STAND IN THE POCKET AND THROW THE BALL

[Anthony!]

@rightbench and SeaChase

Your reasoning is bad, and you should feel bad.

The Hawks have one of the worst passing offenses in the league. What type of logic is necessary? I know it's not all Wilson's fault but he certainly contributes.

Its funny you know its not all Wilsons fault, but yet that is all you talk about. Wilson is last on the list of issues in our passing game.

It's funny how you won't admit any of it is his fault.

Its funny how all you talk about is how it is his fault, oh and FYI I have said some of it his him. Its just he is lowest on the list of issues at this point.

 

[Ozzy]

People like seachase and others criticizing Wilson after this game is baffling. I thought he played great today. People can give Anthony a hard time but he's much closer to the truth that the anti-wilson crowd. Gets old...

Great win today!

 

[Bigbadhawk]

I don't care how bad our O line play supposedly is. 1 play out of every series Mr Wilson, stand in the pocket and either throw the ball or take the sack.

You're not a running back and it's getting harder to watch you play right now.

Russell Wilson has been sacked 7 times. A pocket passer would have been sacked at least 10+ times by the Cardinals by now.

https://twitter.com/AndrewSiciliano/status/536663285798432769

 

[HawKnPeppa]

@rightbench and SeaChase

Your reasoning is bad, and you should feel bad.

The Hawks have one of the worst passing offenses in the league. What type of logic is necessary? I know it's not all Wilson's fault but he certainly contributes.

What part of run-first offense and defensive-minded coach do you not understand? Let's add the fact that he was taking coverage sacks both in AND out of the pocket. The cards DO have a pretty good SECONDARY. As somebody else already said, He would have taken twice as many sacks if he had stayed in this so called 'POCKET' a few people mention as though they have wished said pocket into existence, and believe they consistently see something resembling it.

Further, he was both our passing AND a major part of our rushing game today, by design, so how many chances did he have to drop back, get into rhythm and survey the field? :roll:

He executed a game plan and created were needed. Classic Russell Wilson. Would you have rather have had Stanton or Palmer with the OL in this state? No other team dumpster dives for OL the way we do, and nobody disregards pass pro the way Cable does. You should be used to that by now.

You seem to have an FFL mentality in your approach to what a player must do. How much of the games do you actually watch?

 

[Recon_Hawk]

Everyone sees something different, but by my count only one of the six sacks was for sure on the offensive line.

The other six (in particular order):

1 was a bad protection call. The Cardinals showed a six man blitz, but only rushed 4. The Oline blocked left, leaving a free rusher to Wilson on the right. That's either on the Oline or Wilson.

1 was an untouched 6th rusher. The Oline blocked their five guys. Wilson needed to change the play, protection, or get the ball out quicker to Turbin on the slant on the goaline.

1 was a perfect pocket that Wilson tried running out of early into a cardinals defender. Could have been a coverage sack. I'll need to watch the all-22 to know for sure.

1 was a planned screen pass to Lynch with routes by the receivers. The oline leaked out and Wilson was to late to get the ball to his RB. The play almost looked like Wilson forget there were defenders crashing in even tho it's designed that way. It's a huge WTF play.

1 was a play near the 10 yard line. The pocket is clean for the play call, but it's tight coverage. Wilsons best chance was a corner route by Richardson or to simply throw the ball into the stands, but he scrambles out of the pocket and can't out run the defender.

1 was a play action with Cooper Helfet making a tough block, forcing Russell to move. The pressure is coming from his left, so Wilson scrambles into that pressure to the left and finds open space, but the route design is all to the right so there's not a receiver anywhere close to Russell. He slips and takes a small sack.

If anyone sees otherwise, I'd like to hear it, but for these 6 plays, specifically, the Oline was doing its job. You could argue 5, maybe 6 of these sacks were preventable by smarter QB play. Of course wilson prevented a couple sack, as well, but if we are looking at the sack numbers and the areas to improve on these plays, this is how I saw it.

 

[RiverDog]

One of the trade offs of having a scrambling quarterback is that they are going to take more vs. less sacks than a traditional pocket passer like Manning or Rivers. The problem is that less mobile quarterbacks are going to unload the ball anytime they feel a sack is eminent. A scrambler's first instinct is "I can get out of this", and a lot of times will over estimates his ability to do so. It is something we're going to have to accept if we want to see those Houdini escape acts Russell has used to help us out of so many fixes, so I don't want to see him changing his approach, at least not at this point in his career.

 

[CurryStopstheRuns]

@rightbench and SeaChase

Your reasoning is bad, and you should feel bad.

