Its not Russ, its not Pete, It wasnt Schotty or Bevell...

[RolandDeschain]

We don't even run very many short receiver routes the vast majority of the time Dome, you are just inventing the narrative you want to see.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

We need a superior offensive line to deal with RW's abilities. Everyone laments the lack of a short and quick passing game but that requires a short drop. Plays well to Tom Brady's 6'5" not so much with RW's 5'10". That's why Brady can pick you apart all game long.

It's the same old story, go out and get a good, not average, offensive line.

There's a little fella who has had a killer short passing game for like 15 years now by the name of Drew Brees. You may have heard of him. Not to point out the huge, glaring, Mars-sized hole in your theory that Wilson's height means he can't be a good short-range passer.

Drew Brees is a little taller and has had much better O-lines. RW can be effective in the short passing game with a good O-line, not with what we have had for the last four years. But rarely do you see Russ throw the quick hitch unless it's to the unimpeded horizontal pass. Mostly from the shot-gun or deep drops and roll outs. Brady can do it under center, stand up and throw. He draws you in and then hits downfield, he's made a career out of it. How effective is it? His record speaks for itself and now that he's left NE they have a losing record and his new team is in the NFCCG. No brainer.

Like most Seahawks' fans I love RW and he's definitely a top-5 QB but for gawd's sake, get him a line.

Our O-line ranked 16th in pass pro this year, so not great, but also not terrible.

I think it's short sighted to think that's Russell's problem when it comes to his deficiencies.......which are getting the ball out on time, and more importantly throwing it to the correct receiver after reading the defense.

Russell's accurate, throws a great ball, but that is a problem of his. So maybe a better pass pro line would help, but IMO it wouldn't result in helping him look more like a polished Brees, Brady or Rodgers type of QB that are masters at reading defenses and getting the ball out on time with quick precision and accuracy.

Russell needs a coordinator and offensive scheme that maximizes his vision, which is getting him out in space where he can confidently go through his progressions.

No contest for me for which coordinator could do that, it's Doug Peterson. He's a mastermind at the short misdirection RPO passing game that would maximize Russell's attributes. Rhythm, tempo, space.

But Pete would never hire an experienced veteran coordinator like Peterson that'd want autonomy.

I also think Pete wants to ensure there isn’t a mutiny in the locker room as to who the top dog coach really is.

I think Pete is searching for someone that could not possibly threaten him in any way.

He’ll be hiring someone that will definitely “lay down” to Carroll.

Imagine, the locker room in full support of an OC over Carroll. That wouldn’t suit well with Carroll.

Carroll will surely make it known all the success is because of Carroll and all the failures are someone else,
but may not publicly state it.

I personally do not think Carroll will hire Pederson because Pederson is an established coach with a Super Bowl resume.

Any personal decision to back Pederson may result in a mutiny in the locker room, and it can prove fatal to Carroll.

Carroll is going to of course prevent any possibility of that.

Pederson will not be the hire in my opinion.

 

[DomeHawk]

I played football from the time I was 8 to age 22. In spite of that I don't consider myself an expert like many here. I have never coached and rarely participate in the x's and o's you see here so often. The one thing I do bring to the table is the knowledge that you can't scheme yourself to success if you have inferior athletes. That's just not the way football works.

 

[DomeHawk]

We need a superior offensive line to deal with RW's abilities. Everyone laments the lack of a short and quick passing game but that requires a short drop. Plays well to Tom Brady's 6'5" not so much with RW's 5'10". That's why Brady can pick you apart all game long.

It's the same old story, go out and get a good, not average, offensive line.

There's a little fella who has had a killer short passing game for like 15 years now by the name of Drew Brees. You may have heard of him. Not to point out the huge, glaring, Mars-sized hole in your theory that Wilson's height means he can't be a good short-range passer.

Drew Brees is a little taller and has had much better O-lines. RW can be effective in the short passing game with a good O-line, not with what we have had for the last four years. But rarely do you see Russ throw the quick hitch unless it's to the unimpeded horizontal pass. Mostly from the shot-gun or deep drops and roll outs. Brady can do it under center, stand up and throw. He draws you in and then hits downfield, he's made a career out of it. How effective is it? His record speaks for itself and now that he's left NE they have a losing record and his new team is in the NFCCG. No brainer.

