NFR How the Seattle Seahawks Solved Peyton Manning

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Kent Lufkin, Feb 4, 2014.

  1. Darryl Pahl

    Darryl Pahl Active Member

    I don't buy into the idea that the Seahawks won because they aren't overpaying their QB. Rather than basing the team strategy on a single player, they based it on an overall philosophy, and then found the people that best fit this philosophy. Making intelligent choices based on current ability rather than reputation and then being able to hone these skills as a team is where I think the genius comes in.

    Lots of teams overpaid their QBs this year - how did that work out for them? There's always going to be teams that take this approach, yet I think that the top two teams (49's and Seahawks) took the opposite approach - one that I think a lot of teams will emulate.

    In terms of Russell Wilson, I'll just have to disagree. Never throws on time? He's led his team to 28 wins in two years. Can't say that's all down to Bennett, Avril, or Harvin. Seemingly refuses to throw? He had 0 interceptions in the playoffs, following the team philosophy to not turn the ball over. Didn't make many plays? I think I was watching a different game.

    One safety, two field goals, one rushing TD, two passing TDs, one kick off return, one interception pick 6, 5 points after. I think that would be the definition of a complete team effort.
    Salmo_g, Brett Angel and Kent Lufkin like this.
  2. PT

    PT Physhicist

  3. Old Man

    Old Man Just an Old Man

    The writer must be from New York or Denver. Only rush four guys and still get to Manning. Well I guess it worked out for the boys.
  4. GAT

    GAT Active Member

    I think the Denver offensive line threw the game.... they betted against themselves in Vegas.

    Say it ain't so, Joe... say it ain't so.

  5. Good assessment, in my opinion.

    I think it is also worth noting that in this game (as in many games) the leading scorer was Steven Hauschka, the place kicker. He also was key in preventing kick-off returns, by putting the ball high and deep, giving the coverage time to converge on the ball deep in the Broncos' territory, or kicking it out of the end zone entirely, thus giving Seattle an edge in field position. He's one of the best in the biz, and will be a free agent this year.

  6. o mykiss

    o mykiss Active Member

    I agree. I thought Wilson played a helluva game. Geez, Charles, what more could you want than a 123 passer rating, 2 TDs and no INTs? With the beat down the Seahawk defense gave to the Donks, he did way more than was necessary. Who knows how much more he might have accomplished if the damn defense had let him spend a little more time on the field.
    Kent Lufkin likes this.
  7. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down

    They won because they have better players. They have better players because they have drafted very well and they have been able to go out and sign free agents to supplement the positions they have not addressed in the draft, particularly d-line and wideout. Their depth on the D-line was hugely important expecially since the Broncos were behind and had to throw.

    My point was simply that the seahawks coaches didn't play any defenses much diffrent than the Pat's had 2 weeks earlier agains the same team. The differece was that the Seahawks had better players, and a lot of them.

    As far as my chriticism (or percieved slight) of Wilson, watch the games people! He has some huge strengths, mobility, arm strength, leadership to name a few. The single most important thing he does is that he rarely turns over the ball.

    He doesn't throw the ball on time much or throw anyone open. This isn't really debatable if your eyes work. He also doesn't turn it over....which is awesome.

    As far as salary goes, my beloved Pat's went through the same thing during Brady's 1st couple years. It's a great position to be in to get quality QB play for next to nothing. Enjoy it. It will end some time as Wilson's contract comes up and he improves. At that point the game changes a bit, but if Schnieder continues to hit with his drafts the team will win. The days of signing 2 pass rushers in the off season will end though.

    Go Sox,
    Gary Knowels likes this.
  8. Yard Sale

    Yard Sale Active Member

    Yes, both the Niners and hawks are greatly benefitting from the new rookie salary rules, but here is the real truth!

  9. Charles, I think your assessment of the difference between the Pats and the Hawks is fine. But I really don't get your emphasis on "throwing the ball on time," while at the same time acknowledging Wilson's low turnover rate. The difference between a ball thrown 'on time' (by which I presume you mean at the point that a play, as written up in the playbook, says the receiver should be in position) vs. one that is thrown late, when the receiver is open, often is an interception. The Legion of Boom prey on that "throwing the ball on time" training by many successful quarterbacks with noteworthy results.

    In my opinion, a ball that is thrown 'on time' is one that is caught by the intended receiver, whether at the point drawn up in the playbook or not, or is lobbed out of play, before the quarterback is sacked. Wilson is better at both than most QBs in the league. It is a strength that the Seahawks rode all the way to a championship.

    Kent Lufkin likes this.
  10. Kent Lufkin

    Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    I couldn't agree more about Hauschka. Letting him get away would be a serious mistake. Of course, there's bound to be some other kicker out there who's just as reliable but willing to work for less to get a spot on a championship team.

  11. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down

    This post hurts my head.

    The Seahawks tried to overpay, or at least pay market value for their QB (Flynn). It just turned out he wasn't better than the player they drafted and paid 600 grand to. At some point they will have to pay Wilson, we'll see what they do then. It wasn't an organizational approach, it was a circumstance, just as the Pat's won in 01 and 03 partially due to not having to pay their QB. The Ravens last year were exactly the same. The free agent rules dictate that at some point (4 years in) you have got to pay the player somewhere near market value. I suppose they may tell Russell he isn't worth it and that they were gonna save cap space for the other 52. Anyone think that that will happen?

