FREE RUSSELL!

[jammerhawk]

Getting on point with the thread the team will need to vary their game plan against the Buccs as the Buccs have the best run D in the league. I suspect Pete will know that and there will be changes until the Buccs sell out to stop the passing game.

Expect lots of play action, and expect Russell to be morphing to quick passing attack early.

Thast what they should do, that is doubtful what they will do though.

Well, we will see on Sunday.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Like I said to all you people who are good with being one and done in the playoffs good for you.

So, let's say the team keeps being two and done in the playoffs. Are you satisfied? It's better than one and done, but it's not what we all want.

Let's say Seattle consistently reaches the NFC Championship game...and loses. Are you satisfied? I kinda doubt it. Once it becomes a pattern, you're looking for explanations behind the pattern.

Let's say we keep appearing in the Super Bowl, but never win for several years. Are you satisfied? Probably not. You suspect there's some schematic or philosophical issue, and you go looking for it.

So, basically, people who keep repeating the quote aren't going to be content unless we win the Super Bowl most years - which, while amazing in theory, is kind of a ridiculous standard to hold Pete Carroll to in this league of parity, especially after you consider he DID win a Super Bowl.

Face it. Seven playoff appearances is success. The evidence that Pete is failing on the philosophical side is just not all that compelling - especially when you consider all the drafting problems he's been having.

 

[John63]

Like I said to all you people who are good with being one and done in the playoffs good for you.

So, let's say the team keeps being two and done in the playoffs. Are you satisfied? It's better than one and done, but it's not what we all want.

Let's say Seattle consistently reaches the NFC Championship game...and loses. Are you satisfied? I kinda doubt it. Once it becomes a pattern, you're looking for explanations behind the pattern.

Let's say we keep appearing in the Super Bowl, but never win for several years. Are you satisfied? Probably not. You suspect there's some schematic or philosophical issue, and you go looking for it.

So, basically, people who keep repeating the quote aren't going to be content unless we win the Super Bowl most years - which, while amazing in theory, is kind of a ridiculous standard to hold Pete Carroll to in this league of parity, especially after you consider he DID win a Super Bowl.

Face it. Seven playoff appearances is success. The evidence that Pete is failing on the philosophical side is just not all that compelling - especially when you consider all the drafting problems he's been having.

2 things the goal is winning the SB. If we go 1 and done a couple of years,then 2 and done and then nfc and then SB and then we win, fine. But that's not what's happening. 2 those failings in drafting are on him and his philosophy.

 

[Tical21]

If we don't run, we struggle, period. We hit them in the mouth like they've never been hit and see what happens. Russ is 2-8 when throwing 40 times or more, including both losses this year. But yeah, open it up baby!! Unleash it! FREE RUSSELL!!

 

[Sgt. Largent]

If we don't run, we struggle, period. We hit them in the mouth like they've never been hit and see what happens. Russ is 2-8 when throwing 40 times or more, including both losses this year. But yeah, open it up baby!! Unleash it! FREE RUSSELL!!

 

[John63]

If we don't run, we struggle, period. We hit them in the mouth like they've never been hit and see what happens. Russ is 2-8 when throwing 40 times or more, including both losses this year. But yeah, open it up baby!! Unleash it! FREE RUSSELL!!

1 who says dont run? Not one person here said don't run. All we said is lets unleash Wilson given this team is good against the run but not the pass. Also, who said 40 times a game? I know you went threw and it is the number that suited your stance the best. Problem is there is only 1 QB this year Avg 40 throws a game so that makes your 40 very disingenuous. I think most would say 35 is about right, there are alot of QBs avg 35 a game, and guess what he is avg 31 now so wow a whole 4 more. So let's see if we throw 35, and we run say 60 offensive plays that means we have 25 more offensive plays to run I wonder if we throw 35 what we will do with the other 25? Oh I know we will run. Problem solved. Amazing what happens when you use legitimate numbers and not arbitrary numbers that are not even relevant. It's also not just about how many he throws but when.