Like most Seahawks' fans I love RW and he's definitely a top-5 QB but for gawd's sake, get him a line.

Our O-line ranked 16th in pass pro this year, so not great, but also not terrible.

29th in QB sacked percentage. You're not going to win championships with that. Look at the teams with the lowest sack %, they are the teams at the top.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/qb-sacked-pct

 

[TwistedHusky]

Domehawk,

You can absolutely scheme your way to success against better athletes in football. Teams do it all the time.

The 85 Bears did not actually have the best roster that year. They had a good one but what put them over all the other teams was the 46 defense. That is still the best defense in history even though the 46 probably does not work today.

But the best example of scheming to success is A-11 football. A-11 offense was specifically designed to make it easier for teams in HS to compete with teams with better athletes. I think they made rule changes to cut the effectiveness of it but it certainly worked.

It made smaller schools immediately competitive and even able to win games against some of the bigger power schools.

Our biggest problem is that Pete seems not only unaware that tactics can impact success, he seems oblivious to the reality that the other team knowing your strategy and tactics can hurt your own effectiveness. Or that strengths/weaknesses in matchups should determine the tactics you employ, as they effect the success rate.

None of this seems to register with him. Again, probably more because he is old than because he has never been exposed to these concepts.

As Pete continues to age, this gets worse and will get worse. However, Pete stepping down means the winning years of Seahawk football end. So it isn't like people are clamoring to push him off the stage. Nor should they be.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

29th in QB sacked percentage. You're not going to win championships with that. Look at the teams with the lowest sack %, they are the teams at the top.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/qb-sacked-pct

Yeah I'm over blaming our O-line for Russell getting sacked a bazillion times a year, over half of his sacks are on him.

 

[John63]

29th in QB sacked percentage. You're not going to win championships with that. Look at the teams with the lowest sack %, they are the teams at the top.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/qb-sacked-pct

Yeah I'm over blaming our O-line for Russell getting sacked a bazillion times a year, over half of his sacks are on him.

I presume you have a link to were it says over half right? Never mind you dont, So we have a link with facts saying our oline was bad, and no link for fact showing over half is on Wilson.. HMMM fact or fiction. I will go with fact thanks.


I am over blaming everyone but the HC for the crappy oline we have had for now 10 years.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

29th in QB sacked percentage. You're not going to win championships with that. Look at the teams with the lowest sack %, they are the teams at the top.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/qb-sacked-pct

Yeah I'm over blaming our O-line for Russell getting sacked a bazillion times a year, over half of his sacks are on him.

I presume you have a link to were it says over half right? Never mind you dont, So we have a link with facts saying our oline was bad, and no link for fact showing over half is on Wilson.. HMMM fact or fiction. I will go with fact thanks.


I am over blaming everyone but the HC for the crappy oline we have had for now 10 years.

I said our O-line was ranked 14th in 2020.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2020 ... e-rankings

That's top half of the league. Not great, but also not the dumpster fire you guys make it out to be every year so you have something to blame for Russell getting sacked too much.

He's great at getting out of trouble and making plays, but as he ages it's less and less every year. If you don't see that he holds onto the ball too long and takes too many sacks, which contributes to Dome's stat? Then I can't help you.

Half, 30%, 40%, 70%........pick whatever percentage you want. It's a terrible stat to prove our O-line is bad.

 

[John63]

29th in QB sacked percentage. You're not going to win championships with that. Look at the teams with the lowest sack %, they are the teams at the top.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/qb-sacked-pct

Yeah I'm over blaming our O-line for Russell getting sacked a bazillion times a year, over half of his sacks are on him.

I presume you have a link to were it says over half right? Never mind you dont, So we have a link with facts saying our oline was bad, and no link for fact showing over half is on Wilson.. HMMM fact or fiction. I will go with fact thanks.


I am over blaming everyone but the HC for the crappy oline we have had for now 10 years.

I said our O-line was ranked 14th in 2020.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2020 ... e-rankings

That's top half of the league. Not great, but also not the dumpster fire you guys make it out to be every year so you have something to blame for Russell getting sacked too much.

He's great at getting out of trouble and making plays, but as he ages it's less and less every year. If you don't see that he holds onto the ball too long and takes too many sacks, which contributes to Dome's stat? Then I can't help you.

