What do you think?

I answered "best QB starts" based on the assumption that Flynn's "sore arm/shoulder" was indeed impacting his ability to play.

Pretty sure we had a competition already.

I'm not 100% sure Wilson is the best option anymore. But i am 100% sure that since we chose Wilson to start we now need to stick wtih him and let him grow regardless of growing pains.

You don't pull a rookie QB after 4 starts, especially not in our situation. Sure, there's a chance that Flynn comes in and lights it up but it's a big gamble. Much bigger gamble than a friggin onside kick.

Stick with the Rookie let him develop. Too late to put the rabbit back in the hat.

I have more faith in Wilson at this point... it's Carroll and Bevell that frustrate me.

We're not putting Wilson in a place where he can succeed with our current play-calling and scheme.

JSeahawks wrote:I'm not 100% sure Wilson is the best option anymore. But i am 100% sure that since we chose Wilson to start we now need to stick wtih him and let him grow regardless of growing pains.

Ditto.

TAKE HASSELBECK OUT NOW, HE'S TERRIBLE, WHERE'S DILFER?

RW is a rookie and has all the time in the world to develop.

You have to see what Flynn can do. It would be foolish not to.

cesame wrote:RW is a rookie and has all the time in the world to develop.

You have to see what Flynn can do. It would be foolish not to.

Do you think Flynn is better at handing the ball off to Lynch? More chemistry with feeding the ball to Turbin? Is he tall enough to see over the line and see that our WRs are being covered? Does he ignore play calls by Bevell?

SonicHawk wrote:

cesame wrote:RW is a rookie and has all the time in the world to develop.

You have to see what Flynn can do. It would be foolish not to.

Do you think Flynn is better at handing the ball off to Lynch? More chemistry with feeding the ball to Turbin? Is he tall enough to see over the line and see that our WRs are being covered? Does he ignore play calls by Bevell?

This says it all.


Russell Wilson has NO accountability here.

bestfightstory wrote:

SonicHawk wrote:

cesame wrote:RW is a rookie and has all the time in the world to develop.

You have to see what Flynn can do. It would be foolish not to.

Do you think Flynn is better at handing the ball off to Lynch? More chemistry with feeding the ball to Turbin? Is he tall enough to see over the line and see that our WRs are being covered? Does he ignore play calls by Bevell?

This says it all.


Russell Wilson has NO accountability here.

I don't think RW has played well at all. I also don't think that anybody has helped him.

I also don't think Flynn would do any better or they would let him do any better.

This offense is as basic as it gets.
You can pull Wilson and start him later without any difference in offensive play calling.
We're not losing anything by starting Flynn.

SonicHawk wrote:

cesame wrote:RW is a rookie and has all the time in the world to develop.

You have to see what Flynn can do. It would be foolish not to.

Do you think Flynn is better at handing the ball off to Lynch? More chemistry with feeding the ball to Turbin? Is he tall enough to see over the line and see that our WRs are being covered? Does he ignore play calls by Bevell?

Can you say without a single shred of doubt that Russell Wilson is better than Matt Flynn?

sammyc521 wrote:We're not putting Wilson in a place where he can succeed with our current play-calling and scheme.

He cannot run the "vanilla offense" what makes you think he can run the full boat?

m0ng0 wrote:

sammyc521 wrote:We're not putting Wilson in a place where he can succeed with our current play-calling and scheme.

He cannot run the "vanilla offense" what makes you think he can run the full boat?

To me its not as much about whether we're going vanilla or whether we're going exotic, its about whether we allow him to move around, improvise and be Russell Wilson. Thats what we saw on the first drive, which was masterful. I feel they're stifling his creativity.

While I believe in letting rookie QBs spend a year on the bench, I can't disagree a whole lot with what we did given our QB situation and how good Wilson looked in (completely meaningless and way overvalued) the preseason.