FYI in most cases when we threw 40+ we had to because we were down huge so using that once again would be disingenuous.

The reality is this, the team we are facing are really good against the run, and really bad against the pass. Any Good HC would take advantage of what they do bad. That is what we are saying.

 

[Tical21]

Okay. Russell is 9-12 when throwing more than 35 times.

We win when we run. When we do what we are not built to do, which is pass more than run, we lose. Period. Teams that allow their opponent to dictate how they play...lose.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

If we don't run, we struggle, period. We hit them in the mouth like they've never been hit and see what happens. Russ is 2-8 when throwing 40 times or more, including both losses this year. But yeah, open it up baby!! Unleash it! FREE RUSSELL!!

1 who says dont run? Not one person here said don't run. All we said is lets unleash Wilson given this team is good against the run but not the pass. Also, who said 40 times a game? I know you went threw and it is the number that suited your stance the best. Problem is there is only 1 QB this year Avg 40 throws a game so that makes your 40 very disingenuous. I think most would say 35 is about right, there are alot of QBs avg 35 a game, and guess what he is avg 31 now so wow a whole 4 more. So let's see if we throw 35, and we run say 60 offensive plays that means we have 25 more offensive plays to run I wonder if we throw 35 what we will do with the other 25? Oh I know we will run. Problem solved. Amazing what happens when you use legitimate numbers and not arbitrary numbers that are not even relevant. It's also not just about how many he throws but when.

FYI in most cases when we threw 40+ we had to because we were down huge so using that once again would be disingenuous.

The reality is this, the team we are facing are really good against the run, and really bad against the pass. Any Good HC would take advantage of what they do bad. That is what we are saying.

Tical said hit em in the mouth, so I posted a funny gif of when Marshawn said his running style is to hit the defense over and over and over and over.

How you took that to mean I said don't run I have no idea.

 

[John63]

If we don't run, we struggle, period. We hit them in the mouth like they've never been hit and see what happens. Russ is 2-8 when throwing 40 times or more, including both losses this year. But yeah, open it up baby!! Unleash it! FREE RUSSELL!!

1 who says dont run? Not one person here said don't run. All we said is lets unleash Wilson given this team is good against the run but not the pass. Also, who said 40 times a game? I know you went threw and it is the number that suited your stance the best. Problem is there is only 1 QB this year Avg 40 throws a game so that makes your 40 very disingenuous. I think most would say 35 is about right, there are alot of QBs avg 35 a game, and guess what he is avg 31 now so wow a whole 4 more. So let's see if we throw 35, and we run say 60 offensive plays that means we have 25 more offensive plays to run I wonder if we throw 35 what we will do with the other 25? Oh I know we will run. Problem solved. Amazing what happens when you use legitimate numbers and not arbitrary numbers that are not even relevant. It's also not just about how many he throws but when.

FYI in most cases when we threw 40+ we had to because we were down huge so using that once again would be disingenuous.

The reality is this, the team we are facing are really good against the run, and really bad against the pass. Any Good HC would take advantage of what they do bad. That is what we are saying.

Tical said hit em in the mouth, so I posted a funny gif of when Marshawn said his running style is to hit the defense over and over and over and over.

How you took that to mean I said don't run I have no idea.

I was replying to tical.

 

[John63]

Okay. Russell is 9-12 when throwing more than 35 times.

We win when we run. When we do what we are not built to do, which is pass more than run, we lose. Period. Teams that allow their opponent to dictate how they play...lose.

again "NO ONE IS SAYING NOT TO RUN"

so first we are 10-14-1 when throwing 35 or more. 2nd of the 25, 20 were done with us behind and behind big with most of the throwing down in the 2nd half. We are saying to start throwing from the jump street. I will give you 2 examples

Last year LAC he threw 39 times, but only 12 in the first half, we ended up being behind after 1st half. We were behind going into the 4th with 7 minutes to go we were down 25-10 he threw over 20 times from that point on, We lost 25-17. So saying we loose when he throws over 35 times is not a true representation of what is happening. We did not loos because he threw over 35 times, we lost because we waited to long to start throwing. This example makes up most of those games were we threw over 35 times, and also most of the losses.

