Time to GET BEHIND Russell Wilson

Status
Not open for further replies.

volsunghawk

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,860
Reaction score
0
Location
Right outside Richard Sherman's house
Sgt. Largent":iv3m56tv said:
volsunghawk":iv3m56tv said:
Verndog":iv3m56tv said:
I do not believe for a second that Flynn would put up even remotely similar numbers with THIS team that he did in one game against Detroit, playing with an outstanding WR corps in Green Bay.

I don't think anyone's saying Flynn would put up similar numbers.

What some of us are saying is that RIGHT NOW, in 2012 Flynn gives the passing offense a better chance of succeeding over a rookie that's finding his way in the league.

Why? Because of his massive experience? Because of his outstanding arm? Because the coaching staff would suddenly have a change of heart and say, "Go sling it, kid" to Flynn when they haven't demonstrated that willingness with ANY other QB they've EVER had on the roster?
 

Verndog

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
0
Location
Auburn, Wa
volsunghawk":221la38w said:
In other words, I do not believe - at ALL - that putting Flynn in the lineup would result in a vastly improved passing game or a more explosive offense.

What I DO believe is that putting Flynn in would signal to the team, its fanbase, and everyone watching that Seattle is second-guessing itself and that it can't commit to one guy at the most crucial position on the team.

1) There does not need to be "vast' improvement to turn those 2 losses to W's. Minor improvement is all that is needed, with potentially better vision and better reads/ reacts that could be done. Also not being scared to throw a tight pass in the redzone may help. :idea:

2) Why would Carroll say he thinks the QB competition continues over and over. His whole theme of compete every game and every week, best man plays gets over ruled to develop a rookie QB? Wilson doesn't have an expiration tag...not for 4 years at least...there just is NO hurry.
 

volsunghawk

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,860
Reaction score
0
Location
Right outside Richard Sherman's house
Verndog":2astp9m3 said:
volsunghawk":2astp9m3 said:
In other words, I do not believe - at ALL - that putting Flynn in the lineup would result in a vastly improved passing game or a more explosive offense.

What I DO believe is that putting Flynn in would signal to the team, its fanbase, and everyone watching that Seattle is second-guessing itself and that it can't commit to one guy at the most crucial position on the team.

1) There does not need to be "vast' improvement to turn those 2 losses to W's. Minor improvement is all that is needed, with potentially better vision and better reads/ reacts that could be done. Also not being scared to throw a tight pass in the redzone may help. :idea:

2) Why would Carroll say he thinks the QB competition continues over and over. His whole theme of compete every game and every week, best man plays gets over ruled to develop a rookie QB? Wilson doesn't have an expiration tag...not for 4 years at least...there just is NO hurry.

1. I do not think Flynn represents minor improvement. I don't think he represents an upgrade in any way.

2. Carroll may talk competition, but he has demonstrated that he will stick with his starting QB unless injury forces his hand. Hasselbeck in 2010 and Jackson in 2011 had some stretches of bad play, but we never saw the backup come in.

Oh, personally, I think the best man IS playing.
 

Verndog

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
0
Location
Auburn, Wa
Sarlacc83":2q0dwtut said:
This is a disingenuous argument as your assumption is a constant undercurrent in the past 4 weeks of your posts.

Really? So I didn't really jump on the Wilson bandwagon as accused? :?
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
volsunghawk":1kg3ox9o said:
Why? Because of his massive experience? Because of his outstanding arm? Because the coaching staff would suddenly have a change of heart and say, "Go sling it, kid" to Flynn when they haven't demonstrated that willingness with ANY other QB they've EVER had on the roster?

No, and yes.

Flynn is more experienced, which means he knows how to read defenses better. He knows how to work through progressions faster. He knows when to change plays at the line better..........and yes this all means that more of the playbook would be used for Flynn.

Here's the deal. All Carroll is asking out of his QB right now is to manage games, which translates to "don't screw up, make a couple plays and let your defense dominate." So which QB right now is better at managing the game? Certainly not a rookie.
 

volsunghawk

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,860
Reaction score
0
Location
Right outside Richard Sherman's house
Sgt. Largent":9wqg0gk6 said:
volsunghawk":9wqg0gk6 said:
Why? Because of his massive experience? Because of his outstanding arm? Because the coaching staff would suddenly have a change of heart and say, "Go sling it, kid" to Flynn when they haven't demonstrated that willingness with ANY other QB they've EVER had on the roster?

