RiverDog wrote:
Actually I'm certain that you did. It was zero, nothing, nada. I remember the debate very well.
But if all you are going to do is assign 5% of the blame to him, you might as well say that he was completely blameless as I'm not sure if there was ever a pass thrown that I'd assign that low of a percentage to the quarterback. It's either a lot, none, or shared a lot more equally than how you've broken it down.
If I remember right, Lynch had flared to the right and was uncovered, would have made a great check down had Russell decided not to throw it. He also could have pulled it down and scrambled, thrown it away if he got into trouble, and he had a timeout in his pocket if he or someone else was tackled in bounds. Especially being a quarterback with his ability to create a masterpiece out of a busted play, he could have made something happen.
Luck should be rated above RW
politicalfootball wrote:Luck should be rated above RW but although we lost to them last year we are the better team. Can't wait to see them in the SB.
kalibane wrote:Hawk, it was one of the worst calls ever. And it really only has a little to do with not running the ball, which they absolutely should have done if for no other reason to take time off the clock.
If they were going to pass they should have called a play that gave Wilson an option to run or throw it away instead of a one read quick throw to our worst receiver.
HumanCockroach wrote:Sorry RD but on a three yard slant there is no "check down", Wilson made the right read on the play, and it was the play called. If you want to assign blame for the ball being a bit too high, or a bit in front, I'm cool with that, but on a quick slant that is open, the QB can NOT wait, there was absolutely zero blame for the decision to throw the ball, it was indeed the right read, execution could have been better, but if your claim is he should have checked down, or looked to run, you yourself are absolving him, by placing the blame squarely on the coaches decision to run the play, without a check down, or another option. Here you are claiming Wilson should have improvised instead of throwing the ball to an open receiver on a designed and called play.
kalibane wrote:As always Future, in your zeal to run down the Seahawks or one of their players you just step out on the ledge too far and lose your balance. There are perfectly good arguments to consider Luck better than Wilson... footwork and definitely arm strength are not part of those arguments.
I think that's what annoys me the most about you. You just throw stuff out there that you think sounds good instead of actually putting together a cogent well informed argument. It's an insult to people's intelligence for you to assume that they pay as little attention to the game as you seemingly do. Just once I'd like to see you come with an argument that isn't a clichéd made up narrative plucked from the cesspool of ProFootball Talk comment sections.
When you make comments like that about Wilson's arm strength compared to Luck's it shows me right then and there that you either haven't actually taken the time to compare them or you're intentionally fabricating stuff. When you're willing to start from an obvious fallacy and try to pass it off as a matter of fact statement there is no reason to even consider taking the rest of your argument seriously.
P.S. Have you ever taken a minute and thought about how many of the arguments that you come up with to knock the Seahawks or their players are based on "what if" scenarios? In other words there is no actual hard data to back up what you're saying because it's all based on an assumption that because, as you put it, player X isn't "asked" to do something it means they can't do it even when the data that does exist seems to suggest that they can. Forming a conclusion based on the absence of data is one of the most intellectually bereft places you can start an argument and yet you go back to that well over and over again.
You're right in that group of people who claimed Tom Brady was overrated before 2007 and Kobe Bryant was overrated before Shaq left.
RiverDog wrote:
I was responding to Anthony's question as to what Russell could have done had he seen or sensed Butler jumping the route. If Russell had some sort of indication that he was in a bad spot, he could have pulled it down and thrown to Lynch, or scrambled around and made something out of nothing. I did not say or imply that Russell "should" have done this or that, only that he had several options had he decided not to throw to Lockette.
kalibane wrote:And stop it with that kind of spectacle nonsense as anecdotal evidence. I've personally thrown the ball 50 yards in the air in an intramural football game and I never played QB in organized ball nor have I ever clocked anything above 70 mph on a radar gun in baseball. You should have stuck to talking about the deep digs, at least then you kind of give the appearance that you know what you should be talking about.
If you don't think Russell Wilson could throw a ball 70 yards in the air in a T-Shirt and Shorts with no rush you are a flat out idiot. We've all seen him put it 50 yards in the air on the run on a flick of the wrist.
I've seen Michael Vick more or less make that same throw that Luck made only in pads in a game on a rope. I've seen Kyle Boller throw the ball through the uprights from the 50 yard line (60 yards+ in the air if you need help with math) from his knees. THAT is elite arm strength.