    When you do not have to pay your QB market value, you can have a very deep and talented 53 man roster from the long snapper to the tailback. This along with excellent (truly amazing actually) drafts allowed the Seahwks to have a better, deeper roster than anyone else. This shows up by being better in all 3 phases of the game.

    As a comparison, the Patriots had by many metrics the top Punter in football last year in Zolton Mesko. They cut him in the off season. The punter was a luxury they could not afford. 5 million for Welker was too risky. The D-line had depth issues so they drafted for the need, but the player simply wasn't good enough. Having the same issue, the seahawks signed 2 top notch pass rusher in Avril and Bennett who harrassed and beat Manning. If the Pat's had those 2 players they would have beaten the Broncos too. They would have lost to Seattle in the SB but hopefully you all are starting figure out that salaries matter in a capped league.

    Wilson's a good player. He's worth way more than 600 grand. He has some flaws though. He holds on to the ball forever. He didn't make a bunch of plays and they ask very little of him. In fact, I can't think of a play he made in the SB that was exceptional in any way ( although the same could be said for Manning). He made a few nice throws on slants, underthrew what shoud have been a TD for a 40 yard gain and did what he does best by protecting the football. It will be interesting what happens when he is a free agent. Will they play a QB 15- 20 mil. who they ask to throw less than any other starter in the NFL? They'll likely have to. Then you will find out that it's hard to pay all-pro's all over the field. Enjoy next year. Seattle is stacked again. At some point they'll have to pay though.

    Go Sox,
  12. Kent Lufkin

    Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Not sure about that. They'll only end up paying to the extent they want to keep the same players rather than let them walk in free agency. The reason we ended up with folks like WIlson, Sherman, Baldwin, Kearse and others, is that since nobody else wanted them they were more than happy to accept the league minimum salary.

    The bigger question is whether the 12th man is gonna accept Schneider and Carroll letting any of those guys walk. Keeping them means increasing payroll while letting them go means adding an unknown to the equation in the form of gambling on getting an acceptable replacement for fewer dollars.

    Seems to me that the Hawks have some hard decisions to make. Their recent track record of over 1100 player transactions in the previous 4 years suggests they're more willing to roll the dice than to suck it up and pay more. The exception will likely be Wilson. I hope another is Hauschka.

    As you can probably tell from other posts, not many folks agree with your critical assessment of Wilson as 'Holding onto the ball too long'. Dick Olmstead hits it squarely by stating that passing 'on time' means risking an interception. It's better to eat a loss on a play and not throw a pass than to throw it just because the plays calls for it. And yes, we were all watching the same game.

    I realize that it's unlikely this will convince you otherwise. The fact though, is that Carroll's plan just won the Super Bowl. The Pats weren't a much larger speedbump for Denver than Denver was for Seattle. That tells me a lot about their strategy.

  13. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down


    He leaves a lot of plays out there. I harp on him not throwing on time because it shows that the plays he makes are mostly with his athletcism and not his brain. It's all well and good, now when he plays for a team that gives up 8 to the most prodigous offense in history. This isn't gonna be the case forever. You can watch his head move down from the recievers to the D- line nearly every play as he tries to flee. Fortunately, he's a super athlete and he often gets away with not even looking down the field until he gets out of the pocket. Those legs will only last so long. He's gotta start trusting his brain too.

    If you really look at what they ask him to do, it's all quick slants and roll outs where there is only 1 or 2 options. A simple offense works well when your D and running game is that good, but as you watch him you see how limitted he is in the passing game. It's hard to score enough points to win that way. He's a smart guy. He has a strong and generally accurate arm. Hopefully he improves because in a couple years they are going to pay him elite QB money. He better learn how to play at an elite level. I actually think he could, but he's pretty darned far away right now.

    Go Sox,
  14. Yard Sale

    Yard Sale Active Member

    Pains me to say it but those first few 3rd down conversions Wilson made were huge. You really want to give manning a couple more possessions and wear out your D?

    The more the rules change the more important a good QB becomes. Before you take RW for granted look at the average lifespan of a QB in the NFL is, and 2/3rds of those are backups.
    Kent Lufkin likes this.
  15. Kaiserman

    Kaiserman content

    With so many "experts" on here, you all should go apply at ESPN.

    Heck, can't do any worse than they are... Seattle was suppose to lose.

    I think Peyton was paid off to throw the game.
  16. Teenage Entomologist

    Teenage Entomologist Gotta love the pteronarcys.

    The Broncos didn't win because Peyton only shouted" Omaha!" twice.
  17. Brookie_Hunter

    Brookie_Hunter aka Dave Hoover

    I mostly see a whining in that commentary, not evidence he purporting to show. Hey if you freeze frame through every play to look for all the possible indiscretions that and slight measurement mistakes by the zebra's that favors your side if called another way, anyone could make up a film just like that for any game played. Many of those plays were reviewed and nothing was overturned. You'd have to say the Refs deliberately threw the game in the Seahawks favor and it would be total none sense to even suggest it.
    Ed Call and Irafly like this.
  18. Porter

    Porter Active Member

  19. Ed Call

    Ed Call Mumbling Moderator Staff Member

    This thread is a load of poppycock and nonsense.
    Old Man and Brookie_Hunter like this.
  20. Old Man

    Old Man Just an Old Man

    I suppose if Wilson had a bad game or the Hawks won by a lower score, all the armchair coaches would be knocking him more. The Hawks won. No more needs to be said. They played like they were coached and they were all happy with the outcome.
    Brett Angel, Kent Lufkin and Ed Call like this.