No, and yes.

Flynn is more experienced, which means he knows how to read defenses better. He knows how to work through progressions faster. He knows when to change plays at the line better..........and yes this all means that more of the playbook would be used for Flynn.

Here's the deal. All Carroll is asking out of his QB right now is to manage games, which translates to "don't screw up, make a couple plays and let your defense dominate." So which QB right now is better at managing the game? Certainly not a rookie.

Bollocks. Flynn has 4 years of bench sitting. Where has Jim Sorgi's long bench sitting behind Manning gotten him?
 

Verndog

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
0
Location
Auburn, Wa
volsunghawk":2wtgta6v said:
Oh, personally, I think the best man IS playing.

They thought the same thing in Arizona after naming Skelton the starter.

Go have a look at Kolb's numbers...I'll be some are thanking us for getting their #2 in there. ;)
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
volsunghawk":t0y2hjk3 said:
Bollocks. Flynn has 4 years of bench sitting. Where has Jim Sorgi's long bench sitting behind Manning gotten him?

Well if you can't realize that a 4th year QB coming from arguably the best QB'ing team in the NFL is more adept at the nuances of the position like reading defenses and knowing where to go with the ball over a rookie with zero experience in those areas, then this conversation is over.

I'm not denying that Wilson has a better upside. But NOW, in 2012 he is not more equipped to run this offense over someone like Matt Flynn. Period.
 

Sarlacc83

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,110
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR
Sgt. Largent":15680rhq said:
volsunghawk":15680rhq said:
Bollocks. Flynn has 4 years of bench sitting. Where has Jim Sorgi's long bench sitting behind Manning gotten him?

Well if you can't realize that a 4th year QB coming from arguably the best QB'ing team in the NFL is more adept at the nuances of the position like reading defenses and knowing where to go with the ball over a rookie with zero experience in those areas, then this conversation is over.

I'm not denying that Wilson has a better upside. But NOW, in 2012 he is not more equipped to run this offense over someone like Matt Flynn. Period.

Unles he is, because of the very first sentence in the bolded part.
 

volsunghawk

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,860
Reaction score
0
Location
Right outside Richard Sherman's house
Verndog":2wrwr23b said:
volsunghawk":2wrwr23b said:
Oh, personally, I think the best man IS playing.

They thought the same thing in Arizona after naming Skelton the starter.

Go have a look at Kolb's numbers...I'll be some are thanking us for getting their #2 in there. ;)

Yes, Kolb did throw for a heck of a lot of yards in their 17-3 loss on Thursday, didn't he? Those yards sure were helpful.
 

Verndog

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
0
Location
Auburn, Wa
volsunghawk":2v33lkgw said:
Verndog":2v33lkgw said:
volsunghawk":2v33lkgw said:
Oh, personally, I think the best man IS playing.

They thought the same thing in Arizona after naming Skelton the starter.

Go have a look at Kolb's numbers...I'll be some are thanking us for getting their #2 in there. ;)

Yes, Kolb did throw for a heck of a lot of yards in their 17-3 loss on Thursday, didn't he? Those yards sure were helpful.

Dude...your not very objective are you? They are 4-1 with a worse D then ours, and Kolb's play has a lot to do with this.

http://www.nfl.com/player/kevinkolb/2507169/profile

And yes....289 yards tops anything Wilson has put up.
 

RezHawk

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
756
Reaction score
11
Location
Western Montana
Thanks for posting this English. I agree 100%. Greatness does not happen overnight it takes patience and the ever dreaded learning curve. Many of us, including myself, have been hoping for a QBOTF for the past couple years. I believe Wilson can be that guy and am willing to endure the pain of losses now for the promise of greatness in the future. We have been in every game to the last drive this year, this team will learn how to win the tight games in time. If given time I think that this offense could gel in the second half of the season which is exactly the right time for this to happen. If Wilson is pulled and Flynn inserted we will simply be starting the process over.

