Ringer article on Seahawks Offense

[keasley45]

I think a lot of this is people trying to desperately convince themselves that without Wilson, we still are relevant because Carroll is still here.

Maybe that is true.
Not sure what the upside is even if Carroll can somehow get the team competitive in 2-3 years though. Carroll can't last much longer regardless. We have already seen he does a horrific job of hiring assistants - maybe this time it will work out after all those failures though.
I think Carroll's capability and competence is suspect at this point. But even if it isn't, then what? Carroll gets us to barely a playoff team in a few years, and then who takes over?
It feels like we are just prolonging the inevitable here. Maybe we can eek a few years of slightly above-average football out.

But the railing against Wilson seems very committed. Almost like people are trying to convince themselves that somehow we have any kind of future without a QB, maybe by deluding themselves that Wilson held us back.

It is almost funny to watch.

I dont know that it's always rwiling against Wilson as much as it is railing against the notion that without Wilson, we are nothing. This forum tends to in some cases try to default to a shallow, debate around a binary set of choices that just don't make sense. Run vs Pass, defensive philosophy vs innovative offense, Russ vs Pete. Lines are drawn and the sky is always falling in the scenario a person doesn't favor.

That's a rather myopic view of the game of football that seems to assign value based on casual view of a sport that is significantly more complex than what can be gleaned from a TV screen on a Sunday afternoon, a highlight reel, or general statistical analysis.

Same goes for the evaluation of our draft performance as a wholesale failure, that ignores the context for why decisions were made. That doesn't excuse a poor personnel decision, but it also isn't necessarily a foreshadowing of how the front office will perform under a completely different set of criteria, modified philosophy, new salary cap reality, and in all honesty, the benefit of more experience.

Truth is, we've got one hell of a franchise that had one hell of a qb... one helluva team here for a good period. It's been as good as it can get, and there have been shortfalls and disappointments. But in no instance did the credit for our success or fault for our failure lay entirely at the feet of one player, or one coach. The team has risen and fallen, collectively.

It will without a doubt be great again and I believe that will happen much sooner than later. The pieces are just to good in my opinion to predict otherwise unless in this new era of seahawks ball, we show a complete inability to adapt. We haven't taken our first step into that reality yet. But predicting our performance in any way is much more an exercise in evaluating the 'grey' areas of the board, than trying to spin a discussion around the 'black and white'.

 

[toffee]

I dont know that it's always rwiling against Wilson as much as it is railing against the notion that without Wilson, we are nothing. This forum tends to in some cases try to default to a shallow, debate around a binary set of choices that just don't make sense. Run vs Pass, defensive philosophy vs innovative offense, Russ vs Pete. Lines are drawn and the sky is always falling in the scenario a person doesn't favor.

That's a rather myopic view of the game of football that seems to assign value based on casual view of a sport that is significantly more complex than what can be gleaned from a TV screen on a Sunday afternoon, a highlight reel, or general statistical analysis.

Same goes for the evaluation of our draft performance as a wholesale failure, that ignores the context for why decisions were made. That doesn't excuse a poor personnel decision, but it also isn't necessarily a foreshadowing of how the front office will perform under a completely different set of criteria, modified philosophy, new salary cap reality, and in all honesty, the benefit of more experience.

Truth is, we've got one hell of a franchise that had one hell of a qb... one helluva team here for a good period. It's been as good as it can get, and there have been shortfalls and disappointments. But in no instance did the credit for our success or fault for our failure lay entirely at the feet of one player, or one coach. The team has risen and fallen, collectively.

It will without a doubt be great again and I believe that will happen much sooner than later. The pieces are just to good in my opinion to predict otherwise unless in this new era of seahawks ball, we show a complete inability to adapt. We haven't taken our first step into that reality yet. But predicting our performance in any way is much more an exercise in evaluating the 'grey' areas of the board, than trying to spin a discussion around the 'black and white'.

Have you received John63's unconditional endorsement yet? Ie his famous "this"?

 

[TwistedHusky]

Keasley,

It isn't whether we are nothing without Wilson. We are nothing without a top-tier franchise QB. Remember, I wanted to trade Wilson before his contract extension BECAUSE I SAW THIS HAPPENING BEFORE IT DID.