Most of the starting QBs in the NFL can make that throw in shorts and a t-shirt with all that wind up; there will just be varying degrees of air underneath the ball. And there was plenty of air under Luck's throw.
c_hawkbob wrote:
NorthHawk wrote:That's where touch comes in.
The QB has to be able to throw it hard enough to squeeze it in the short window, but not too hard to make it overly difficult to catch.
Some QBs never figure that out.
NorthHawk wrote:
It's not going away any time soon, so get used to it.
RiverDog wrote:I agree with burrton. The 2 PT. conversion in the NFCCG was nothing more than a prayer. The fact that it was a conversion meant that had nothing to lose, so he might as well throw it up in the air like that as he had a 50/50 chance that his guy would come down with it. The football Gods were smiling at us on that one.
Of course it was a prayer. But he threw it where he wanted, to Willson who he knew was there somehow.
burrrton wrote:*sigh*
http://www.nfl.com/videos/seattle-seaha ... conversion
If by "where he wanted" you mean "the left half of the field", sure, and he didn't know Willson was there "somehow"- he appears to have seen him when he was wheeling around.
That does't change the fact that it was a hail mary that Willson had to camp under and was only not picked because Dix panicked with too much time to react.
It only went about 25-30 yards horizontally, so it went nearly as far vertically, and while that makes it a throw my wife couldn't make, it's hardly an example of outrageous arm strength by NFL standards.
There are 206 million great examples of RW's arm strength- you don't have to run to a particularly weak example.
Hawktawk wrote:He threw it falling backwards with both feet off the ground and got it all the way across the field. If thats a "weak" example and doesn't impress you fine. I was very impressed. Wilson got "lucky" once again which he just seems to do most of the time. Hes got "it"the intangible things that make him a winner along with very unique athletic gifts.
Now that we have linebackers and nose guards getting 100 million dollar deals Schneider is looking like an utter idiot dragging this thing out.Hes costing the Hawks more every day he waits.
PAY HIM. HES WORTH IT.
He threw it falling backwards with both feet off the ground and got it all the way across the field.
got it right to were Luke was.
I doubt there are many QBs who could have made that through, under that much duress with that much touch and that far.
Hawktawk wrote:Of course it was a prayer. But he threw it where he wanted, to Willson who he knew was there somehow. He said so after the game. Dix missed the ball because I don't think he had any idea Wilson was going to be able to come back across the field under that much duress. The high arc on the ball was necessary to get it over the defenders who were absolutely in his face. It was a throw that required great arm strength and athleticism, an amazing play in a game full of them..
burrrton wrote:He threw it falling backwards with both feet off the ground and got it all the way across the field.
RiverDog wrote:IMO he had a general idea that some Seahawk receiver might be in the area, but he was not targeting anyone. It was no more of an example of a great arm/athleticism than throwing a ball into the cheap seats after a touchdown. If you're hell bent to hand out a compliment for that play, you'd be better off noting that it was a very smart play in that it was his last resort and being that it was a conversion attempt, he had absolutely nothing to lose.
Ironically, we might not have seen that play under current rules as now the defense can return a conversion attempt for a touchdown.
so to me you are arguing just to argue.
Burton it does not matter if Luke had to stop peddling or not
he knew Luke was over there, if you relook at the video at about the 8 second mark just before Russell again turns to his left he saw Luke leaking out and knew it.
If you're hell bent to hand out a compliment for that play, you'd be better off noting that it was a very smart play in that it was his last resort and being that it was a conversion attempt, he had absolutely nothing to lose.
burrrton wrote:This I agree with, and in fact I think the play was probably designed to go to him. RW just got gobbled by the pressure so had to throw it up for grabs.
A money play. A clutch play. But hardly a good demonstration of the cannon hanging from his right shoulder.
Dude the problem is once again you have provided nothing that proves the throw he made does not show his arm strength.
Now again if you want to argue just how much it shows his arm strength fine but it does not change the fact you need arm strength to pull that off with all the factors involved.
burrrton wrote:
Very good. You need "arm strength". See what's missing from that statement versus what it's intended to demonstrate?
I am bananas.
Like I said you just wanted to argue. so fine argue oh wait you already admitted you were wrong.
burrrton wrote:
Hey, Anthony- turn around quick and look up and behind you- that's the point of my last post that just when whooshing over your head.
Perfect place to leave this.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 40 guests