Example 2 Houston we won 41-38 Wilson threw over 40 times, However it was spread out and started from the beginning, He threw 20 in the first half or in other words about half. This example represents most of our wins when we throw over 35 times.


There is a difference in throwing 35+ spread out throughout the game and doing it because you are behind and have no choice.

We are not saying don't run, we are saying use the pass to set up the run given our opponent are not good against the pass.A good coach takes advantage of his opponents weakness and this week it is pass defense. A knowledgeable fan would know you attack the opponents weakness.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

1 who says dont run? Not one person here said don't run. All we said is lets unleash Wilson given this team is good against the run but not the pass. Also, who said 40 times a game? I know you went threw and it is the number that suited your stance the best. Problem is there is only 1 QB this year Avg 40 throws a game so that makes your 40 very disingenuous. I think most would say 35 is about right, there are alot of QBs avg 35 a game, and guess what he is avg 31 now so wow a whole 4 more. So let's see if we throw 35, and we run say 60 offensive plays that means we have 25 more offensive plays to run I wonder if we throw 35 what we will do with the other 25? Oh I know we will run. Problem solved. Amazing what happens when you use legitimate numbers and not arbitrary numbers that are not even relevant. It's also not just about how many he throws but when.

FYI in most cases when we threw 40+ we had to because we were down huge so using that once again would be disingenuous.

The reality is this, the team we are facing are really good against the run, and really bad against the pass. Any Good HC would take advantage of what they do bad. That is what we are saying.

Tical said hit em in the mouth, so I posted a funny gif of when Marshawn said his running style is to hit the defense over and over and over and over.

How you took that to mean I said don't run I have no idea.

I was replying to tical.

You should quote Tical then.

 

[John63]

1 who says dont run? Not one person here said don't run. All we said is lets unleash Wilson given this team is good against the run but not the pass. Also, who said 40 times a game? I know you went threw and it is the number that suited your stance the best. Problem is there is only 1 QB this year Avg 40 throws a game so that makes your 40 very disingenuous. I think most would say 35 is about right, there are alot of QBs avg 35 a game, and guess what he is avg 31 now so wow a whole 4 more. So let's see if we throw 35, and we run say 60 offensive plays that means we have 25 more offensive plays to run I wonder if we throw 35 what we will do with the other 25? Oh I know we will run. Problem solved. Amazing what happens when you use legitimate numbers and not arbitrary numbers that are not even relevant. It's also not just about how many he throws but when.

FYI in most cases when we threw 40+ we had to because we were down huge so using that once again would be disingenuous.

The reality is this, the team we are facing are really good against the run, and really bad against the pass. Any Good HC would take advantage of what they do bad. That is what we are saying.

Tical said hit em in the mouth, so I posted a funny gif of when Marshawn said his running style is to hit the defense over and over and over and over.

How you took that to mean I said don't run I have no idea.

I was replying to tical.

You should quote Tical then.

Yeah next time.

 

[AubHawk71]

Stats, schmats.

I'm trying to dodge this three way pizzing match this thread devolved into without getting any drops on me, but I agree with AROS. It's quite simple, the Bucs sucs at passing D, good at Running D.

It's cute to sit at your computer and look up stats to trying to "win" an argument with strangers on the internet, but no amount of:

Well, the Seahawks are 72-97 under PC when they pass more than 6 times in the last half of the 3rd quarter...

...analytics really pertains to the real world football game played with real humans. Analytics work well with baseball because, well, there aren't as many moving parts as with the footballz.

6-2 record: hooray
Watching the games this season: Painful

It's supposed to be entertainment, no?

 

[Tical21]

Okay. Russell is 9-12 when throwing more than 35 times.