I wasn't some Wilson fanatic. But I know enough to know without Wilson we would have done nothing this past five years. Even with all the distractions and things that likely did impact Wilson's success.

And yes, I have concerns that Carroll has outlived his usefulness. If an aging coach, that typically wins because of defense, has somehow put together teams in the past few years that literally are among the worst of the history in the NFL, what else is there to expect success from?

You could say player development because that WAS also a strength. But in the past 5 years (and even 8 years), we have put together only average or substantially below average in terms of roster strength additions.

So what now?

We aren't nothing without Wilson. We are, however, nothing without a franchise QB. We had one. We gave him away. They are near impossible to get because to be a top-tier team you need them.

 

[Lagartixa]

burley, yea, maybe, but then again maybe, just maybe if John63's Super Wilson were all he was cracked up to be and did what Tom Brady did to bring HIS team from BEHIND to retaking the lead, maybe we wouldn't be discussing how everything had funneled down to One Stinking Play.
The only thing that held Russell Wilson back in that game= Russell Wilson...Everyone was @ fault FOR THAT LOSS except Russell Wilson? LOLOL Yeah...OK.
63 keeps saying WE (meaning everyone but himself) should just "Move On", he has shown zero intentions of doing so.

Wilson didn't even have to do what Brady did. All Wilson had to do was get a few first downs and keep the clock moving. Instead, we got one four-play drive, two three-and-outs, and then the Seahawks were behind.

 

[toffee]

Wilson didn't even have to do what Brady did. All Wilson had to do was get a few first downs and keep the clock moving. Instead, we got one four-play drive, two three-and-outs, and then the Seahawks were behind.

Kurt Warner couldn't understand why Russ wouldn't take the easy throws.

 

[Chukarhawk]

In light of what we know post draft, there's no argument I can agree with that keeping RW would have been better for the future of this franchise. And not just from a financial standpoint.

This team would have been stuck in mediocrity - a middling team that could not advance deep into the playoffs, while being unable to properly build a foundation with its limited draft capital / late round draft picks.

I'd rather be a team that sucks for a year or two with potential for contender status by year three, than a team stuck in pretender mode for years to come. Keeping RW would have been the ultimate pretender move. Win just enough games against regular season opponents, but lose against playoff level competition.

RW's last playoff stat? 11/27 passing. 2/14 on 3rd downs. That's not good enough.

"But, but the play calling was bad!"

There were plenty of open receivers that game. The film don't lie.

Now this team can move forward.

what will you say when Wilson takes Denver into the playoffs for the next 6 years and we suck for the next decade?

 

[sc85sis]

Kurt Warner couldn't understand why Russ wouldn't take the easy throws.

I know some people think Kurt is anti-Seahawks and/or anti-Russ, but I don’t feel anything he pointed out here was unfair. He pointed out that the offensive line needed to improve. He mentioned that Russ does things that are special. But he also showed that Russ can at times overly rely on his athleticism when there are “layups” to be had. And he’s absolutely right. Russ still needs to improve on his reads and be willing to take what’s there, but for whatever reason he can’t or just won’t do that. And this has resulted in incompletions and sacks that didn’t have to happen.

 

[toffee]

I know some people think Kurt is anti-Seahawks and/or anti-Russ, but I don’t feel anything he pointed out here was unfair. He pointed out that the offensive line needed to improve. He mentioned that Russ does things that are special. But he also showed that Russ can at times overly rely on his athleticism when there are “layups” to be had. And he’s absolutely right. Russ still needs to improve on his reads and be willing to take what’s there, but for whatever reason he can’t or just won’t do that. And this has resulted in incompletions and sacks that didn’t have to happen.

and three and outs.

 

[keasley45]

I know some people think Kurt is anti-Seahawks and/or anti-Russ, but I don’t feel anything he pointed out here was unfair. He pointed out that the offensive line needed to improve. He mentioned that Russ does things that are special. But he also showed that Russ can at times overly rely on his athleticism when there are “layups” to be had. And he’s absolutely right. Russ still needs to improve on his reads and be willing to take what’s there, but for whatever reason he can’t or just won’t do that. And this has resulted in incompletions and sacks that didn’t have to happen.