I will not deny that Wilson has struggled at times and as a fan it can difficult to watch, but I feel that the way he handles himself proffesionally and his consant desire to improve speaks volumes to his ability to be the future leader of this offense.
 

volsunghawk

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,860
Reaction score
0
Location
Right outside Richard Sherman's house
Verndog":cao7g0cx said:
volsunghawk":cao7g0cx said:
Verndog":cao7g0cx said:
They thought the same thing in Arizona after naming Skelton the starter.

Go have a look at Kolb's numbers...I'll be some are thanking us for getting their #2 in there. ;)

Yes, Kolb did throw for a heck of a lot of yards in their 17-3 loss on Thursday, didn't he? Those yards sure were helpful.

Dude...your not very objective are you? They are 4-1 with a worse D then ours, and Kolb's play has a lot to do with this.

http://www.nfl.com/player/kevinkolb/2507169/profile

And yes....289 yards tops anything Wilson has put up.

I would suggest that my previous post that explained why I disagree with putting Flynn in would settle any confusion about where I fall on this issue. And I'm consistent... I was against Flynn even signing here back before he was actually a FA.

Kolb has done nothing out of the ordinary for him thus far. He put up some stinkers in Philly and some good games. But he was then - and is now - inconsistent. His play wasn't the reason for Arizona's win in New England. And 289 yards did exactly jack for the Cardinals against the Rams (for the record, those 289 yards were on 50 attempts, with 28 completions - considering that Wilson usually attempts around 25 passes, that would be the equivalent of him completing 14 passes for 140 yards).

I don't know how the Cards would do with Skelton in there, but he did perform better for them last season than Kolb did, with the same cast of teammates.

EDIT: And you are the last person who should be talking about objectivity.
 
OP
OP
theENGLISHseahawk

theENGLISHseahawk

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
volsunghawk":27un6pn8 said:
I'll answer.

Putting Flynn in takes development time away from Wilson, and Wilson has shown more potential with THIS team than Flynn has - in practice and on the field.

I do not believe for a second that Flynn would put up even remotely similar numbers with THIS team that he did in one game against Detroit, playing with an outstanding WR corps in Green Bay.

I do not believe for a second that Carroll and Bevell would give Flynn a more wide-open passing game than they're giving Wilson. They would clamp down on him the same way they did with Wilson, and the same way they did with Jackson, and the same way they did with Hasselbeck.

In other words, I do not believe - at ALL - that putting Flynn in the lineup would result in a vastly improved passing game or a more explosive offense.

What I DO believe is that putting Flynn in would signal to the team, its fanbase, and everyone watching that Seattle is second-guessing itself and that it can't commit to one guy at the most crucial position on the team. It would signal a lack of faith in a guy they hand-picked. And yes, I believe that Wilson was a hand-picked potential franchise QB while Flynn was a fallback option in case the FO didn't get the guy they wanted. I believe that Wilson's work ethic, arm, and mobility all outrank Flynn's, and that those things are all reasons why Wilson won the starting job in the first place.

I also believe that Wilson needs experience to become a bonafide top-flight starting QB, and that putting Flynn in prevents this without giving us any value in return. I believe that 2013 is where Seattle's SB window is truly and fully open - with more experience for the O-line and perhaps a playmaker at WR - and that this year is crucial for Wilson to gain experience so the offense hits on all cylinders next season. Please don't, however, think that I'm talking about throwing this season away. I think we can still make a run, since anything can happen on any given Sunday. But I think we're better situated for 2013, and that we must get our franchise QB the necessary experience for that to happen. Plus, I disagree that Flynn would be any sort of upgrade, so a developing Wilson is still the top QB on the team.

THAT is what's wrong with giving Flynn a shot.

Heck of a post there. A very well reasoned argument.
 

Verndog

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
0
Location
Auburn, Wa
volsunghawk":3dm3o32r said:
... I was against Flynn even signing here back before he was actually a FA.

EDIT: And you are the last person who should be talking about objectivity.

Classic. :snack:
 

volsunghawk

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,860
Reaction score
0
Location
Right outside Richard Sherman's house
Verndog":2dcjg2d9 said:
volsunghawk":2dcjg2d9 said:
... I was against Flynn even signing here back before he was actually a FA.