Half, 30%, 40%, 70%........pick whatever percentage you want. It's a terrible stat to prove our O-line is bad.

my apologies for coming across s snarky. Tired of watching a bad oline year in and out and having some try to blame everyone but the person responsible for the oline Also I do see how he causes some of the sacks, I also see how in most cases he has no choice since everyone is sent long. However, I don't think the sacks he causes are near as many as you think. FYI Footballoustisders has our oline ranked as 27th in pass blocking. They started charging, so I can't share a link. I would agree they were pretty good in the first half of the year, but we also faced alot of very weak defenses. As we started facing better defenses they looked really bad. In fact on KJR they were saying Wilson was hit, hurried, sacked or pressured on over 50% of his drop backs. That is not good.

 

[QuahHawk]

Analysis: Was Russell Wilson really to blame for the sacks against the Chargers?

"Carroll said Wilson could have done more to avoid the four sacks that he took, three of which loomed pivotal in killing Seattle drives."

https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/sea ... -chargers/


Last week’s win saw a statistical rarity: Russell Wilson not getting sacked

“Sacks are a QB stat” is layman’s term for explaining that quarterbacks are, indeed, the most important variable"
"The longer, nuanced statement: "Variation in sack rates across teams is primarily driven by quarterbacks and not offensive lines."
"The short, digestible statement: "Sacks are a quarterback stat."

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2020/12/18/2 ... completion



Seahawks Film Room: How Russell Wilson was sometimes his own worst enemy in 2018

" I wanted to look at the 51 sacks to determine the root cause for each and discuss trends I saw on film. After doing so, I believe that even though Seattle's sack rate of 10.7 percent is far from good, the line definitely improved in pass protection this season under Mike Solari."

https://theathletic.com/767912/2019/01/ ... y-in-2018/

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Yeah I'm over blaming our O-line for Russell getting sacked a bazillion times a year, over half of his sacks are on him.

I presume you have a link to were it says over half right? Never mind you dont, So we have a link with facts saying our oline was bad, and no link for fact showing over half is on Wilson.. HMMM fact or fiction. I will go with fact thanks.


I am over blaming everyone but the HC for the crappy oline we have had for now 10 years.

I said our O-line was ranked 14th in 2020.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2020 ... e-rankings

That's top half of the league. Not great, but also not the dumpster fire you guys make it out to be every year so you have something to blame for Russell getting sacked too much.

He's great at getting out of trouble and making plays, but as he ages it's less and less every year. If you don't see that he holds onto the ball too long and takes too many sacks, which contributes to Dome's stat? Then I can't help you.

Half, 30%, 40%, 70%........pick whatever percentage you want. It's a terrible stat to prove our O-line is bad.

my apologies for coming across s snarky. Tired of watching a bad oline year in and out and having some try to blame everyone but the person responsible for the oline Also I do see how he causes some of the sacks, I also see how in most cases he has no choice since everyone is sent long. However, I don't think the sacks he causes are near as many as you think. FYI Footballoustisders has our oline ranked as 27th in pass blocking. They started charging, so I can't share a link. I would agree they were pretty good in the first half of the year, but we also faced alot of very weak defenses. As we started facing better defenses they looked really bad. In fact on KJR they were saying Wilson was hit, hurried, sacked or pressured on over 50% of his drop backs. That is not good.

Russell's continually at the bottom of the list every year in the "time to throw" stat.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/pass ... e-to-throw

This year's he's almost at 3 seconds, and this stat has continuously increased over the past five years. Not a good sign for an aging QB that still thinks he can duck out of trouble and make plays, and is becoming less and less effective at doing so.

So yeah, I'm all for a better O-line. But again, pass pro is not a good stat IMO to throw out there when it comes to the O-line that has to block for Russell.

 

[John63]

I presume you have a link to were it says over half right? Never mind you dont, So we have a link with facts saying our oline was bad, and no link for fact showing over half is on Wilson.. HMMM fact or fiction. I will go with fact thanks.


I am over blaming everyone but the HC for the crappy oline we have had for now 10 years.

I said our O-line was ranked 14th in 2020.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2020 ... e-rankings

That's top half of the league. Not great, but also not the dumpster fire you guys make it out to be every year so you have something to blame for Russell getting sacked too much.