The Hawks have one of the worst passing offenses in the league. What type of logic is necessary? I know it's not all Wilson's fault but he certainly contributes.

The cards DO have a pretty good SECONDARY.

This statement lacks truth.

 

[SeaChase]

@rightbench and SeaChase

Your reasoning is bad, and you should feel bad.

The Hawks have one of the worst passing offenses in the league. What type of logic is necessary? I know it's not all Wilson's fault but he certainly contributes.

What part of run-first offense and defensive-minded coach do you not understand? Let's add the fact that he was taking coverage sacks both in AND out of the pocket. The cards DO have a pretty good SECONDARY. As somebody else already said, He would have taken twice as many sacks if he had stayed in this so called 'POCKET' a few people mention as though they have wished said pocket into existence, and believe they consistently see something resembling it.

Further, he was both our passing AND a major part of our rushing game today, by design, so how many chances did he have to drop back, get into rhythm and survey the field? :roll:

He executed a game plan and created were needed. Classic Russell Wilson. Would you have rather have had Stanton or Palmer with the OL in this state? No other team dumpster dives for OL the way we do, and nobody disregards pass pro the way Cable does. You should be used to that by now.

You seem to have an FFL mentality in your approach to what a player must do. How much of the games do you actually watch?

Watched every game for years. A run first team doesn't traditionally mean the QB runs first. :141847_bnono:

As I pointed out the flea flicker was a jump ball that put a rookie against one of the best defenders in the league so you obviously don't read posts very well. Great excuse though for Wilson-"one of the best secondary's"- yet he struggles against bad secondary's.

 

[Russ Willstrong]

@rightbench and SeaChase

Your reasoning is bad, and you should feel bad.

The Hawks have one of the worst passing offenses in the league. What type of logic is necessary? I know it's not all Wilson's fault but he certainly contributes.

What part of run-first offense and defensive-minded coach do you not understand? Let's add the fact that he was taking coverage sacks both in AND out of the pocket. The cards DO have a pretty good SECONDARY. As somebody else already said, He would have taken twice as many sacks if he had stayed in this so called 'POCKET' a few people mention as though they have wished said pocket into existence, and believe they consistently see something resembling it.

Further, he was both our passing AND a major part of our rushing game today, by design, so how many chances did he have to drop back, get into rhythm and survey the field? :roll:

He executed a game plan and created were needed. Classic Russell Wilson. Would you have rather have had Stanton or Palmer with the OL in this state? No other team dumpster dives for OL the way we do, and nobody disregards pass pro the way Cable does. You should be used to that by now.

You seem to have an FFL mentality in your approach to what a player must do. How much of the games do you actually watch?

Chase has a right to be ignorant.
He made it clear he doesn't watch games closely or check stats since those things don't matter. What matters to him is what the announcers say on tv and because fans like him don't use their mind they are never to blame.
I think he said something like 211 yds passing is no big deal since it's less than 200.

 

[Russ Willstrong]

QB rating of 121.6, and it's getting old? Really? :roll:

Wilson's best game of the year and he had under 200 yards throwing and 6 sacks and you want to point out his Qb rating?

Using simple arithmetic I've determined for you that 211 is indeed OVER 200 yds. (Just in case you'd like to revise your post for accuracy.)
Not to pick nits but at times your posts are lousy. I.e. "Wilson's best game of the year".. it was not.

You might want to call up the announcers and tell them that as that's what was said near the end of the 4th quarter. So 11 more yards than 200 woohooo so much more lol. 211 passing yards, pretty awesome for a 3rd year Super Bowl winning franchise QB right?

By the way I took your advice and called up to the press box and they told me you were wrong and ignorant to boot.

 

[gulliver]

I know it gives everybody the yips to have RW running around risking injury, but standing in the pocket (which usually isn't there) and getting leveled 6x a game seems worse than cutting him loose on the RO and designed runs. And in fact, when he runs more, we win more.

In our wins this year, RW had an average of 9.3 carries per game. In losses, he had an average of 4.8 carries.

It's worth noting that he only ran twice per game in our first two losses (SD, Dallas) and we lost by 8 PPG average, and ran 7 (STL) and 8 (KC) times in our next two losses, where we only lost by 3 PPG average.

This doesn't *prove* anything, but it does show that our success is *correlated* with his number of carries. And interestingly, his rushing YPC and YPG aren't THAT much better in wins than losses--the thing that seems to matter is that he gets CARRIES. Thinking logically, one could suggest that the more defenses have to respect him taking off and running, the more success we see on offense.

 

[Uncle Si]

Russel played very well today and blaming him for six sacks is down right idiotic.