EDIT: And you are the last person who should be talking about objectivity.

Classic. :snack:

Dude, read.

I have already pointed out that I am not objective when it comes to the "sit Wilson/start Flynn" argument. I said it in the beginning of the damn post you just quoted. But you've been swinging from Flynn's jock for months now, so you have no claim to objectivity, either.
 

Verndog

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
0
Location
Auburn, Wa
volsunghawk":26dpd1m6 said:
Verndog":26dpd1m6 said:
volsunghawk":26dpd1m6 said:
... I was against Flynn even signing here back before he was actually a FA.

EDIT: And you are the last person who should be talking about objectivity.

Classic. :snack:

Dude, read.

I have already pointed out that I am not objective when it comes to the "sit Wilson/start Flynn" argument. I said it in the beginning of the damn post you just quoted. But you've been swinging from Flynn's jock for months now, so you have no claim to objectivity, either.

You are wrong there bud.
I've always liked both Flynn and Wilson, I supported the decision to start him after his play in pre season took command. That does not mean that I quit believing Flynn could lead this team this year, and now the picture HAS changed whether you and the Wilson fan club (no matter what play him club) want to admit it or not. Wilson is not even close to playing at the level he did in pre season when I supported the move. That simply cannot be argued. So, now comes the time to do what's best for the team. Unfortunately for Flynn that is an uphill battle because of all the purple tongues on Wilsons side.

Not fairly re evaluating after failure / change is total Homerism.
 

dunceface

New member
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
0
ugghhh this crap is still going on even after a win?? :roll:


I'll be in the shack...
 

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,883
Reaction score
397
Sgt. Largent":rxkr5vlp said:
I'm not denying that Wilson has a better upside. But NOW, in 2012 he is not more equipped to run this offense over someone like Matt Flynn. Period.

And once Flynn gets us a deep playoff run this year, everyone will suddenly be perfectly happy to bench him in favor of RW in 2013? I highly doubt that. "Win Now" is too powerful.

Seattle has two young quarterbacks. Neither are the next coming of Peyton Manning and so both are and will remain, in different ways, dependent on scheme and surrounding talent. Each needs development, the right kind of receivers, and belief from the organization.

Therefore, whomever Seattle chose this year, they needed to stick with him and invest in his growth long-term. Wilson won that trust and has not yet lost it.
 

hawkfan1975

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
731
Reaction score
0
volsunghawk":1tpzb8id said:
Bollocks. Flynn has 4 years of bench sitting. Where has Jim Sorgi's long bench sitting behind Manning gotten him?

Wow, I'm pretty shocked to see you fighting tooth and nail with this one Volsung (just doesn't seem like you would, but, here it is).

Is the other side of the argument that tough to grasp? I mean, it's not like this rookie has actually shown he has "lights out" play brilliance in a season game (could care less about preseason, as should everyone else). How many points does he put up against even so-so divisional teams D's? How many 3rd downs lost? How many red zones tossed away? (and yes, it's about putting points on the boards, not the stats, because with even mediocre QB play we win PHX and STL). And can any of us really say we heartily won the GB...in our wicked house btw? Was it RW's genius that won that game?

Is the rebuttal that tough to grasp? Our D (and special teams, and punter, coaches, and water boys) have kept us within games. All this in spite of our resident heart throb behind center. The ONLY constant has been his lack of performance, urgency, and execution.
This isn't a "hater situation" with RW, it's something that just is. Will he reign in his game one day? Sure, never say never. Is he the right man on the field right now, h*ll no (imo). Should he ever have been? h*ll no (imo).
You put in the qb who's had more hours/days/years (yes, even benched) while learning to read D's, expanding the playbook, honing the skills and yeah I'm afraid I agree Flynn aids our fantastic team (heck, even dink and dunk beats PHX and STL game).

I just do not understand this fawning over Wilson right now. I don't dislike the kid (at all, except for his interviewing btw, which is a bit pompous in comparison to his actual output imo but whatever there. who cares about that?), I just feel, like many rooks, he needs time to get his game together before playing leader with this talent on the field.
If I'm bothered with anyone it's PC with this (not RW).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top