The 2nd best thing to letting a rookie ride the bench is starting early, and then sitting. Gets to see how he handled certain situations, and then see how someone else did it. Gives time to reflect, whereas a starter is always preparing for the upcoming opponent. So I don't mind benching Wilson.

That said, I decided before TC that whoever won the job would get six weeks before I'd pitch removing them. Wilson hasn't done anything egregious enough to change my mind - he's just struggling like a rookie, and in many ways better than a rookie. I'm really not confident than Flynn would do a whole lot better, although I'm not against finding out at some point this season.

Another reason to stick Wilson in is that I cannot say with any degree of confidence whether or not Wilson is our long-term QB - that's a question we don't need to know now, but we need to know it by the end of the year. I want to see RW grow, and if we try to find improvement over a 4 game sample size, we're just being silly.

ive seen enough, flynn

Compete for it in practice what have you got to lose? One of two things could happen:
1.) The added pressure makes Wilson better being he preforms better under pressure.
2.) He buckles under the pressure. in this case we don't want him.

I have no idea now........with the running game we have we should not be having this much trouble passing the ball. I mean we see 8 and 9 man fronts yet are still unable to pass the ball consistently.

The best player on the team is always the back up QB. I'm not making that mistake with Flynn like I did with Whitehurst. Wilson needso to get through the growing pains, and we need to grow with him.

SonicHawk wrote:Pretty sure we had a competition already.

Nope...it is not over and Carroll said it himself..."the competition continues"....and the score has clearly changed.

Pull the string on this move Pete, you will be no worse then last in passing will you??

Sarlacc83 wrote:The best player on the team is always the back up QB. I'm not making that mistake with Flynn like I did with Whitehurst. Wilson needso to get through the growing pains, and we need to grow with him.

I'm in with Flynn for the next 4 games.....hopefully more. With just a bit of imagination, Wilson can still be a formidable weapon on this team whether starting or not. One good thing we've learned is that the kid will definitely serve as a quality back-up. That is a rare luxury that shouldn't be discounted.

JSeahawks wrote:I'm not 100% sure Wilson is the best option anymore. But i am 100% sure that since we chose Wilson to start we now need to stick wtih him and let him grow regardless of growing pains.

^ This

^ That

and the other thing.

Sarlacc83 wrote:The best player on the team is always the back up QB. I'm not making that mistake with Flynn like I did with Whitehurst. Wilson needso to get through the growing pains, and we need to grow with him.

Except you don't know if it'll be a mistake because we have no idea how Flynn will perform in real games for us. Our defense is too good to throw away the season on the basis of growing pains. If were not going to have a winning season with Wilson then we can afford to develop him on the bench. Flynn is a 4 million per year contract we can't really afford to let sit at this current progress unless we improve soon.

Flynn. End the charade.

Sarlacc83 wrote:The best player on the team is always the back up QB. I'm not making that mistake with Flynn like I did with Whitehurst. Wilson needso to get through the growing pains, and we need to grow with him.

Yep.

And consider this. Even with a very bad statistical game this week, he's even at TD:INT ratio and win:loss ratio. To compare him to another rookie starting on a great defensive team, let's look at Joe Flacco through four games:

2-2 win-loss, 1 TD and 4 INT, with 192 yards passing his highest yardage in a game. Add in next weeks game, and he's 2-3, with 1 TD and 7 INT. I'd say Wilson is ahead of the power curve. Like it or not, he's our best, as well as our most experienced quarterback.

Oh, and he hasn't yet faced a defense outside the top ten rated in pass DVOA. He's done this against the #9, #7, #5, #6 DVOA pass defenses. But yes, it's a "charade".

JSeahawks wrote:I'm not 100% sure Wilson is the best option anymore. But i am 100% sure that since we chose Wilson to start we now need to stick wtih him and let him grow regardless of growing pains.

32nd overall in passing.

It literally cannot get worse.