He's great at getting out of trouble and making plays, but as he ages it's less and less every year. If you don't see that he holds onto the ball too long and takes too many sacks, which contributes to Dome's stat? Then I can't help you.

Half, 30%, 40%, 70%........pick whatever percentage you want. It's a terrible stat to prove our O-line is bad.

my apologies for coming across s snarky. Tired of watching a bad oline year in and out and having some try to blame everyone but the person responsible for the oline Also I do see how he causes some of the sacks, I also see how in most cases he has no choice since everyone is sent long. However, I don't think the sacks he causes are near as many as you think. FYI Footballoustisders has our oline ranked as 27th in pass blocking. They started charging, so I can't share a link. I would agree they were pretty good in the first half of the year, but we also faced alot of very weak defenses. As we started facing better defenses they looked really bad. In fact on KJR they were saying Wilson was hit, hurried, sacked or pressured on over 50% of his drop backs. That is not good.

Russell's continually at the bottom of the list every year in the "time to throw" stat.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/pass ... e-to-throw

This year's he's almost at 3 seconds, and this stat has continuously increased over the past five years. Not a good sign for an aging QB that still thinks he can duck out of trouble and make plays, and is becoming less and less effective at doing so.

So yeah, I'm all for a better O-line. But again, pass pro is not a good stat IMO to throw out there when it comes to the O-line that has to block for Russell.

The question is though, is this a Wilson thing, or a by product of PCs desire for chunk plays which means longer routes.

 

[John63]

Analysis: Was Russell Wilson really to blame for the sacks against the Chargers?

"Carroll said Wilson could have done more to avoid the four sacks that he took, three of which loomed pivotal in killing Seattle drives."

https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/sea ... -chargers/


Last week’s win saw a statistical rarity: Russell Wilson not getting sacked

“Sacks are a QB stat” is layman’s term for explaining that quarterbacks are, indeed, the most important variable"
"The longer, nuanced statement: "Variation in sack rates across teams is primarily driven by quarterbacks and not offensive lines."
"The short, digestible statement: "Sacks are a quarterback stat."

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2020/12/18/2 ... completion



Seahawks Film Room: How Russell Wilson was sometimes his own worst enemy in 2018

" I wanted to look at the 51 sacks to determine the root cause for each and discuss trends I saw on film. After doing so, I believe that even though Seattle's sack rate of 10.7 percent is far from good, the line definitely improved in pass protection this season under Mike Solari."

https://theathletic.com/767912/2019/01/ ... y-in-2018/

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2020/1/3...ch-technique-independent-hands-2-handed-punch

PFF’s Pass Blocking Grades (30th)
PFF’s Pass Blocking Efficiency (25th)
ESPN’s PBWR (28th)
Football Outsiders Pass Blocking Ranking (24th)

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-all-32-units-entering-the-2020-nfl-season

"28. SEATTLE SEAHAWKS
The Seahawks have ranked among the worst offensive lines in the league over recent years, and last season was no different as they finished 27th in our final rankings."

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I said our O-line was ranked 14th in 2020.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2020 ... e-rankings

That's top half of the league. Not great, but also not the dumpster fire you guys make it out to be every year so you have something to blame for Russell getting sacked too much.

He's great at getting out of trouble and making plays, but as he ages it's less and less every year. If you don't see that he holds onto the ball too long and takes too many sacks, which contributes to Dome's stat? Then I can't help you.

Half, 30%, 40%, 70%........pick whatever percentage you want. It's a terrible stat to prove our O-line is bad.

my apologies for coming across s snarky. Tired of watching a bad oline year in and out and having some try to blame everyone but the person responsible for the oline Also I do see how he causes some of the sacks, I also see how in most cases he has no choice since everyone is sent long. However, I don't think the sacks he causes are near as many as you think. FYI Footballoustisders has our oline ranked as 27th in pass blocking. They started charging, so I can't share a link. I would agree they were pretty good in the first half of the year, but we also faced alot of very weak defenses. As we started facing better defenses they looked really bad. In fact on KJR they were saying Wilson was hit, hurried, sacked or pressured on over 50% of his drop backs. That is not good.

Russell's continually at the bottom of the list every year in the "time to throw" stat.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/pass ... e-to-throw

This year's he's almost at 3 seconds, and this stat has continuously increased over the past five years. Not a good sign for an aging QB that still thinks he can duck out of trouble and make plays, and is becoming less and less effective at doing so.

