kinda like what Whiz is doing with Lindley right now? Cause Lindley sucks, and Painter sucked. connection????


Poor Whiz... Rod Graves destroyed Whiz's chances of succeeding in AZ.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Et tu Clayton? Really?
 Post Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:28 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 12:56 pm
Posts: 325
HansGruber wrote:
Dan Marino was the best rookie qb of all time.


Thank you. Earlier in the thread it was stated that both RGIII and Wilson in their incomplete seasons are ranked higher than any rookie ever. Dan Marino's team finished 12-4, he put up good numbers, and he did it in an era where you didn't run spread offense and pass like nuts because the rules let the DBs maul your receivers and the front seven could hit you. RGIII, Wilson, and Luck might not really have a good full season as Cam Newton did last year.

I hear similar things about our current and last President. I've heard people state that one or other is the "worst ever" but they have no clue who Franklin Pierce or James Buchanan are.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ] 

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]



 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.