RW after week 1 last season

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Re: RW after week 1 last season
Mon May 27, 2013 4:26 pm
  • We also will never know how our season would have ended if Clemons had been taken out for one play for a breather and not blown out his knee, or if we had kept Mike Williams around instead of Braylon Edwards, or let TO stick on the roster. There are always a million possibilities. I think the fact that we got the season we did with a rookie QB is one of the greatest success stories ever, so I am not one who really cares what Flynn might have done. Just as I'm not all that interested in seeing what T-Jack might have done. I really liked both guys, and thought they were both great teammates and hard workers, but we have our guy now, and that's what we really needed more than anything out of last year. Now it's time to move forward, and we took that one big step that needed to take place. Everything after qualifying for the playoffs was a bonus. Actually everything beyond smashing the holy hell out of the 49ers on a week where the 9ers were a "shoo-in" to win due to the media's infatuation with Captain Comeback and his tantrums was pretty much gravy in my book.
    R.I.P. Dad. I miss you. You will never be forgotten
    1/12/39 - 8/7/08
    User avatar
    * NET Alumni *
    Posts: 3882
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am

Re: RW after week 1 last season
Mon May 27, 2013 4:46 pm
  • 12thMode wrote:Not to take any magic from Wilson, but we will never know how are seaon would have ended if we started Flynn.

    We don't know how it would have gone at all. I'm guessing it'd be closer to 8-8 and no playoffs than :30 away from the NFCCG though. Flynn doesn't appear to have IT IMO.
    Image Always been a Seahawks fan
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    Posts: 20141
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North

Re: RW after week 1 last season
Mon May 27, 2013 5:09 pm
  • SharkHawk wrote:Badda bing badda boom. This is a great explanation. I will throw another one out, and that's all of the same guys who couldn't go on long enough about how worthless Ichiro was to the 2001 Mariners, and how they were seeing stuff that wasn't there, because the stats PROVED he wasn't good. They PROVED IT. Look at his amount of walks and his OBP and his OPS and there is PROOF that Ichiro SUCKED and that the team was headed nowhere.

    Last time I checked, that was the last competitive baseball team that took the field as the home squad in Safeco and Ichiro was clearly the difference on that team, but statheads were having their brains explode because their metric said he sucked, and they couldn't deny hard enough that there was no such thing as "it" and "it" doesn't make a team better from top to bottom when you all of a sudden inject "it" into the equation.

    We saw it with Ichiro, we saw it with Russ, I'll go so far as to say we saw it with the guy with the "worst stats" on the 90's Sonics in Nate McMillan. Facts showed that the Sonics were a better team when they had both Payton and Mac on the court at the same time, and that's what they did. When Payton was running the point on his own and Mac was on the bench early in Glove's career then he struggled, the team struggled. Then "Glue" started getting extended minutes with "Glove" and the team as a whole became exponentially better and Glove became one of the best players to ever suit up. Interesting to watch statheads blow up when they would go off and say Mac needed to sit down and blahbedy blah blah, but the evidence was in the success that the TEAM was having. Same with Russ. Same with Ichi-balls (thank Buhner for that one), and same with the Sonics rotations in about 95-96-ish. Even Derrick McKey started to play like he was always supposed to. ;)

    The irony of this is the best scouting departments use both traditional methods and statistics to evaluate players. The stat geek vs fundamentalist meat-head debate is useless because people can be both or combine their skills with the differing skills of others, and this is exactly what the best scouts and scouting departments do. If you're throwing statistics under the bus when it comes to evaluating players, that's like trying to win a boxing match with your non-dominant hand tied behind your back. It can be done but why voluntarily handicap yourself so severely?
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 1237
    Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm

Re: RW after week 1 last season
Mon May 27, 2013 5:25 pm
  • Hasselbeck wrote:
    Crizilla wrote:i cant remember but was anyone flipping out and screaming for Flynn to start?

    What idiot would do that?


    There was this monkey, right?
    User avatar
    * NET Starfish *
    Posts: 14817
    Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:29 am
    Location: Down at the old Milk Plus

Re: RW after week 1 last season
Mon May 27, 2013 5:30 pm
  • The "IT factor" isn't real. It's like "muscle memory" or "intelligence" in that it's a phrase or word we use to describe a variety of different biological nuances and traits combining together to form some immense quality in a person. ("Muscle memory" is used to describe mainly the white matter brain tissue myelin and the very important job it does. "Intelligence" is usually used to describe innate ability and expertise/experience in a given task or set of tasks.) "IT factor" is likely along similar lines with only a subtle advantage separating the good from the great, or there's no advantage at all and we're just saying people have "it" to attribute what's truly a streak of good luck to a person's skill (this is in fact a well-documented bias we all have to some extent or another, although it's based on studying occupations where it's easier to separate luck from skill). Either way, we can't actually say if anyone has "it" or not until we actually know what "it" is. We can keep guessing though.
    NET Veteran
    Posts: 1237
    Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm

Re: RW after week 1 last season
Mon May 27, 2013 6:19 pm
  • Good stuff, BirdsCommaAngry. But, I think we are getting close to quantifying "it"...we're getting closer with every nerdy stats sight put up.

    And, honestly, I dont know if I'll like the game as much when/if a time comes where the "humanity" portion of the game is able to be measured with a %. I just dont know..
    User avatar
    NET Pro Bowler
    Posts: 15446
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:08 pm

Re: RW after week 1 last season
Tue May 28, 2013 12:59 am
  • It factor is most certainly real. Especially when it comes to NFL qb's. Anyone who argues otherwise works for Skynet and should not be trusted.
    User avatar
    * NET Alumni *
    Posts: 4714
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
    Location: Seattle, WA

Re: RW after week 1 last season
Tue May 28, 2013 2:03 am
  • Blitzer88 wrote:Not gonna lie.....I thought that we should of given Flynn a look at that point. Glad I was wrong though!

    OF COURSE YOU DID! Why am I not surprised?!
    User avatar
    * NET Baller *
    Posts: 21276
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


It is currently Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:27 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member


  • Who is online