Plenty of Reasons for RW to WANT to leave Seattle

[burrrton]

Man, there is no way to logic this here.

Logic? You want to bring up logic?? You use more fallacy in your ridiculous posts than anyone I've ever seen in ~20 years on the internet.

Just looking at your last step into a pile of dog sht, I can see appealing to authority, science of small numbers, confirmation bias, and that's just skimming. I could go on.

You're really bad at debating, and RW gives you a boner. That's a bad combination to bring into a Seahawk board and try and argue with people over the age of 8. Go argue with the kids on espn.com.

[burrrton]

we went form avg 28 attempts in the first 6 games to 28 in the next 10 how did we change anything, All that changed were the types of pass plays. Answer it did not, its just another Future lie.

He doesn't have any idea, because he never thought to check to see if his argument had any validity. He's going on what his eyes told him, what his 'gut instinct' is.

In other words, Captain EyeTest is behaving like Captain EyeTest.

[monkey]

Starting out 3-3 in a "pass first" offense (already factually incorrect, but hey, I'll play along), then cutting Harvin, ought to tell you something about HARVIN, not Wilson you pin head.
The fact that after unloading Harvin they regrouped and made another Superbowl is what speaks volumes about Wilson.

Why haven't you been banned yet? It's one thing to disagree with virtually everyone here on virtually every topic but to utterly refuse to accept when you've been proven to be factually wrong repeatedly means that you're either stupid or you are trolling. You clearly ARE stupid but really the truth is you are a troll.
Go away you are NOT wanted here or welcome!

[Futureite]

Starting out 3-3 in a "pass first" offense (already factually incorrect, but hey, I'll play along), then cutting Harvin, ought to tell you something about HARVIN, not Wilson you pin head.
The fact that after unloading Harvin they regrouped and made another Superbowl is what speaks volumes about Wilson.

Why haven't you been banned yet? It's one thing to disagree with virtually everyone here on virtually every topic but to utterly refuse to accept when you've been proven to be factually wrong repeatedly means that you're either stupid or you are trolling. You clearly ARE stupid but really the truth is you are a troll.
Go away you are NOT wanted here or welcome!

It sure does. He threw 4 picks, O TDs less than 100 yds for almost the entire game and the Seahawks STILL won. The punter threw a TD, the ST recovered an onsides kick and the D thwarted countless redzone opportunities, forcing the Packers to kick field goals. He gets a whole shyt ton of help in tons of games, and all fans like you is turn the other cheek and look at the times he plays great. Even Tim FN Tebow could win games at the end that his team kept him in for the majority of regulation, and in fact he did so 8 or 9 times one yr. So save it.

Please just shut the hell up with your fact citing. Seriously. Everyone has facts they can site on a sports website, both pro and against. There are never any true clear cut "winners". And I'm far from disagreeing on "every" topic. You are too FN dense to realize your burden of proof for demonstrating your guy is at the highest possible level (which is what top 5 is) is far greater than mine to prove he's 10-12. FYI, that is true for any subject, in any discipline. Last time some moron like you is going to bait me into an insult battle. Might want to check yourself and find who the real troll is, buddy.

[Agent 86]

The best thing I did on this site was ignore Future, and he didn't even really bother me. I suggest you all do the same cause he will continue to post whatever he posts as long as even one person is willing to respond. Believe me, it is refreshing when I see that message between posts that he posted something and I don't have to read it.

Now if we could only get all of you on board to stop "quoting" him in your replies, I would be nearly Future free.

[HumanCockroach]

If you watch any of the known broadcasters in America that are football experts, they all say Luck is the best passer. I don't think it matters, RW wins another title and Luck is going to be sucking wind for a legacy.

Why do people continue to cite experts? These are the very same experts that trashed the Seahawks draft that year, profess players like to Yo gabba Gabbert is HOF material, claim guys like Leaf, George, RGIII are the best player in the draft, and are wrong with MORE regularly than average fans.

Futures "fair" article is one such expert, and he starts his breakdown on Wilson with "he's short" before actually admitting he is the MOST dangerous QB in the NFL, before back tracking again to "he's short" . Not interested in being a sheep ( especially since my ability to accurately judge NFL talent, as well as many on this board, is vastly more accurate and insightful), my advise is make up your OWN mind and opinion, not have it spoon fed by people that are merely regurgitating what they have read somewhere else, or are trying to push a pre determined agenda.

[burrrton]

Please just shut the hell up with your fact citing.

AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!

I *literally* LOL'd. There is no more perfect quote to attribute to you, Future.

[burrrton]

Now if we could only get all of you on board to stop "quoting" him in your replies, I would be nearly Future free.

