Don't Overanalyze. Simple Question...

[Seymour]

I want to say yes, but I said no.

As Russell ages and slows down, I don't think Pete or any other HC will be able to figure out how to get this team back to a SB with Russell as QB.

The NFL game is changing, and IMO leaving Pete in the dust with how he thinks he can win. Still competitive, still able to win.........but not the dominance needed nor the offensive philosophical shift needed to keep up with how the NFL game is changing and evolving.

the NFL is really more about cycles than evolving.

These offenses are always cyclical, from the 80s Chargers and 90s Cowboys and 9ers, 2000s Rams, the read option Hawks.. you WCO, spreads, run and shoot... and yet the Patriots drop back passing game with a physical TE and good but not great RBs still manage to be very successful, just as those style of offenses were in the 80s and 90s.

Pete could see out the Rams cycle, if given the time, and find himself with a very good QB, strong run game and strong D. That, like it did in Philly recently, get them back to a Super Bowl. Some will depend on how Russ evolves. He still looked pretty agile and cagey against the Rams, while certainly not explosive.

But the team has to grow up fast... 8/9 wins this year and then a real solid draft next.

Wilson has a hamstring issue that is holding him back from running....pretty sure. It's listed in the report several weeks now and being downplayed by him and the team (for obvious reasons), but he had wide open runs on Sunday he passed on and likely is throttling down the run plays because of the hammy issue. Now and then you can see him gimp every so slightly if you watch closely.

Woops....forgot to ask. Permission to overanalyze please?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I want to say yes, but I said no.

As Russell ages and slows down, I don't think Pete or any other HC will be able to figure out how to get this team back to a SB with Russell as QB.

The NFL game is changing, and IMO leaving Pete in the dust with how he thinks he can win. Still competitive, still able to win.........but not the dominance needed nor the offensive philosophical shift needed to keep up with how the NFL game is changing and evolving.

the NFL is really more about cycles than evolving.

These offenses are always cyclical, from the 80s Chargers and 90s Cowboys and 9ers, 2000s Rams, the read option Hawks.. you WCO, spreads, run and shoot... and yet the Patriots drop back passing game with a physical TE and good but not great RBs still manage to be very successful, just as those style of offenses were in the 80s and 90s.

Pete could see out the Rams cycle, if given the time, and find himself with a very good QB, strong run game and strong D. That, like it did in Philly recently, get them back to a Super Bowl. Some will depend on how Russ evolves. He still looked pretty agile and cagey against the Rams, while certainly not explosive.

But the team has to grow up fast... 8/9 wins this year and then a real solid draft next.

For sure, the new RPO craze is just the evolution of RO, air raid (Leech), west coast and other offensive scheme based playcalling coming out of college.

But that's kinda my point. The game is evolving, and Pete's still stuck in his three yards and cloud of dust mode.

Which is fine, you can still win running the ball, controlling the clock, getting a couple explosive plays a game and having a great defense. Just don't think he can get the roster back to where it needs to be in Russell's tenure.........or hell even his own tenure.

 

[Chapow]

Odds are against it. Brees and Rodgers haven't won a second one. Peyton Manning got his second through the luck of a dominant defense.
I think people underestimate how really hard it is to make and win a superbowl. There are 31 other teams intent on doing the same thing with the same salary cap and draft capital of every other team. The odds are you win a SB every 30 years or so, all things being equal.

This.

I think it's unlikely, but not because of anything to do with Pete or Russ or any other player or coach.

Aaron Rodgers has only won 1 as a Packer.
Drew Brees has only won 1 as a Saint.
Peyton Manning only won 1 as a Colt.

It is damn hard to get to and win a Super Bowl. Many, many things have to go your way over the course of a season to accomplish it for even the best teams.

 

[MD5eahawks]

Odds are against it. Brees and Rodgers haven't won a second one. Peyton Manning got his second through the luck of a dominant defense.
I think people underestimate how really hard it is to make and win a superbowl. There are 31 other teams intent on doing the same thing with the same salary cap and draft capital of every other team. The odds are you win a SB every 30 years or so, all things being equal.

In order to win multiple SB's:
1) You need a good QB on a below market deal or rookie deal
2) You need to be in a weak division to pile up 6 easy wins a season
3) You need to have good health

Just hard to have all those things like the Patriots seem to.

I don't totally agree. All you really need is a damn good defense and a really good QB. Check out Brady's D when he won and when he lost. At, or very near, the top in points allowed when he won. But he is the one that gets ALL the credit. Neither Brees nor Rogers has had a good D since they won and their win was with, you guessed it, a damn good D. Even Manning had a damn good D in Denver when he won. The win with Indy came with the best D he had while there.

With PC as a HC you know the D is going to be good. Wilson is a top notch QB. So, with that recipe, the chances are pretty good.

edit for typos. think I gottem all.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Oddly enough, the importance of great QBs to the NFL has almost paradoxically made it very difficult for these QBs to make the SB.

