Wilson: $26m this year, 204 total yards.

[Tical21]

Right, so just turn back the clock and get the players we had in 2015? Sounds easy. Where's your time machine? It was Baldwin catching a lot of those passes, wasn't it? Where's he on our roster?

Last season when we went pass-happy, we turned the ball over, had too many sacks, and lost football games. Then we went more run-centric, and we won 10 of the next 14 games, against tougher teams than the Broncos and Bears.

Also, this was Game 1 and Wilson didn't play much in the pre-season, nor did Lockett, nor did Metcalf. Let things work in a bit, let the OL get their feet, etc. before going pass-happy.

OR try running it now, adn see if you can, the fat it at times they do, ie under 2 minutes and when they go uptempo, so they can do it now as well. And if you want to play the turn the clock back, we dont have the same players we had last year so just because you say it did not work then does not mean it cant work now, Also again I am not saying ignore the long ball I am saying mix the short passing in more. Bring those Safeties up forcing them with short passes and the go over the stop. If they dont come up no problem move the ball 5-10 yards at a time. FYI We did not go pass happy in a league were people throw 50 times a game 33 attempts is not pass happy.

Again I am not saying going pass happy you seem to focus in on that. I am saying pass more than 25 times a game and through in more short passes.

You're aware the more we throw, the lower Russ' efficiency gets. Literally. I think we've pretty well established that the strength of Russ' game is not short passing.

The more we run, the more dangerous Russ becomes, and the more we win. It's that simple.

Can you show the data on Russ' efficiency going down when attempts. You can't just state something like that as if it's factual without showing the facts. It's 100% not as "simple as that" so show the data please.

It was going around on twitter about a month ago. It wasn't one of the usual Seahawks twitter folks. I've looked for it again, but can't find it. It shows that when we throw < 20 times, we're basically unbeatable and Russ has amazing efficiency. 20 - 24 times, still great, but less. 25- 30 times there's a pretty big dropoff, and 30 + times we barely ever win and Russ' efficiency gets quite a bit lower. It's true to a point with any quarterback, as you usually only throw that much when you're behind and things aren't going well, but it's accelerated in Russ' case.

 

[bmorepunk]

Regardless of OP title it is about adapting.

Too many people are getting caught up in yards and money.

We don't care if they rush 50 times if it is working. We don't care if all it is 5 second drop backs for deep shots.

But be adaptable and use the best player on the field if needed.

Today they did great doing just that.

That is all.

Quit twisting this topic.

Twisting?

Thread title is about yards and money.

First sentence is about money.

 

[oldhawkfan]

Also means we are not wanting to throw the coach out the window.

However there are those that don’t like his offensive philosophy and think he is wasting Russell’s best years.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Yeah, because he's obviously not living up to that contract :roll:

 

[sutz]

I'm sure his agent is working on a "must also make peak fantasy football stats" clause in his next contract.

:34853_doh:

 

[Seymour]

Great game by Wilson. Since so many of you actually didn’t read the original posts it was about the coaches not using Wilson effectively and not anything bad about Wilson.

But hey, screw the truth. Just because you are a Seahawks fan doesn’t mean you have any integrity. Something this thread has taught me.

Original Post:

If you want someone to throw 20 times, run 4 times and hand off 21 times you might spend your money more wisely. PC has become poor at using his tools. I don’t blame Wilson though he could have ran for firsts a couple of those times but didn’t. It’s crap offense by a bad OC picked by a bad offensive HC.

I did and agreed with you! Many will just respond to the title as I did my first post until I read it again. I run into this issue also when someone gets upset about the way I phrase things and then ignores the real point and the rest of the post.

Point is your title choice is part of the problem and you cannot change others but you can help not be misunderstood by choosing a title that doesn't mislead your main point. :2thumbs:

Hang in there. :irishdrinkers:

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Great game by Wilson. Since so many of you actually didn’t read the original posts it was about the coaches not using Wilson effectively and not anything bad about Wilson.

But hey, screw the truth. Just because you are a Seahawks fan doesn’t mean you have any integrity. Something this thread has taught me.

Original Post:

If you want someone to throw 20 times, run 4 times and hand off 21 times you might spend your money more wisely. PC has become poor at using his tools. I don’t blame Wilson though he could have ran for firsts a couple of those times but didn’t. It’s crap offense by a bad OC picked by a bad offensive HC.

I did and agreed with you! Many will just respond to the title as I did my first post until I read it again. I run into this issue also when someone gets upset about the way I phrase things and then ignores the real point and the rest of the post.

Point is your title choice is part of the problem and you cannot change others but you can help not be misunderstood by choosing a title that doesn't mislead your main point. :2thumbs:

Hang in there. :irishdrinkers:

Even this premise is false. To say Pete's "wasting" Wilson's talents is also a wrong premise for paying him all the monies.

If you're an old school coach that's stuck in 1978 wanting to pound the rock and play predictable schemes that a modern NFL team and opponent's coach can easily pick apart...............you DESPERATELY need a Russell Wilson to bail your ass out.

And let's be honest, that's pretty much what's been going on here for a LONG time now since the height of the LOB and our defensive dominance. Russell playing almost perfect football to win games in 2nd halves.

Any lesser lower priced QB? We'd be lucky to win 5-6 games over the past 5 years. Russell IS the difference between six wins and 10+ wins.

 

[Seymour]

LOL. Disagree. That is like saying the Ferrari you bought that has never been out of 2nd gear is not a waste because it still reliably gets you to work and back and you have your job still.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

LOL. Disagree. That is like saying the Ferrari you bought that has never been out of 2nd gear is not a waste because it still reliably gets you to work and back and you have your job still.