Seahawk Sailor wrote:

Sarlacc83 wrote:The best player on the team is always the back up QB. I'm not making that mistake with Flynn like I did with Whitehurst. Wilson needso to get through the growing pains, and we need to grow with him.

Yep.

And consider this. Even with a very bad statistical game this week, he's even at TD:INT ratio and win:loss ratio. To compare him to another rookie starting on a great defensive team, let's look at Joe Flacco through four games:

2-2 win-loss, 1 TD and 4 INT, with 192 yards passing his highest yardage in a game. Add in next weeks game, and he's 2-3, with 1 TD and 7 INT. I'd say Wilson is ahead of the power curve. Like it or not, he's our best, as well as our most experienced quarterback.

well i feel much better after reading that

Seahawk Sailor wrote:2-2 win-loss, 1 TD and 4 INT, with 192 yards passing his highest yardage in a game. Add in next weeks game, and he's 2-3, with 1 TD and 7 INT. I'd say Wilson is ahead of the power curve. Like it or not, he's our best, as well as our most experienced quarterback.

No. He's not.

If Flynn comes in and stinks it up, ok.. we can say it's not the QB. But until he plays? You simply cannot say that.

Whitehurst played - he stunk it up - we learned quickly why he wasn't starting.

We're DEAD LAST in passing, how much worse can it get? Play Flynn. You paid him the money to come here, give him his shot. This is the best defense in franchise history and it's being ruined by one of the worst offenses in recent memory.

PLAY FLYNN.

The WORST defense we've played was #9 DVOA against the pass.

I'd almost be willing to give up a game to see Pete say "hey, screw it. Seattle, I'm putting Flynn in this week and this week only just to show you why Wilson's the quarterback." He won't do it because he's a nice guy, but if he did, I'd expect everyone here to be completely wowed at how experienced Flynn looked at taking sacks.

What no Dilfer vote come on guys.

Hasselbeck wrote:We're DEAD LAST in passing, how much worse can it get?

0-4, 3 QB turnovers a game comes to mind.

Part of the reason we're dead last in passing is because we're also dead last in passing attempts.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:We're DEAD LAST in passing, how much worse can it get?

0-4, 3 QB turnovers a game comes to mind.

Part of the reason we're dead last in passing is because we're also dead last in passing attempts.

Well hell... we honestly should be 1-3, the refs literally gave us the win on Monday.

We're dead last in passing attempts because Bevell apparently doesn't believe enough in Wilson to open up the playbook.

That alone should scream something. Either Bevell needs to take the training wheels off Wilson, or make the change if Wilson can't handle the playbook. Period. End of story.

Hasselbeck wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:We're DEAD LAST in passing, how much worse can it get?

0-4, 3 QB turnovers a game comes to mind.

Part of the reason we're dead last in passing is because we're also dead last in passing attempts.

Well hell... we honestly should be 1-3, the refs literally gave us the win on Monday.

We're dead last in passing attempts because Bevell apparently doesn't believe enough in Wilson to open up the playbook. .

If he doesnt believe in the guy that won the job, how do you think he feels about the guy that lost it?

Hasselbeck wrote:

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:We're DEAD LAST in passing, how much worse can it get?

0-4, 3 QB turnovers a game comes to mind.

Part of the reason we're dead last in passing is because we're also dead last in passing attempts.

Well hell... we honestly should be 1-3, the refs literally gave us the win on Monday.

We're dead last in passing attempts because Bevell apparently doesn't believe enough in Wilson to open up the playbook.

That alone should scream something. Either Bevell needs to take the training wheels off Wilson, or make the change if Wilson can't handle the playbook. Period. End of story.

I don't think you really have any idea what the head coaches are thinking.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:We're DEAD LAST in passing, how much worse can it get?

Part of the reason we're dead last in passing is because we're also dead last in passing attempts.

Amazing what epidemic 3 and outs will do to your passing attempts.

JSeahawks wrote:If he doesnt believe in the guy that won the job, how do you think he feels about the guy that lost it?