Sorry, but I think you'll want the one I just quoted above.

"YOU GUYS JUST SHUT THE HELL UP WITH YOUR 'FACTS' AND 'STATISTICS' AND 'PROOF'!"

[obiken]

He is not Luck, but he is ours and for us he works, and he brings so much to the table that we would never trade him for Luck, because we love him!!

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Going to go ahead and feed the troll, but, as far as Russell Wilson's performance in the NFCCG last year, Future, you're not looking at the whole picture. Simply pulling stats without offering analysis. First, two of those, Wilson hit his receiver in the hands. Second, Wilson was dealing with a bush league, brutal head shot from Clay Matthews; that definitely was affecting his play. So, yeah, the team had to lean on the defense and running game until Russel Wilson was back in it. And when he was back in it, he delivered. No quarterback, even the greats, are ever good all the time, and Russell Wilson is good way more often than bad.

[RiverDog]

Going to go ahead and feed the troll, but, as far as Russell Wilson's performance in the NFCCG last year, Future, you're not looking at the whole picture. Simply pulling stats without offering analysis. First, two of those, Wilson hit his receiver in the hands. Second, Wilson was dealing with a bush league, brutal head shot from Clay Matthews; that definitely was affecting his play. So, yeah, the team had to lean on the defense and running game until Russel Wilson was back in it. And when he was back in it, he delivered. No quarterback, even the greats, are ever good all the time, and Russell Wilson is good way more often than bad.

Not only that, but Future conveniently overlooks Russell's stellar play during the last part of regulation through the overtime period because it doesn't fit his premise that Russell is an over rated quarterback.

As far as not feeding the troll or banning him, I don't understand how you guys can allow him to get under your skin like he obviously does. I'm no more of a fan of his comments than you guys are but I don't allow it to affect my blood pressure. CPR from the old PI forum was a lot more obnoxious with his backhanded compliments and thinly veiled insults than anything Futureite's ever done IMO.

Besides, Future's comments, as out of place and biased as they are, draw many more responses than those from other regular posters. Sometimes it's the only thing the rest of us can agree on.

[burrrton]

He is not Luck

Correct.

However, we're not paying him $20+M/yr because we love him. We're paying him that because over the last 3 years, he's been better.

[burrrton]

Not only that, but Future conveniently overlooks Russell's stellar play during the last part of regulation through the overtime period because it doesn't fit his premise that Russell is an over rated quarterback.

That's part of the confirmation bias I mentioned.

[Anthony]

Please just shut the hell up with your fact citing.

ahh the truth hurts hurt in the end you want us to stop using facts because the facts expose you to be the moron you are. Deal with it

[HumanCockroach]

Anybody else crack up when Gore attempted to show respect and love for Smith and Kap yesterday, but instead basically called them leaderless stupid QBs that never took control of the huddle? Cracked up. Confirmation of what many here have been saying ( though I avoided that particular response) ....

Kap is dumb, and not a leader, because Frank Gore said so.... LOL,

Also that upside DB that compares favorably with Seattle's DB's was cut. I guess being a starting corner in SC is a death sentence.

[Distant Relative]

Still feeding trolls I see.

[HumanCockroach]

Low hanging fruit and what not ....

[RiverDog]

Anybody else crack up when Gore attempted to show respect and love for Smith and Kap yesterday, but instead basically called them leaderless stupid QBs that never took control of the huddle? Cracked up. Confirmation of what many here have been saying ( though I avoided that particular response) ....

Kap is dumb, and not a leader, because Frank Gore said so.... LOL,

Also that upside DB that compares favorably with Seattle's DB's was cut. I guess being a starting corner in SC is a death sentence.

Yuppers. Gore was complimenting Andrew Luck's command of the huddle, said that "I've never had that before" and didn't realize he was taking a shot at Smith and Kaepernick. It was a Freudian slip. The truth came out and he never realized it.

Now Futureite will come in and defend Kaepernick by saying that Kaep scored higher on the Wonderlic than Russell did.

[obiken]

I think CK is in for a rough season. Too many loses to replace. IF he went to Zona or ST Louis, he would be fine.

[Distant Relative]

Low hanging fruit and what not ....

Wasn't meant for you bro.

[savvyman]

Why do people continue to cite experts? These are the very same experts that trashed the Seahawks draft that year, profess players like to Yo gabba Gabbert is HOF material, claim guys like Leaf, George, RGIII are the best player in the draft, and are wrong with MORE regularly than average fans.

I remember being in My Hotel Room in Reno after I had just laid out a high 4 figure bet for the Seahawks to win the Superbowl against Denver.

