olyfan63
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2012
- Messages
- 6,169
- Reaction score
- 2,276
Sometimes it takes the opponent perspective to get another view of reality...Here's where you're wrong.
Wilson was never top 3, even if his stats might've suggested it....like leading the league in TD passes, which for him is a misleading stat.....because when you typically lead the league in TD passes, your offense looks like a machine, not disjointed. I think the only time the Seahawks were a real offense under Wilson was 2012 when him and Kap benefitted from what Shanahan was doing with RG3. From 2013, it was never easily sailing for these QBs.
If Wilson was top 3, then Purdy is #1 right now by that very same metric, easily, 100% without fail. Why wouldn't he be?
He certainly had a few top skills, but all they did was mask the QB you see now. And Carroll made sure that Wilson would function at the level he did in Seattle, in a way these other coaches cannot because they're under the impression Wilson could play the position traditionally.
Once Lockett and Metcalf settled in, they allowed Wilson's deep ball to truly shine. But it was never enough when the good defenses in January got to him.
Yes, the read-option was largely copied from what Shanahan Sr. was doing with RGIII. 2012 thru 2014 it was such a key part, especially in crunch time; after that, it seemed the Hawks ran it less.
I think your point, "because they're under the impression Wilson could play the position traditionally" is key, and where Nathaniel Hackett screwed up in coaching Russ with the Broncos. He can't. Robert Saleh made reference to it after the Jets game, "we made him (try to) play (traditional) quarterback." Implied meaning parentheses added by me. But his "Sandlot" skills are (WERE) all-time great, especially with the offense based around them, and the amount of attention and practice devoted to scramble-drill. Also Doug Baldwin was amazing on the scramble drill. Baldwin probably won 3 games for us in that 2013 season with his unbelievable catches from his chemistry with Russell, pre-Lockett.
Wilson's record of success against the 49ers, as best as I can tell, were because SF didn't have Aaron Donald and Robert Quinn (and later other fast pass-rushers like Quinn), who wrecked Russell because Donald wrecked things up the middle and the others could catch Russell from behind. So Russell's sandlot game and the other Hawks strengths, running game and defense, translated to victory more than usual against the 49ers. I don't really have a good explanation for Russell's "excess wins" success against 49ers, you got a better one?