discussion: Seattle shows what a top defense does for a qb

Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Rams Huddle › discussion: Seattle shows what a top defense does for a qb

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • July 11, 2014 at 10:51 am #1480
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Seattle ranked 27th but their QB is different. Take away his scrambling ability and all them first downs become sacks probably. Just saying….

    me: IMO this all goes to show what having a top defense and running game will do for your qb. First off, as a rule scrambling/mobile qbs get sacked MORE, not less. The guys who beat the rush (again as a rule) are pocket passers who can throw quick from the pocket. And when it comes to both 1st downs and sacks, Seattle is a mess.

    Seattle was 25th in third down conversions. They were 23rd in 1st downs generally. Wilson got 31 rushing 1st downs on 96 attempts. The team as a whole was 4th in 1st downs rushing with 116, so he got a good portion of those. BUT it did not mean fewer sacks.

    Even though Seattle was 32nd in passing attempts, they were ALSO 32nd in sack percentage with a 9.92% sack percentage. A 9.92% sack percentage is really really bloody damm bad. And to be both lowest in attempts AND worst in sack percentage is pretty terrible.

    Really, the way I see it, it amounts to this. No matter what anyone says about Wilson or the Seattle offensive line, THEY are not the reason they win. They are held up by a great defense and a great rushing attack. Take away one or both of those things and probably what happens is that Wilson becomes a dead short quarterback.

    I like Wilson’s poise, confidence, maturity, smarts, and ability to make plays. But they do not win because of him. This is of course just a hypothetical, but put Andrew Luck on the Seahawks and they become this scary dynasty. Put Wilson on the Colts and they struggle.

    Prometheus Faulk

    One caveat – Seattle did have, IMO, a fairly competent run blocking line last year, particularly Unger. While as you mentioned their pass blocking definitely leaved something to be desired, they were able to spring Lynch successfully, particularly between the tackles.

    It just so happened that with their frightening secondary and front seven versatility, they could commit to the run whole-heartedly and throw much more sparingly than any other club and not have to throw out of a hole too much. When Wilson was throwing, for the most part it was in a favorable situation where the opposing defense was focused on containing Lynch.

    July 11, 2014 at 12:50 pm #1484
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    What was Wilson’s QB rating the last
    two years? Just curious.

    w
    v

    July 11, 2014 at 12:54 pm #1485
    Dak
    Participant

    Wow, 32nd in pass attempts and in sack percentage. According to the predominant train of thought, you need a passing-driven offense to succeed these days. Without it, you just can’t muster enough offense to win. And, in many cases, that may be true. So, it really shines a light on just how great that Seattle defense is. Yes, the run game, too, but the run game wouldn’t be enough without that stifling defense.

    I expect a couple of heavyweight bouts between the Rams and ‘Hawks this year. And, I expect at least a split for the Rams. That last game in Seattle will be tough. Can you imagine if that game was for the division? How fun would that be?

    July 11, 2014 at 1:09 pm #1486
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    2012 = qb rating of 100.
    2013 = qb rating of 101.2

    http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson/2532975/profile

    When he came out as a rookie, Softli was
    emphatic about his football IQ.

    He’s not an Andrew Luck, but he’s a unique
    intelligent, gamer.

    I would not make the statement, “they win because
    of defense and a running game.”
    I think that kinda ignores Wilson’s skills.
    I’d say they win because of Defense, running game, and
    the decision-making of Russell Wilson.
    w
    v

    • This reply was modified 10 years, 4 months ago by Avatar photowv.
    July 11, 2014 at 1:59 pm #1491
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator
    wv wrote:

    2012 = qb rating of 100.
    2013 = qb rating of 101.2

    http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson/2532975/profile

    When he came out as a rookie, Softli was
    emphatic about his football IQ.

    He’s not an Andrew Luck, but he’s a unique
    intelligent, gamer.

    I would not make the statement, “they win because
    of defense and a running game.”
    I think that kinda ignores Wilson’s skills.
    I’d say they win because of Defense, running game, and
    the decision-making of Russell Wilson.
    w
    v

    I would disgree, but maybe not in the way you expect. First, yeah Softli was emphatic about Wilson very early on and called it perfectly.

    BUT IMO you could put up to a dozen and a half qbs on that team, have them run the same offense, and they would do as well or better.

    So I think you over-value him…but just by a bit. I am not in the “Wilson suxx” camp.

    It’s like I said though. Put Luck on the Seahawks and they are a freaking dynasty, NOW. Put Wilson on the Colts and both he and they struggle a lot more than they did. Obviously that’s just an opinion, but I like putting it that way.

    Who are the many other qbs, who in my mind could qb the 2013 Seahawks with the same results or better? (“Better” probably just meaning they pass more and so the passing attack is a bigger part of their game.)

    Alphabetical order –>

    Bradford
    Brady
    Brees
    Cutler
    Flacco
    Foles
    Griffen3
    Kaepernick
    Luck
    Manning, E
    Manning, P
    McNown
    Newton
    Palmer
    Rivers
    Rodgers
    Roethlisberger
    Romo
    Ryan
    Smith, Alex
    Stafford

    ..

    July 11, 2014 at 4:02 pm #1506
    Avatar photowv
    Participant
    zn wrote:

    I would disgree, but maybe not in the way you expect. First, yeah Softli was emphatic about Wilson very early on and called it perfectly.

    BUT IMO you could put up to a dozen and a half qbs on that team, have them run the same offense, and they would do as well or better.

    So I think you over-value him…but just by a bit. I am not in the “Wilson suxx” camp.

    It’s like I said though. Put Luck on the Seahawks and they are a freaking dynasty, NOW. Put Wilson on the Colts and both he and they struggle a lot more than they did. Obviously that’s just an opinion, but I like putting it that way.

    Who are the many other qbs, who in my mind could qb the 2013 Seahawks with the same results or better? (“Better” probably just meaning they pass more and so the passing attack is a bigger part of their game.)

    Alphabetical order –>

    Bradford
    Brady
    Brees
    Cutler
    Flacco
    Foles
    Griffen3
    Kaepernick
    Luck
    Manning, E
    Manning, P
    McNown
    Newton
    Palmer
    Rivers
    Rodgers
    Roethlisberger
    Romo
    Ryan
    Smith, Alex
    Stafford

    ..

    Yeah, i value him more highly than you.

    I remember how he played in that playoff game against Washington
    when they were behind. He really impressed me, leading that team from behind in a playoff game.

    I think you just dont like little hobbit quarterbacks.

    This video supports your argument, not mine btw. But i still thot it was interesting,
    how in those huge blowouts RW completed only 7 passes, etc:

    w
    v

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.