Flynn never had the luxury of playing against 2nd/3rd stringers for the entire duration of preseason + the Chiefs defense without its 3 best players (which 4 weeks in looks like a laughing stock at FULL strength)..

Go ahead and hang onto the preseason all you want.. Once upon a time, Charlie Whitehurst was a preseason superstar too.

The best QB on this teams roster is the teams backup. And we're squandering an entire season because of it.

We are 2-2. I felt like Flynn was the better option immeditay following he game but that's because he didn't play. It's the back up qb syndrome. We have a rookie qb. Be realistic.

Hasselbeck wrote:

JSeahawks wrote:If he doesnt believe in the guy that won the job, how do you think he feels about the guy that lost it?

Flynn never had the luxury of playing against 2nd/3rd stringers for the entire duration of preseason + the Chiefs defense without its 3 best players (which 4 weeks in looks like a laughing stock at FULL strength)..

Go ahead and hang onto the preseason all you want.. Once upon a time, Charlie Whitehurst was a preseason superstar too.

The best QB on this teams roster is the teams backup. And we're squandering an entire season because of it.

I didnt say a word about the preseason. I was just trying to get into the coaches head, just as you were with your post. They clearly thought Russell Wilson was the better option, for whatever reason, and yet you say they dont trust him. So if they dont trust the guy who they thought was better enough to open up the playbook... which is the reason you said we're dead last in passing, why would they trust the guy who lost the job to do more passing?

Hasselbeck wrote:

JSeahawks wrote:If he doesnt believe in the guy that won the job, how do you think he feels about the guy that lost it?

Flynn never had the luxury of playing against 2nd/3rd stringers for the entire duration of preseason + the Chiefs defense without its 3 best players (which 4 weeks in looks like a laughing stock at FULL strength)..

Go ahead and hang onto the preseason all you want.. Once upon a time, Charlie Whitehurst was a preseason superstar too.

The best QB on this teams roster is the teams backup. And we're squandering an entire season because of it.

Nice post and I believe your namesake could take this team to the SB. Matt was on the decline for sure, but he knew the sanctuary of a pocket and how to step up into it while looking downfield for open receivers. I want to see if Flynn can do the same now that I know Wilson can't (yet).

Growing Pains, growing pains, growing pains. I am really not sure where people go the idea we were going to the super bowl this year starting a rookie QB. I figured we were going to be hot and cold up and down no matter which "rookie" we started. Yes, I know....Flynn had those 2 big regular season games of experience and all but I still don't buy that making him so much more experienced. Don't get me wrong, I do like Flynn and feel he very likely could develope into a good franchise QB some day (same as Wilson). I just do not feel he would be doing much better atm.

Most all teams in NFL that start rookie or inexperienced QBs are going to have these type of years. Look at the "great" Cam Newton everybody raved about last year.....what was their record, 6-10?? I am not taking anything away from what he accomplished, just that is the pitfalls of starting rooks. Consistancy is always the issue early in QB's careers. I see an 8-8 team atm but have hopes we improve and maybe steal a couple extra wins(ha ha).

You guys definitely need kit kat break. The offense is a work in progress but again we could have won this game if not for a few unlucky breaks ( flukey interceptions ) and a dude kicking almost 60 yard field goals

Seahawk Sailor wrote:The WORST defense we've played was #9 DVOA against the pass.

I'd almost be willing to give up a game to see Pete say "hey, screw it. Seattle, I'm putting Flynn in this week and this week only just to show you why Wilson's the quarterback." He won't do it because he's a nice guy, but if he did, I'd expect everyone here to be completely wowed at how experienced Flynn looked at taking sacks.

Winner.

HawkWow wrote:Nice post and I believe your namesake could take this team to the SB. Matt was on the decline for sure, but he knew the sanctuary of a pocket and how to step up into it while looking downfield for open receivers. I want to see if Flynn can do the same now that I know Wilson can't (yet).