So yeah, I'm all for a better O-line. But again, pass pro is not a good stat IMO to throw out there when it comes to the O-line that has to block for Russell.

The question is though, is this a Wilson thing, or a by product of PCs desire for chunk plays which means longer routes.

It's a Wilson thing for me. I highly doubt Pete's instructing Wilson to hold onto the ball too long and take too many unnecessary sacks and intentional grounding penalties killing drives.

But Russell's always played like this, it's one of his biggest attributes, and one of his biggest detriments.

Not sure what we're arguing about. If you can't see this, then idk what to say. Dude holds onto the ball too long, is at the top of the list every year in sacks, as my link illustrates it's not all on the O-line. Slow throw times and holds onto the ball too long, which results in sacks.

But again again and again, you want to improve the O-line I'm all in. Just don't expect these numbers to dramatically drop if you do. It's ingrained in Russell's QB DNA.

 

[John63]

my apologies for coming across s snarky. Tired of watching a bad oline year in and out and having some try to blame everyone but the person responsible for the oline Also I do see how he causes some of the sacks, I also see how in most cases he has no choice since everyone is sent long. However, I don't think the sacks he causes are near as many as you think. FYI Footballoustisders has our oline ranked as 27th in pass blocking. They started charging, so I can't share a link. I would agree they were pretty good in the first half of the year, but we also faced alot of very weak defenses. As we started facing better defenses they looked really bad. In fact on KJR they were saying Wilson was hit, hurried, sacked or pressured on over 50% of his drop backs. That is not good.

Russell's continually at the bottom of the list every year in the "time to throw" stat.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/pass ... e-to-throw

This year's he's almost at 3 seconds, and this stat has continuously increased over the past five years. Not a good sign for an aging QB that still thinks he can duck out of trouble and make plays, and is becoming less and less effective at doing so.

So yeah, I'm all for a better O-line. But again, pass pro is not a good stat IMO to throw out there when it comes to the O-line that has to block for Russell.

The question is though, is this a Wilson thing, or a by product of PCs desire for chunk plays which means longer routes.

It's a Wilson thing for me. I highly doubt Pete's instructing Wilson to hold onto the ball too long and take too many unnecessary sacks and intentional grounding penalties killing drives.

But Russell's always played like this, it's one of his biggest attributes, and one of his biggest detriments.

Not sure what we're arguing about. If you can't see this, then idk what to say. Dude holds onto the ball too long, is at the top of the list every year in sacks, as my link illustrates it's not all on the O-line. Slow throw times and holds onto the ball too long, which results in sacks.

But again again and again, you want to improve the O-line I'm all in. Just don't expect these numbers to dramatically drop if you do. It's ingrained in Russell's QB DNA.

I guess I don't agree with you saying its all Wilson when we know for a fact PC has said he wants chunk plays, which means longer routes, which means having to hold the ball longer. I am not saying some of the sacks are not on him, all qbs cause some of their sacks. I just don't believe out of the 40+ sacks this year more than 10-20% of them are on him. And either way does not excuse being hit, hurried, pressured and sacked don over 50% of your drop backs. Also Wilson is always top 5 in being pressured in under 2 seconds. Then if you want to talk about the 10-20% of sacks he causes you must also talked about the additional 10-20 he stops from happening.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I guess I don't agree with you saying its all Wilson when we know for a fact PC has said he wants chunk plays, which means longer routes, which means having to hold the ball longer. I am not saying some of the sacks are not on him, all qbs cause some of their sacks. I just don't believe out of the 40+ sacks this year more than 10-20% of them are on him. And either way does not excuse being hit, hurried, pressured and sacked don over 50% of your drop backs. Also Wilson is always top 5 in being pressured in under 2 seconds. Then if you want to talk about the 10-20% of sacks he causes you must also talked about the additional 10-20 he stops from happening.

It's not all Wilson. It's football, a team sport, every positive and every negative is some degree and percentage of praise or blame/criticism on all parts involved.

Guess that's where we part ways, you think it's more on Pete and the O-line that Russell gets sacked so much, and I think it's more on Wilson.

Mobile QB's get sacked more, pocket QB's who get the ball out quickly get sacked less.