ESPN closed their Pre-Superbowl coverage by asking their 10 EX-NFL Experts (Virtually all of them in the Hall of Fame) who did they pick to win the Superbowl? 9 out of 10 of the Experts Picked Denver to Win.. I remember feeling "Uh-Oh" did I let some Homerism affect my analysis of the teams in the Up-coming game? However, within a few minutes my confidence was back as I knew my research was thorough and that I could trust my own analytical process over the "Experts" opinion.

Heck even as part of my research I reached out to you for your assessment.

We all know how this story ended.

Many times the Expert is very knowledgeable but they can also be very lazy in their approach to analysis as they rely on their expertise to quickly arrive at their conclusions.

[NorthHawk]

There's also more than a little of the "herd" mentality where people don't want to go against the grain.
I can understand that as it might be a little embarrassing to be outside the norm and be wrong, too on national television where millions can laugh at your predictions.

[RiverDog]

IMO the "experts" vastly under estimated the amount of pressure we could bring on Peyton Manning. We didn't have one single player in the top 25 in sacks that season and Denver gave up a league low of 20 sacks, so IMO they felt that the Broncos could do a more than adequate job of protecting Manning. In addition, we ended the regular season on a bit of a slump, both of our playoff games were very close, and both were played at home, so the perception could have been that this team had already peaked and that going on the road would rob our defense of it's 12th man fig leaf.

IMO there was considerable justification for establishing Denver as the favorite and that we were not the victim of some sort of Peyton Manning bias. They were simply wrong, big time.

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry RD, I strongly disagree with the idea there was strong reasons to place the Broncos as clear cut favorites. Even if history was the ONLY reason, which it wasn't. The idea about single player sacks stats is interesting, until of course you actually look at the facts of the matter ( ie only team with 4 players with 8 or more sacks that season, or that Seattle pressured the QB on 44% of all drop backs, 20% higher than the second highest rate of pressure by any team that season) the fact that Seattle gave up the LEAST amount of yardage after catch, which was what Denver's offense was predicated on, etc. Many here pointed out Denver was custom made for Seattle before the game, and were absolutely right, was that homerism? Or simply delving deeper than experts chose ( or really ever choose) to go, DESPITE two full weeks to actually watch and learn what the bulk of us knew?

Sorry, they get no pass on this stuff from me. Shoddy investigation, and a follow the leader mentallity nothing more.

[RiverDog]

Sorry RD, I strongly disagree with the idea there was strong reasons to place the Broncos as clear cut favorites. Even if history was the ONLY reason, which it wasn't. The idea about single player sacks stats is interesting, until of course you actually look at the facts of the matter ( ie only team with 4 players with 8 or more sacks that season, or that Seattle pressured the QB on 44% of all drop backs, 20% higher than the second highest rate of pressure by any team that season) the fact that Seattle gave up the LEAST amount of yardage after catch, which was what Denver's offense was predicated on, etc. Many here pointed out Denver was custom made for Seattle before the game, and were absolutely right, was that homerism? Or simply delving deeper than experts chose ( or really ever choose) to go, DESPITE two full weeks to actually watch and learn what the bulk of us knew?

Sorry, they get no pass on this stuff from me. Shoddy investigation, and a follow the leader mentallity nothing more.

Clear cut favorites? All I said was that there was justification for establishing them as a favorite. I never even said that they should be favored, just that there was sound reasoning for making them such.

[obiken]

Most fans would have Brady, Rogers, Luck, and then Wilson. I would agree. Would I trade Luck for Wilson? No, but to say Luck is not the better passer I think is wrong.

[Anthony]

Most fans would have Brady, Rogers, Luck, and then Wilson. I would agree. Would I trade Luck for Wilson? No, but to say Luck is not the better passer I think is wrong.

And yet the facts and stats support that he is not, he has more volume but that does not make him better. He has a better oline but that does not make him better, he has better Wrs but that does not make him better, he plays easier defenses but that does not make him better. To say he is the better passer with little facts to support it is wrong.

[obiken]

The Players rated RW 22 and Luck 7th sorry that's says it all. When their peers say that Luck is better their is no where to take the argument. Again, would I trade Wilson for Luck NO, but no doubt Luck is better.

[mykc14]

The Players rated RW 22 and Luck 7th sorry that's says it all. When their peers say that Luck is better their is no where to take the argument. Again, would I trade Wilson for Luck NO, but no doubt Luck is better.

Terrible argument. Based on this Demarco Murray is better than Lynch and there is no way you can can convince me that is true.

[Anthony]

The Players rated RW 22 and Luck 7th sorry that's says it all. When their peers say that Luck is better their is no where to take the argument. Again, would I trade Wilson for Luck NO, but no doubt Luck is better.