Rule changes to protect the QB and give advantages to them have also made it easier for rookie QBs to be effective.

Top tier veteran QBs command such a price tag they strip the budgets of their team leaving them with gaping, exploitable holes.

So the blueprint to the SB almost requires a QB on a rookie contract.

Pete might potentially win a SB with a rookie QB if he can craft another great defense, but that isn't in the cards now.

Wilson can win a SB if he goes to a team with a great defense that just needs an effective QB (Jets, Jags, etc)

Or you can do like the Rams, leverage your rookie QB contract to spend those available dollars on top tier FAs to fill most of your holes and then run roughshod through the league that way.

But teams like the Packers, Saints, etc? No shot. Too much cap room used on QB means too many areas you have to leave thin because you cannot pay the higher quality players and you probably lose your own top performers to FA for the same reasons (Jordy Nelson, etc.)

Ironically, all those rules to protect the star QBs has made it easier for teams to get their rookies productive faster - giving their team advantages against the top tier star veteran QBs. But that is bad news for teams like the Seahawks, because getting a great QB no longer gives you permanent pathways to the playoffs like it used to.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

What's crucial is making the top 2 seed in the conf, so we only play one away game in the playoffs and skip the first round. Every year we can do that our chances are massively increased. But just making the playoffs we got a shooter's chance, especially with Wilson.

GO HAWKS!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So the blueprint to the SB almost requires a QB on a rookie contract..

Good point, but that's also a gamble giving up a competent veteran that may win you 8-10 games a year keeping your job security as a HC and GM vs. gambling on a rookie in order to save the cap to spend it elsewhere.

Obviously it's worked for franchises like us, Eagles and now KC (so far). But it can also horribly backfire if you keep drafting the wrong rookies.

But if we're specifically talking bout Pete? Then yes you're right, the way he wants to play CRITICALLY depends on having an elite defense........and the only way you get that in this league is by not having a QB that's soaking up 25% of your cap space.

 

[AROS]

Interesting that so far 67 percent think yes meanwhile many have offered valid and well-thought out reasons to the contrary.

 

[JimmyG]

Odds are against it. Brees and Rodgers haven't won a second one. Peyton Manning got his second through the luck of a dominant defense.
I think people underestimate how really hard it is to make and win a superbowl. There are 31 other teams intent on doing the same thing with the same salary cap and draft capital of every other team. The odds are you win a SB every 30 years or so, all things being equal.

This.

I think it's unlikely, but not because of anything to do with Pete or Russ or any other player or coach.

Aaron Rodgers has only won 1 as a Packer.
Drew Brees has only won 1 as a Saint.
Peyton Manning only won 1 as a Colt.

It is damn hard to get to and win a Super Bowl. Many, many things have to go your way over the course of a season to accomplish it for even the best teams.

Also, along those lines, only 12 QBs in the history of the league have even appeared in three Super Bowls or more.

 

[Seahawk_Dan]

Odds are against it. Brees and Rodgers haven't won a second one. Peyton Manning got his second through the luck of a dominant defense.
I think people underestimate how really hard it is to make and win a superbowl. There are 31 other teams intent on doing the same thing with the same salary cap and draft capital of every other team. The odds are you win a SB every 30 years or so, all things being equal.

This.

I think it's unlikely, but not because of anything to do with Pete or Russ or any other player or coach.

Aaron Rodgers has only won 1 as a Packer.
Drew Brees has only won 1 as a Saint.
Peyton Manning only won 1 as a Colt.

It is damn hard to get to and win a Super Bowl. Many, many things have to go your way over the course of a season to accomplish it for even the best teams.

Also, along those lines, only 12 QBs in the history of the league have even appeared in three Super Bowls or more.

Exactly.

Brady, John Elway, Joe Montana, my created Franchise QB in Madden 19.

It's a small list guys.

Lol.

 

[DomeHawk]

I am guessing he won't sign another contract with the Seahawks.

 

[ApnaHawk]

NO DOUBT!

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I am guessing he won't sign another contract with the Seahawks.

Russell will sign with whoever gives him 33M+ a year.

The question is will we be the one's giving Russell that type of crazy money, not whether he'll accept it or not. He'll accept it.

 

[HawkerD]

Franchise QBs need a lot of help and have to help themselves. They need incredibly talented young player (uh oh!), the right free agents (Yikes!) and some luck. They should be willing to take less themselves (see NE formula) for a shot at a championship.

The results of this poll are more homer-ism wishful thinking than any kind of rationale thought. If you had to bet your house on it what would you do??? Statistically speaking we can see how hard it is for QB's a tier above RW (Rogers, Brees). Peyton did it with an incredible Defense. Eli with incredible luck. Big Ben because he is a Steeler. Leave Brady out because NE is an anomaly.