And this is exactly my point. Russ is great and unusually flawed, to the degree that it's difficult to say how good (or bad) we would be in a world without him. Warner pretty plainly says at the end of one of his segments on Russ that th hawks wouldn't win anything significant again without him addressing the shortcomings he has. And when you look at the tape going back to 2017, the same flaws were there. The same juggling of a short sheet of plays that looked to be what he was comfortable with, and the same tendency to miss reads, not see receivers, and essentially force an offense to operate from a deep drop qb platform. His limitation were and are real, but there's rarely been any real discussion about how his shortcomings impacted his side of the ball. Thats in part due to the polarized nature of any subject relating to Wilson.

When considering the offense without Wilson, its easy to focus on his athleticism and given the pattern our games wold take as a result of his limitations and an inherently conservative approach, and fall into the belief that when he was 'freed', we found success. But the offense wasn't functioning any better in the 2 minute drill than it was in the 58 minutes before from a schematic perspective. Russ wasn't all of a sudden calling the shots. The offense would move when he ran, improvised, prevented the defense from substituting. THAT IN ITSELF IS NOT A WINNING FORMULA FOR SUSTAINED SUCCESS. And when you take out the improv 2 minute drills and evaluate Russel on simply executing the plays the way Warner and others have, the result is far, far from elite. Again, he has the ability to shorten the gap, but evaluating his progressions, his line adjustments, his anticipation of open routes... those things are often very average. And that's not dislike. The evaluation that Warner gave is not isolated to those two games. It's who Russ has been from the beginning.

So if you take away the iprov act and ability to overcome his oft inability to execute fairly standard qb'ing concepts, and replace that with someone who can move the chains and hit the open guy and work Waldrons plan... does that equal a Superbowl? Without some other intangible, elite level trait, maybe not. But we weren't getting there with Russ's formula anyway, and I don't see Denver getting there either. So moving on, even if it means stipgapping the position until you find a guy that does enough at the position really well, then so be it. It's hard to win with a guy who runs cool for three quarters until he gets hot running his own unique brand of ball.

 

[John63]

Wilson didn't even have to do what Brady did. All Wilson had to do was get a few first downs and keep the clock moving. Instead, we got one four-play drive, two three-and-outs, and then the Seahawks were behind.

So rather than laying any blame on the defense which took up 70% of the cap you want to put the blame on the offense that gave them a 2-score lead with 9 minutes to go. And forget that Lynch avg under 2 ypc on those last few drives.

Keywords we were up and then behind hmm whose job is it to not let the other team get upon us? Oh year the defense.

 

[hoxrox]

what will you say when Wilson takes Denver into the playoffs for the next 6 years and we suck for the next decade?

Early playoff exits aren't good enough. With Wilson that is your ceiling unless the team around him is a top 5 running game and a top 10 defense.

Contrary to common belief that it's a QB-driven league, I disagree to an extent. I think it's a team-driven league. And now we have a legitimate opportunity to build a more complete team, which raises the team's ceiling and its trajectory.

Now if the FO bombed this last draft, I might share your outlook. But they knocked it out of the park, acquiring key foundation pieces, giving me reason for optimism.

And if we're able to acquire a Josh Allen type talent in 2023? Just watch out...

 

[seatownlowdown]

Kurt Warner couldn't understand why Russ wouldn't take the easy throws.

wow, thats a damning indictment.

wilson is the anti-brady. brady understands everything kurt warner is outlining here and more. he fearlessly attacks the middle and targets soft parts of the defense as lanes come open. brady plays chess against defenses. casuals see the big plays by brady downfield on sportcenter/espn, but imo the reason why brady-led offenses have been so successful is the fact that brady has shred defenses for 5-10 yard chunks at a time, continuously moving the chains downfield. he keeps it simple. sometimes that's just dumping to crossers and letting them do the work.

last year wilson was absolutely terrible when it mattered (3rd down situations)



...ouch

 

[TwistedHusky]

That makes sense. Because he was stuck with what might be the literal worst coach and worst gameplans in the NFL.

Wilson isn't the anti-Brady but you could make a VERY strong argument that Carroll is the anti-Bill.

It feels like that might impact 3rd down %.

 

[IndyHawk]

what will you say when Wilson takes Denver into the playoffs for the next 6 years and we suck for the next decade?