So get All Pro's at every O-line position and Russell will still be in the top 10 in the league in sacks.

 

[John63]

I guess I don't agree with you saying its all Wilson when we know for a fact PC has said he wants chunk plays, which means longer routes, which means having to hold the ball longer. I am not saying some of the sacks are not on him, all qbs cause some of their sacks. I just don't believe out of the 40+ sacks this year more than 10-20% of them are on him. And either way does not excuse being hit, hurried, pressured and sacked don over 50% of your drop backs. Also Wilson is always top 5 in being pressured in under 2 seconds. Then if you want to talk about the 10-20% of sacks he causes you must also talked about the additional 10-20 he stops from happening.

It's not all Wilson. It's football, a team sport, every positive and every negative is some degree and percentage of praise or blame/criticism on all parts involved.

Guess that's where we part ways, you think it's more on Pete and the O-line that Russell gets sacked so much, and I think it's more on Wilson.

Mobile QB's get sacked more, pocket QB's who get the ball out quickly get sacked less.

So get All Pro's at every O-line position and Russell will still be in the top 10 in the league in sacks.

not if you change the system from chunk plays to take what's given, get the ball out quicker. I believe the biggest issue is the system, PC wants of chunk plays.

 

[DomeHawk]

Domehawk,

You can absolutely scheme your way to success against better athletes in football. Teams do it all the time.

I'm not saying that it doesn't happen but as a general rule. I witnessed it time and again playing the game.

Why do you think that Alabama is winning NC's just about every year? Because their coaching is so superior? They have good coaches but so do many other teams. Their offenses roll over other teams with Sarkisian as their OC for Christ's sake.They get the best athletes, they're bigger, stronger, and faster.

 

[chris98251]

Domehawk,

You can absolutely scheme your way to success against better athletes in football. Teams do it all the time.

I'm not saying that it doesn't happen but as a general rule. I witnessed it time and again playing the game.

Why do you think that Alabama is winning NC's just about every year? Because their coaching is so superior? They have good coaches but so do many other teams. Their offenses roll over other teams with Sarkisian as their OC for Christ's sake.They get the best athletes, they're bigger, stronger, and faster.

Well getting the pick of the litter every year does have it's advantages also, when you get 12 draft picks sign up for your roster every year versus other schools say maybe 12 just in that conference you have something.

You can almost play sandlot football and still win.

 

[OrangeGravy]

my apologies for coming across s snarky. Tired of watching a bad oline year in and out and having some try to blame everyone but the person responsible for the oline Also I do see how he causes some of the sacks, I also see how in most cases he has no choice since everyone is sent long. However, I don't think the sacks he causes are near as many as you think. FYI Footballoustisders has our oline ranked as 27th in pass blocking. They started charging, so I can't share a link. I would agree they were pretty good in the first half of the year, but we also faced alot of very weak defenses. As we started facing better defenses they looked really bad. In fact on KJR they were saying Wilson was hit, hurried, sacked or pressured on over 50% of his drop backs. That is not good.

Russell's continually at the bottom of the list every year in the "time to throw" stat.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/pass ... e-to-throw

This year's he's almost at 3 seconds, and this stat has continuously increased over the past five years. Not a good sign for an aging QB that still thinks he can duck out of trouble and make plays, and is becoming less and less effective at doing so.

So yeah, I'm all for a better O-line. But again, pass pro is not a good stat IMO to throw out there when it comes to the O-line that has to block for Russell.

The question is though, is this a Wilson thing, or a by product of PCs desire for chunk plays which means longer routes.

It's a Wilson thing for me. I highly doubt Pete's instructing Wilson to hold onto the ball too long and take too many unnecessary sacks and intentional grounding penalties killing drives.

But Russell's always played like this, it's one of his biggest attributes, and one of his biggest detriments.

Not sure what we're arguing about. If you can't see this, then idk what to say. Dude holds onto the ball too long, is at the top of the list every year in sacks, as my link illustrates it's not all on the O-line. Slow throw times and holds onto the ball too long, which results in sacks.

But again again and again, you want to improve the O-line I'm all in. Just don't expect these numbers to dramatically drop if you do. It's ingrained in Russell's QB DNA.

Correct. Sacks are never going to be a reliable metric to evaluate the Oline with Russ behind it. His sack numbers are always going to be high.