What I am seeing of Wilson, this coaching staff and the FO talent evaluation screams "No F'ing way."

Love this poll because it really lets you know what you are dealing with when trying to put forth an argument if it doesn't put the Hawks in a positive light.

 

[lukerguy]

Can Russell win a SB as the focal point of the offense? No.

The team needs running the ball to be the focal point... in fact almost every team needs to be able to run the ball effectively to win a SB.. even the Pats. Moreover, I think they need to have an above average team defense. Top 10 Defense, Top 10 Running game, Sure, they could absolutely win a SB with those two things.

Right now they have a near top 10 RB if they run like they did against LA, and not close to a top 10 defense.

 

[WmHBonney]

Oddly enough, the importance of great QBs to the NFL has almost paradoxically made it very difficult for these QBs to make the SB.

Rule changes to protect the QB and give advantages to them have also made it easier for rookie QBs to be effective.

Top tier veteran QBs command such a price tag they strip the budgets of their team leaving them with gaping, exploitable holes.

So the blueprint to the SB almost requires a QB on a rookie contract.

Pete might potentially win a SB with a rookie QB if he can craft another great defense, but that isn't in the cards now.

Wilson can win a SB if he goes to a team with a great defense that just needs an effective QB (Jets, Jags, etc)

Or you can do like the Rams, leverage your rookie QB contract to spend those available dollars on top tier FAs to fill most of your holes and then run roughshod through the league that way.

But teams like the Packers, Saints, etc? No shot. Too much cap room used on QB means too many areas you have to leave thin because you cannot pay the higher quality players and you probably lose your own top performers to FA for the same reasons (Jordy Nelson, etc.)

Ironically, all those rules to protect the star QBs has made it easier for teams to get their rookies productive faster - giving their team advantages against the top tier star veteran QBs. But that is bad news for teams like the Seahawks, because getting a great QB no longer gives you permanent pathways to the playoffs like it used to.

Agreed. Russell's salary is too much of a handicap to build a championship team around him. Defense wins championships. We no longer have, nor will we have, the horses on defense to win it all. Watch what the Rams are doing now and see what happens when they have to pay Goff.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Asking this team to make the SB in order to be happy with it - that is a tall ask.

We won the SB. It was glorious. On every flight I take, I'm that idiot watching the SB again. When I fly to Dallas next week, I will be watching it. Or Maui the week after.

I got so much joy from that run or those amazing Marshawn runs along the way. It is OK with me to let another team's fans experience that joy.

I just feel like we should have at least done more than blown out after the wild card games.

We can be a great, successful team just getting close to the SB. We already won it. A few division or conference championship games would be fine with me.

I am not SB or bust at all.

But....we have a system where paying great QBs hamstrings the team. We have a QB we have to pay, if we do so - we will be hamstrung.

So either Wilson has to jump to a team with the great defense in place, or we can ride him like the Packers ride Rodgers but Rodgers isn't making a SB for the same reason.

And it would be worse with Carroll because his system will minimize the impact a QB can even have in contributing to winning.

 

[QuahHawk]

My gut tells me he is destined to become an L.A Charger soon. I'm not sure we are SB bound int he next two years and spending $150 mil on Russ is not the answer. I'd rather trade him for a 1st and 2nd than blow our whole cap on a QB.

Cheap QB's are the in thing right now
Mahomes
Goff
Wentz/Foles
Trubisky

 

[Vesuve]

Will Russell Wilson win another Super Bowl wearing a Seahawks uniform?

No, but won't be his fault.

It takes so many factors and little injuries to go to the Big Game and win it all.

 

[NINEster]

It must be said that the Seahawks went to both Super Bowls on rather thin margins. They only won one playoff game comfortably between 2013-2014 (Panthers, 2014). And then only won another comfortable playoff game the rest of the Carroll era (2016 against the Lions).

2013 saw blowout rematches (at home) versus Saints and 49ers come down to the wire with both teams having final possession with under a minute left in the game. Home field advantage was the difference in those games.

2014 you had the Panthers get dominated, but then the Packers lose a fluke game. The only reason the gods gave Malcolm Butler that INT was because of that Packers game (and the Kearse catch right before it). The Packers have proved ever since that that tight NFCC game wasn't a fluke.

Even the 2012 run was very tight. A Redskins team that was getting its way until Griffin went down. Falcons team that held onto a big lead.

Lynch and the defense carried the team those years.

A repeat of a monster RB and a top 3 defense with Wilson is certainly a threat for another Super Bowl or two given that Wilson is a better QB now, but unlikely.

A very good RB with a top 10 defense is interesting.

All Seahawks SB runs have been as #1 NFC seed (even 2005), so there's that too.

If Wilson had a 2012 playoff run like Flacco or Kaepernick, I'd be more inclined to say he could do it without an all time RB & defense.