Oh man.. don't get me started on the decision to move on from the other Matt.

JSeahawks wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:

JSeahawks wrote:If he doesnt believe in the guy that won the job, how do you think he feels about the guy that lost it?

Flynn never had the luxury of playing against 2nd/3rd stringers for the entire duration of preseason + the Chiefs defense without its 3 best players (which 4 weeks in looks like a laughing stock at FULL strength)..

Go ahead and hang onto the preseason all you want.. Once upon a time, Charlie Whitehurst was a preseason superstar too.

The best QB on this teams roster is the teams backup. And we're squandering an entire season because of it.

I didnt say a word about the preseason. I was just trying to get into the coaches head, just as you were with your post. They clearly thought Russell Wilson was the better option, for whatever reason, and yet you say they dont trust him. So if they dont trust the guy who they thought was better enough to open up the playbook... which is the reason you said we're dead last in passing, why would they trust the guy who lost the job to do more passing?

I know you're a huge Wilson fan.. that's great.. fantastic.

Be honest now.. does the play calling say they trust Wilson?

Hasselbeck wrote:

JSeahawks wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:
Flynn never had the luxury of playing against 2nd/3rd stringers for the entire duration of preseason + the Chiefs defense without its 3 best players (which 4 weeks in looks like a laughing stock at FULL strength)..

Go ahead and hang onto the preseason all you want.. Once upon a time, Charlie Whitehurst was a preseason superstar too.

The best QB on this teams roster is the teams backup. And we're squandering an entire season because of it.

I didnt say a word about the preseason. I was just trying to get into the coaches head, just as you were with your post. They clearly thought Russell Wilson was the better option, for whatever reason, and yet you say they dont trust him. So if they dont trust the guy who they thought was better enough to open up the playbook... which is the reason you said we're dead last in passing, why would they trust the guy who lost the job to do more passing?

I know you're a huge Wilson fan.. that's great.. fantastic.

Be honest now.. does the play calling say they trust Wilson?

No it doesnt. And thats exactly my point. If they dont trust Wilson what makes you think they woudl trust Flynn, when its obvious they thought Wilson was better since htey gave him the job?

Its not even a Wilson vs Flynn issue for me. Flynn very well might be better. Its a, you dont bench your starting QB 4 games into the season thing.

http://blog.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/2012/09/30/carroll-says-hell-take-hard-look-at-qb-position/
This article says Pete will look at the QB position. I have a feeling that once they watch the tapes and see just how many opportunities were missed today that we may see Flynn next week.

JSeahawks wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:

JSeahawks wrote:[quote="Hasselbeck"]

Flynn never had the luxury of playing against 2nd/3rd stringers for the entire duration of preseason + the Chiefs defense without its 3 best players (which 4 weeks in looks like a laughing stock at FULL strength)..

Go ahead and hang onto the preseason all you want.. Once upon a time, Charlie Whitehurst was a preseason superstar too.

The best QB on this teams roster is the teams backup. And we're squandering an entire season because of it.

I didnt say a word about the preseason. I was just trying to get into the coaches head, just as you were with your post. They clearly thought Russell Wilson was the better option, for whatever reason, and yet you say they dont trust him. So if they dont trust the guy who they thought was better enough to open up the playbook... which is the reason you said we're dead last in passing, why would they trust the guy who lost the job to do more passing?

I know you're a huge Wilson fan.. that's great.. fantastic.

Be honest now.. does the play calling say they trust Wilson?

No it doesnt. And thats exactly my point. If they dont trust Wilson what makes you think they woudl trust Flynn, when its obvious they thought Wilson was better since htey gave him the job?[/quote]
Keyword thought. They may have thought Wilson has more upside or is more dynamic. Flynn didn't get a fair shake in the competition but we won't rehash that argument. What matters now is if they can be rational and objective at this point in time after having more information to work with. I hope a reporter asks Pete directly if this competition is still open.