We win when we run. When we do what we are not built to do, which is pass more than run, we lose. Period. Teams that allow their opponent to dictate how they play...lose.

again "NO ONE IS SAYING NOT TO RUN"

so first we are 10-14-1 when throwing 35 or more. 2nd of the 25, 20 were done with us behind and behind big with most of the throwing down in the 2nd half. We are saying to start throwing from the jump street. I will give you 2 examples

Last year LAC he threw 39 times, but only 12 in the first half, we ended up being behind after 1st half. We were behind going into the 4th with 7 minutes to go we were down 25-10 he threw over 20 times from that point on, We lost 25-17. So saying we loose when he throws over 35 times is not a true representation of what is happening. We did not loos because he threw over 35 times, we lost because we waited to long to start throwing. This example makes up most of those games were we threw over 35 times, and also most of the losses.

Example 2 Houston we won 41-38 Wilson threw over 40 times, However it was spread out and started from the beginning, He threw 20 in the first half or in other words about half. This example represents most of our wins when we throw over 35 times.


There is a difference in throwing 35+ spread out throughout the game and doing it because you are behind and have no choice.

We are not saying don't run, we are saying use the pass to set up the run given our opponent are not good against the pass.A good coach takes advantage of his opponents weakness and this week it is pass defense. A knowledgeable fan would know you attack the opponents weakness.

How many losses does it take from trying to pass to setup the run will it take for you to figure out that it doesn’t work? I just want a number.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Okay. Russell is 9-12 when throwing more than 35 times.

We win when we run. When we do what we are not built to do, which is pass more than run, we lose. Period. Teams that allow their opponent to dictate how they play...lose.

again "NO ONE IS SAYING NOT TO RUN"

so first we are 10-14-1 when throwing 35 or more. 2nd of the 25, 20 were done with us behind and behind big with most of the throwing down in the 2nd half. We are saying to start throwing from the jump street. I will give you 2 examples

Last year LAC he threw 39 times, but only 12 in the first half, we ended up being behind after 1st half. We were behind going into the 4th with 7 minutes to go we were down 25-10 he threw over 20 times from that point on, We lost 25-17. So saying we loose when he throws over 35 times is not a true representation of what is happening. We did not loos because he threw over 35 times, we lost because we waited to long to start throwing. This example makes up most of those games were we threw over 35 times, and also most of the losses.

Example 2 Houston we won 41-38 Wilson threw over 40 times, However it was spread out and started from the beginning, He threw 20 in the first half or in other words about half. This example represents most of our wins when we throw over 35 times.


There is a difference in throwing 35+ spread out throughout the game and doing it because you are behind and have no choice.

We are not saying don't run, we are saying use the pass to set up the run given our opponent are not good against the pass.A good coach takes advantage of his opponents weakness and this week it is pass defense. A knowledgeable fan would know you attack the opponents weakness.

How many losses does it take from trying to pass to setup the run will it take for you to figure out that it doesn’t work? I just want a number.

I would humbly propose..."enough to keep us out of the NFL playoffs".

Then I'll get worried.

 

[scutterhawk]

Stats, schmats.

I'm trying to dodge this three way pizzing match this thread devolved into without getting any drops on me, but I agree with AROS. It's quite simple, the Bucs sucs at passing D, good at Running D.

It's cute to sit at your computer and look up stats to trying to "win" an argument with strangers on the internet, but no amount of:

Well, the Seahawks are 72-97 under PC when they pass more than 6 times in the last half of the 3rd quarter...

...analytics really pertains to the real world football game played with real humans. Analytics work well with baseball because, well, there aren't as many moving parts as with the footballz.

6-2 record: hooray
Watching the games this season: Painful

It's supposed to be entertainment, no?

LOL, PERCEPTION--> If you're not "Entertained", that's your fault.

 

[John63]

Okay. Russell is 9-12 when throwing more than 35 times.

We win when we run. When we do what we are not built to do, which is pass more than run, we lose. Period. Teams that allow their opponent to dictate how they play...lose.

again "NO ONE IS SAYING NOT TO RUN"

so first we are 10-14-1 when throwing 35 or more. 2nd of the 25, 20 were done with us behind and behind big with most of the throwing down in the 2nd half. We are saying to start throwing from the jump street. I will give you 2 examples

Last year LAC he threw 39 times, but only 12 in the first half, we ended up being behind after 1st half. We were behind going into the 4th with 7 minutes to go we were down 25-10 he threw over 20 times from that point on, We lost 25-17. So saying we loose when he throws over 35 times is not a true representation of what is happening. We did not loos because he threw over 35 times, we lost because we waited to long to start throwing. This example makes up most of those games were we threw over 35 times, and also most of the losses.