No, but blaming him for 3 works. He could've thrown the ball away when outside of the pocket, but he continually lets pursuing defenders catch him around the ankles before he throws the ball away. That does get old.

It's not just Russ, but if you want to get into ANY QB's head on game day, you get pressure up the middle. It screws with anyone: Brady, Manning...any of them had bad games. Make it a short QB, and you really screw him. The Cards specialize in getting pressure up the A gaps. The thing that the Cards do well, is that their DE's manage to contain Wilson while they get pressure up the middle. You'll see Wilson curl up and take a sack against AZ more than any other team.

There were plays Wilson could've executed better, but sometimes you have to give the defense credit.

How many times does he not throw the ball away, spin out of trouble and make a huge play from it.

people need to accept what RW is, and that often times good comes from his scrambling, and sometimes bad. reminds me of Steve Young

 

[Sac]

Only 5 interceptions all year.

 

[Grahamhawker]

Russel played very well today and blaming him for six sacks is down right idiotic.

No, but blaming him for 3 works. He could've thrown the ball away when outside of the pocket, but he continually lets pursuing defenders catch him around the ankles before he throws the ball away. That does get old.

It's not just Russ, but if you want to get into ANY QB's head on game day, you get pressure up the middle. It screws with anyone: Brady, Manning...any of them had bad games. Make it a short QB, and you really screw him. The Cards specialize in getting pressure up the A gaps. The thing that the Cards do well, is that their DE's manage to contain Wilson while they get pressure up the middle. You'll see Wilson curl up and take a sack against AZ more than any other team.

There were plays Wilson could've executed better, but sometimes you have to give the defense credit.

How many times does he not throw the ball away, spin out of trouble and make a huge play from it.

people need to accept what RW is, and that often times good comes from his scrambling, and sometimes bad. reminds me of Steve Young

I mentioned this earlier.

QBs who throw the ball away do not run for 73 yards against the Cardinals. We will never turn Russell Wilson into Mini-Manning. Accept his game for what it is and move on...

 

[AgentDib]

Not all sacks are created equal. Two of those sacks were better than throwing the ball away when trying to run down the clock. All of them were better than throwing into tight coverage when our defense is dominating the opponent.

Our redzone offense has struggled this season and that should be of concern to everybody. It's a combination of personnel, execution and coaching. We've been missing a receiver who can catch in traffic, thankfully our TE play was encouraging yesterday. Our protection calls have been pretty bad, we don't seem to change plays at the line well, and it seems like our procedural penalties crop up at the worst spots. There's plenty of blame to go around.

 

[Chapow]

QB rating of 121.6, and it's getting old? Really? :roll:

Wilson's best game of the year and he had under 200 yards throwing and 6 sacks and you want to point out his Qb rating?

Unless he's your QB in fantasy football, who the hell cares how many yards he passed for as long as we win?

Just absolutely baffling, we just beat the team with the best record in the NFL by 16 points and people bitch about how many yards Wilson passed for. :34853_doh:

 

[Ozzy]

I don't feel like going through this whole thread but are people still claiming Wilson didn't play well yesterday? Seriously? He had a passer rating over 120, would of had another TD if not for a ticky tack call on Kearse, had zero turnovers and flat out played great football against a very good defense that was flying all over the place.

 

[pehawk]

I don't feel like going through this whole thread but are people still claiming Wilson didn't play well yesterday? Seriously? He had a passer rating over 120, would of had another TD if not for a ticky tack call on Kearse, had zero turnovers and flat out played great football against a very good defense that was flying all over the place.

Well, Montana was telling us all how Stanton's taller so he can do more things. I know that was said yesterday. I cant remember what else...

 

[SonicHawk]

I don't feel like going through this whole thread but are people still claiming Wilson didn't play well yesterday? Seriously? He had a passer rating over 120, would of had another TD if not for a ticky tack call on Kearse, had zero turnovers and flat out played great football against a very good defense that was flying all over the place.

He wasn't inaccurate yesterday which was huge. He's been good the past two games but he's still struggling with owning the pocket.

Passer Rating doesn't include sacks, hits or hurries, whether they were coverage, missed assignments or RW holding onto the ball or not speeding up his progression. Not a complete picture of his game.

 

[Chapow]

I don't feel like going through this whole thread but are people still claiming Wilson didn't play well yesterday? Seriously? He had a passer rating over 120, would of had another TD if not for a ticky tack call on Kearse, had zero turnovers and flat out played great football against a very good defense that was flying all over the place.

And completed 77% of his throws, but apparently none of that matters if he didn't throw for 350 yards and score tons of points in fantasy football.