He won't last 6 more years..As a starter anyway..He's ageing too rapidly.
I said years ago "when the legs go he's done".
The fact is when the legs go..The arm follows
I will delete my account if he is a full time starter for the next 6 years..

 

[seatownlowdown]

"blah"

"worst coach and worst gameplan": tell me you don't watch football without telling me you don't watch football.
yeah because throwing into double/triple coverage downfield or running into sacks is better than taking sure 1st downs... the gameplan has guys open early, he just wont see it or throw it. its like he waits for a play to break down and hes running for his life before he throws



you are just a butthurt russell wilson groupie. your boy is the prima donna that sold his house in seattle and after he forced his way out of seattle. so enjoy being a denver bronco fan this season.



yuck

oh, and brady has more rings than billy boy btw. wilson is the anti-brady.

 

[scutterhawk]

Wilson didn't even have to do what Brady did. All Wilson had to do was get a few first downs and keep the clock moving. Instead, we got one four-play drive, two three-and-outs, and then the Seahawks were behind.

My point exactly, IF Wilson was a part of why we

I think a lot of this is people trying to desperately convince themselves that without Wilson, we still are relevant because Carroll is still here.

Maybe that is true.
Not sure what the upside is even if Carroll can somehow get the team competitive in 2-3 years though. Carroll can't last much longer regardless. We have already seen he does a horrific job of hiring assistants - maybe this time it will work out after all those failures though.
I think Carroll's capability and competence is suspect at this point. But even if it isn't, then what? Carroll gets us to barely a playoff team in a few years, and then who takes over?
It feels like we are just prolonging the inevitable here. Maybe we can eek a few years of slightly above-average football out.

But the railing against Wilson seems very committed. Almost like people are trying to convince themselves that somehow we have any kind of future without a QB, maybe by deluding themselves that Wilson held us back.

It is almost funny to watch.

3 different OC's & Wilson just couldn't find a fit with any of them?? He had to take matters into his own hands, and revert back to playing his unconventional "Sandlot" style of Football?
ALL Quarterbacks have limitations, NO MATTER WHO the HC OR OC's are, some of those QB limitations, unless they are addressed & overcome, will only be able to play up to a certain level, and will EVENTUALLY revert to playing with the same 'LIMITED' hold THEMSELVES BACK Football.
Change the HC, & the OC, and you still keep on keeping on with the guy that can't or won't fight through his LIMITATIONS...Hmm, just can't figure out why we're always "One & Done" in the Playoffs. LOLOLOL

 

[John63]

That makes sense. Because he was stuck with what might be the literal worst coach and worst gameplans in the NFL.

Wilson isn't the anti-Brady but you could make a VERY strong argument that Carroll is the anti-Bill.

It feels like that might impact 3rd down %.

Again top 5 in 3rd and long.

 

[hawkfan68]

How about-It was up to the final play in that SB , the ball is in Wilson's hands, the game was HIS to win or lose Pete nixed Marshawn running the ball, put his faith in Super Wilson, gave him the opportunity to be the hero......Bad ball placement...It was on Russ to make up for his wounded Defenders, and put the team on his back, and he just couldn't Brady out the win, "Accurate"?

Or in truth it was Bevell who made the call, then ducked away and threw his WR under the bus for it. Carroll took the heat but it was stupid Bevell. I don't 100% blame RW for that play. Yes he threw the ball but the personnel he had to work with on that call was mindboggling. Ricardo Lockette as the primary WR on a slant. Where was Matthews or better yet, they could have had Zach Miller or Luke Willson lined up there. Butler likely doesn't make the play if that happens. He ran through Lockette. A bigger receiver, he wouldn't have gotten through. Just my opinion.

 

[TwistedHusky]

John63,

You should probably let them cling to their delusions that Pete could have been any kind of success without Wilson. Defending Wilson shouldn't matter at this point.

There is nothing to save.

Carroll WAS a great coach (always a gameday moron but he was such an amazing player development guy and motivator, it hardly mattered).

But this is almost as if a 67 year old Steve Largent ended up coming back to be our #2 receiver. You wouldn't hate the guy, but you would hate that he is out there because he can't run routes anymore or catch the ball at near a college, much less NFL level.