Example 2 Houston we won 41-38 Wilson threw over 40 times, However it was spread out and started from the beginning, He threw 20 in the first half or in other words about half. This example represents most of our wins when we throw over 35 times.


There is a difference in throwing 35+ spread out throughout the game and doing it because you are behind and have no choice.

We are not saying don't run, we are saying use the pass to set up the run given our opponent are not good against the pass.A good coach takes advantage of his opponents weakness and this week it is pass defense. A knowledgeable fan would know you attack the opponents weakness.

How many losses does it take from trying to pass to setup the run will it take for you to figure out that it doesn’t work? I just want a number.

How many games of waiting to long to pass more will it take for you to get it, I am guessing you never will. When we actually consistently use the pass to set up the run, or pass as much in the 1st half as the 2nd I can give you a number. Problem is we don't do that even when we should. 1 more time of the 25 times he threw 35 or more in 20 of them we were behind and in those 20 he threw way more in the 2nd half than the 1st so those don't show a true pass to set up the run offense. They show a team trying to run at all cost until it is to late and then throwing and being lucky they have a magician at QB that can win about half of them.

All good coaches game plan to take advantage of what the other team is bad at. IN this game it is pass defense. Does not mean only throw, does not mean throw 40, it means s use the pass to set up the run. By the end of the game it will probably even out, because as the pass works they will have to back off, and then we run, and when they pull back in we pass. That is what you do when a team as an obvious weakness.

 

[scutterhawk]

Okay. Russell is 9-12 when throwing more than 35 times.

We win when we run. When we do what we are not built to do, which is pass more than run, we lose. Period. Teams that allow their opponent to dictate how they play...lose.

again "NO ONE IS SAYING NOT TO RUN"

so first we are 10-14-1 when throwing 35 or more. 2nd of the 25, 20 were done with us behind and behind big with most of the throwing down in the 2nd half. We are saying to start throwing from the jump street. I will give you 2 examples

Last year LAC he threw 39 times, but only 12 in the first half, we ended up being behind after 1st half. We were behind going into the 4th with 7 minutes to go we were down 25-10 he threw over 20 times from that point on, We lost 25-17. So saying we loose when he throws over 35 times is not a true representation of what is happening. We did not loos because he threw over 35 times, we lost because we waited to long to start throwing. This example makes up most of those games were we threw over 35 times, and also most of the losses.

Example 2 Houston we won 41-38 Wilson threw over 40 times, However it was spread out and started from the beginning, He threw 20 in the first half or in other words about half. This example represents most of our wins when we throw over 35 times.


There is a difference in throwing 35+ spread out throughout the game and doing it because you are behind and have no choice.

We are not saying don't run, we are saying use the pass to set up the run given our opponent are not good against the pass.A good coach takes advantage of his opponents weakness and this week it is pass defense. A knowledgeable fan would know you attack the opponents weakness.

How many losses does it take from trying to pass to setup the run will it take for you to figure out that it doesn’t work? I just want a number.

I'm sure that in YOUR 'Expert', -->OPINION <--that YOU have a specific "Number" in mind, eh? :roll:

 

[John63]

Lol someone is no place to be found. Hmm good thing we did not listen to him and keep Wilson leashed ahh.

 

[Fade]

Citing Wilson's W-L when he throws a lot is classic causation vs correlation.

Put him Andy Reed's system, and any pass happy scheme he would be fine, probably break a ton records kind of fine. And win a ton of games fine.

He does that now with Less than ideal parts around him.

On the flipside take one of these so called franchise QB and put him on the Seahawks. I surmise a lot of those guys wouldn't be considered franchise QBs anymore.