Actually the players rated Rw the 5th best QB and Luck 4th does not say much does it. Like I said other than the Volume Luck has nothing on Wilson at all those are the facts not opinion.

[kalibane]

Sorry RD, I strongly disagree with the idea there was strong reasons to place the Broncos as clear cut favorites.

I agree completely. The idea that the Broncos would be a clear cut favorite was based purely on the Peyton Manning narrative. Leading up to the game I was nervous mainly because I was so confident in a win.

The things that Denver did best were the things the Seahawks were the best in the NFL at stopping, like the short screens to D. Thomas and such, also Demaryius is huge but he doesn't fight for balls so I didn't think they could hurt us outside at all. When I was breaking down the game I thought the only way the Hawks lost (aside from injuries) was if the team just wasn't ready to be on the biggest stage.

[burrrton]

no doubt Luck is better.

Let's do it this way, obi- tell us which metric you're looking at to come to this conclusion.

[HumanCockroach]

I thought about asking the same thing. Like if Luck is "clearly" the "better" passer, what pass can he make that Wilson can't? I mean its "clear" right? So even someone who knows nothing about football would immediately notice the difference.

Wilson to the best of my knowledge is more accurate both short and deep, has a longer average both in attempt and completion, has a much lower turnover rate, and throws tds at a higher rate, has lower level talent to throw to, and lower level blocking in front if him. I've yet to see a throw Wilson can't make, and several I am fairly confident no other QB can ( true some of those absolutely have to do with his ability and athleticism)

He has won, won often, and has been "clutch" in big moments time after time.
Just don't see the clear advantage for Luck in any aspect barring gross number stats ( attempts dependant) maybe anticipation? Maybe? Though I am not entirely sure that isn't mitigated by Seattle's "protect the ball at all Costs" mentality..

[Seahawks4Ever]

OK, put Wilson on the Colts and Luck on the Seahawks and what would happen? Wilson would thrive and Luck would be carried out on a stretcher. End of story.

Who was better, Terry Bradshaw or Roger the Dodger? Roger Staubach, of course! Imagine Roger throwing to Terry's weapons and handing the ball to Blier and Franco the Steeler offense would have set records. Mean while Tom Landry would have pulled the rest of his hair out and benched Bradshaw and never let him develop.

We will see over the next 10-12 years who ends up with the most rings, Wilson or Luck.

[obiken]

Let's do it this way, obi- tell us which metric you're looking at to come to this conclusion.


Uhhh, The NFL top 100 as voted on by the players, but that's it!

[Anthony]

Let's do it this way, obi- tell us which metric you're looking at to come to this conclusion.


Uhhh, The NFL top 100 as voted on by the players, but that's it!

The one were Luck was the 4th ranked QB and Rw the 5th? The same one were last year Rw was higher than Luck? Shall I keep going, As I said if you go by the facts and stats, not opinion you cannot say Luck is better period.

[RiverDog]

Sorry RD, I strongly disagree with the idea there was strong reasons to place the Broncos as clear cut favorites

I agree completely. The idea that the Broncos would be a clear cut favorite was based purely on the Peyton Manning narrative. Leading up to the game I was nervous mainly because I was so confident in a win.

The things that Denver did best were the things the Seahawks were the best in the NFL at stopping, like the short screens to D. Thomas and such, also Demaryius is huge but he doesn't fight for balls so I didn't think they could hurt us outside at all. When I was breaking down the game I thought the only way the Hawks lost (aside from injuries) was if the team just wasn't ready to be on the biggest stage.

Again, I never said Denver was a clear cut favorite or even that they should have been favored. I simply said that there were very sound reasons for establishing them as the favorites. Personally, had someone offered me even odds, I would have taken us and bet a bunch. I was reasonably confident that we'd win that game.

[mykc14]

Uhhh, The NFL top 100 as voted on by the players, but that's it!

So once again, Murray is clearly better than Lynch, right?

[RiverDog]

Who was better, Terry Bradshaw or Roger the Dodger? Roger Staubach, of course! Imagine Roger throwing to Terry's weapons and handing the ball to Blier and Franco the Steeler offense would have set records. Mean while Tom Landry would have pulled the rest of his hair out and benched Bradshaw and never let him develop.

We will see over the next 10-12 years who ends up with the most rings, Wilson or Luck.

There aren't a lot of coaches that would have been as patient as Chuck Knoll was with Bradshaw. He had one of the shallowest learning curves of any HOF QB I've ever seen. And you're right, Bradshaw was blessed with a lot of offensive weapons and with one of the best defenses of all time, more so than his contemporaries like Staubach.