Russell's been out of 2nd gear a lot, to the tune of being in the top 5 of every stat for QB's for his entire career.

Again, you guys are debating a false premise..........and if you do think he's being wasted and that cap space could be put to better use elsewhere, answer me this, what has a higher chance of success, paying Russell Wilson to win you games for 10-15 years, or having to spend that 30M elsewhere and hoping you have the same insane success, health, and draft/FA acquisition of all those players..........AND having to find another QB.

No way in hell you're being honest if you think it's the latter. Cause there are about 25 other franchises wallowing in mediocrity who'd sell their own mother's into slavery for a Russell Wilson as examples.

 

[sprhawk73]

My only complaint with utilizing RW is trying to make him a pocket passer when we have a poor offensive line. I see RW as a vastly superior Brett Favre without as many mistakes. I'd have him rolling out on most plays.

 

[Seymour]

LOL. Disagree. That is like saying the Ferrari you bought that has never been out of 2nd gear is not a waste because it still reliably gets you to work and back and you have your job still.

Russell's been out of 2nd gear a lot, to the tune of being in the top 5 of every stat for QB's for his entire career.

Again, you guys are debating a false premise..........and if you do think he's being wasted and that cap space could be put to better use elsewhere, answer me this, what has a higher chance of success, paying Russell Wilson to win you games for 10-15 years, or having to spend that 30M elsewhere and hoping you have the same insane success, health, and draft/FA acquisition of all those players..........AND having to find another QB.

No way in hell you're being honest if you think it's the latter. Cause there are about 25 other franchises wallowing in mediocrity who'd sell their own mother's into slavery for a Russell Wilson as examples.

No...I don't like it but I agree and have said so that yes indeed Pete does need Russell. Mostly because he cannot protect a QB with a solid pass blocking oline but also his game plan requires late game heroics. Any other QB would have the same fate as Saint Andrew Luck.

So my point is, one fast Sunday a month out of 2nd gear doesn't mean that car isn't still 95% waste.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So my point is, one fast Sunday a month out of 2nd gear doesn't mean that car isn't still 95% waste.

You really think 95% of Russell's being wasted?

Like I said, Russell's been in the top 5 of just about every category that matters for his entire career (TD's, QBR, Completion percentage), and the only stat that matters, wins.

Sure I think Pete could open up the offense a little more, but then that also exposes Russell more and puts more wear and tear on his arm and have annual trips to the IR like we're seeing all over the league right now, and have in the past with QB's who sling it around 40 times a game.

So Idk, I'd say it's more about 20-25% wasted. 95%? C'mon. Ridiculous.

 

[Seymour]

So my point is, one fast Sunday a month out of 2nd gear doesn't mean that car isn't still 95% waste.

You really think 95% of Russell's being wasted?

Like I said, Russell's been in the top 5 of just about every category that matters for his entire career (TD's, QBR, Completion percentage), and the only stat that matters, wins.

Sure I think Pete could open up the offense a little more, but then that also exposes Russell more and puts more wear and tear on his arm and have annual trips to the IR like we're seeing all over the league right now, and have in the past with QB's who sling it around 40 times a game.

So Idk, I'd say it's more about 20-25% wasted. 95%? C'mon. Ridiculous.

95% is an exaggeration yes. Lets start with pretty much most of the first half of every game + from there.

I'll go with 60% wasted when I include the lack of protection he gets that causes broken plays and 2nd and 3rd and long that they often throw the towel in on.

 

[McGruff]

You know who has thrown 40 times a game for 300 yards for the last half a season of games?

Cam Newton.

Maybe we should trade for him.

 

[bmorepunk]

You know who has thrown 40 times a game for 300 yards for the last half a season of games?

Cam Newton.

Maybe we should trade for him.

His cap hits are $10 million less per year, which is to the point OP made with the title and first sentence.

I'm sure Newton would make the same decisions and throws as Wilson in the same circumstances. Sure of it.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

You know who has thrown 40 times a game for 300 yards for the last half a season of games?

Cam Newton.

Maybe we should trade for him.

His cap hits are $10 million less per year, which is to the point OP made with the title and first sentence.

I'm sure Newton would make the same decisions and throws as Wilson in the same circumstances. Sure of it.

If you want a terrible team leader that mopes around after losses, refuses to do SB post game interviews, doesn't even go after the ball on the ground IN the SB.......and is good about every 3-4 years, and stinks the other years. Cam's your man.

How's that worked out for Carolina saving that 10M of cap vs. having an insanely consistent QB like Russell who gives you a chance to win every game, game in, game out, year after year.

Seriously, this is one of the worst takes and theories that infects .Net every season. The "we're wasting Russell, so why are we paying him" nonsense.

 

[John63]

You know who has thrown 40 times a game for 300 yards for the last half a season of games?

Cam Newton.

Maybe we should trade for him.

His cap hits are $10 million less per year, which is to the point OP made with the title and first sentence.

I'm sure Newton would make the same decisions and throws as Wilson in the same circumstances. Sure of it.

ahh no, Cam is not half the QB Wilson is, and he is a selfish quitter.

 

[bmorepunk]

Sarcasm, dude.

 

[KitsapGuy]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Seahawks/status/1173684584950583296[/tweet]

https://twitter.com/Seahawks/status/1173684584950583296

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Sarcasm, dude.

I know, but there are people that think that.