Every dropped ball would be a pass that should have gone to someone else.

We ran off our HOF QB ( maybe he because he comes off as a knob more often now).
And now we have an aging, seemingly barely capable headcoach to do this with basically no quality QB.

Arguing about whether Wilson was good or not does not matter, we don't have him now or in the future.

The only reason to continue to argue seems for them to convince themselves that was the reason Pete has basically struggled to be any kind of playoff threat or even a playoff team recently was Wilson. Unlikely but that is all they got now. (We aren't counting that crappy wildcard against the Rams...that was luck, not accomplishment).

Whatever. Wilson is gone. We are stuck with Pete. So we have to deal with it.
When Pete finally leaves it will probably get worse not better. But the days of the Seahawks mattering to anyone outside of Seattle (except as an easy win for above .500 teams) probably are over. And no need to defend Wilson because they will find out Pete can fail just as easily without him.

 

[keasley45]

That makes sense. Because he was stuck with what might be the literal worst coach and worst gameplans in the NFL.

Wilson isn't the anti-Brady but you could make a VERY strong argument that Carroll is the anti-Bill.

It feels like that might impact 3rd down %.

Have you actually watched post game tape to assess whether the gameplan was actually bad? Cant have, because you can watch a random selection of games between 2017 and 2021 (i think there's 5 years worth on the All-22, so dont take my word for it) and see the same poor execution from the qb position then, that were evident last year.

This whole narrative that the game plan was terrible is based on the failure of the plays to work ... when and because wilson was struggling to run the designed offense, and plays that were outside his wheelhouse. When it became necessary during games for the offense to do SOMETHING other than Lynch running, Wilson would go off script. Thats not an indictment of a failed scheme. Thats an indicttment of a QB that never became comfortable with diagnosing defenses enough to carry the team on sustained drives on his arm within a scheme... ANY SCHEME. WHETHER BEVELLS, SCHOTTY's , Or Waldron. Yes, the line has been an issue over the years, and so has RW's inability to do simple things... inexplicably. So either they are all idiots, PC and a bunch of little grey men snuck into the coaches office the evening before games and ripped out plays, or the QB just aint getting it. And if, given all the BS that went down with PR nonsense, blame game, lies, and adult tantrum on the part of #3, raging against a coach and FO that had grown tired of watching an offense play the same tired script isnt enough evidence of the pholosophical divide, i dont know what is. And if you track it this far, the only question is whether the offense worked or not. Kurts analysis and watching any selection of games during Russ's tenure and the answer to that question is obvious.


This was an 11 yard sack. Simple hot read. SF wasnt disguising their blitz in the slightest


This was a 7 yard sack with a wide open DK for a first. Game changing play in the playoffs in 2020. this kind of play stalled multiple drives AND contributed to his pick 6

This was a throw into double coverage with a wide open wr capable of picking up a chunk of yards



Unforced throw into double coverage when he had an open guy underneath. This is OT against the Titans. We lost because of thre successive stupid decisions like this, and on each play, there was a wr available

This play was a throw into double coverage to DK (incomplete) with his TE running uncontested down the middle of the field...

These are simple examples from a handful of games. Watch some of the games where the offense was supposedly 'garbage' and you'll see similar plays. Kurts analysis isnt an abberation or just evidence of a bad game. Its evident in Russ from the beginning. These mistakes occured in aevery game last season before Russ got hurt. During a stretch where he was also leading the league in explosive plays. If there was a stat tracking efficiency in hitting basic plays or the layups Kurt describes, Russ would without a doubt be in the bottom half of the league. And the thing is, for all of those games where Russ 'saved' us in the end, plays like the ablove were part of the reason we needed saving after 3 qtrs in the first place. Seriously, if the number on the back of the jersey was 2 and the name Lock, the evisceration would be unanimous. The QB would be called awful, and the play, amateur hour.

And this is why there's pushback on the idea that the next guy has to be uber talented to succeed here.

Maybe he just needs to be able to see that THIS




might just be OPEN and OK to throw to. Or any of the above.

This is just a brief selection. if it didnt take as much time as it does to sift through games, rewind, copy, save, annotate and paste, i'd post them all. But then the server would probably crash.

The plays were not the main problem.