Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

If Cam, Romo or Peyton threw that game ending INT....


GoobyPls

Recommended Posts

Yep.  Russell Wilson is the luckiest athlete I can ever recall.  Dude pulls off more insanely lucky plays than anyone I've ever seen.  hell, the play right before the INT was sheer luck.  Perfect pass breakup, WR falls, ball lands right in his lap.  Seriously, dafuq is that?  Seems like that type of lucky BS happens with RW all the time.  Then, he throws a back breaking, Super Bowl losing INT and not one mention of the fact that the ball was poorly placed high and inside on a quick slant.  If that ball is put into the WR's body like you want on that route, it's an incomplete pass at worse, likely defensive pass interference.  But, once again, Wilson lucks out and all the ruckus is about the play call.  Sure, the play call sucked, but if the ball was thrown properly, it WAS a relatively safe play.  Still dumb as fug not to just give the ball to Lynch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep.  Russell Wilson is the luckiest athlete I can ever recall.  Dude pulls off more insanely lucky plays than anyone I've ever seen.  hell, the play right before the INT was sheer luck.  Perfect pass breakup, WR falls, ball lands right in his lap.  Seriously, dafuq is that?  Seems like that type of lucky BS happens with RW all the time.  Then, he throws a back breaking, Super Bowl losing INT and not one mention of the fact that the ball was poorly placed high and inside on a quick slant.  If that ball is put into the WR's body like you want on that route, it's an incomplete pass at worse, likely defensive pass interference.  But, once again, Wilson lucks out and all the ruckus is about the play call.  Sure, the play call sucked, but if the ball was thrown properly, it WAS a relatively safe play.  Still dumb as fug not to just give the ball to Lynch.

 

I've said just that.  Credit to Butler for making a great play and flat out jumping the route, but there was no reason for him to lead the receiver, it's not like he needed a run after the catch.  Wilson, if anything, was the worst part of the play.  Seattle had the personnell matchup in their favor, and like I've said, a pass was not the worst play call in the world considering IF they have to run 3 plays from the 1, 1 would have to be a pass, why not then when the matchup favored them and open the playbook the next 2 plays.  Wilson never looked at any other receiver and the pass was not good.  IMO, he cost them the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is their darling, that is for sure.  I think it is funny how he has a RB who gets 5 yards after getting hit at the LOS, a defense that not only keeps the other teams from scoring, but gives him turnovers with great field position.  His "Hail Mary" 2-pointer vs. Green Bay is all I needed to see. 

 

Wilson is staring to believe the hype.  You can tell by his answers when interviewed by the adoring media.  He is not that good--he is elusive and able to improvise, but when you are usually leading the game and you have a defense that has your back, a RB who brings 8 to the box--really?

 

That is like punching another kid on the playground while your buddies hold his arms and legs.  Then walking around like you are one tough hombre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said just that.  Credit to Butler for making a great play and flat out jumping the route, but there was no reason for him to lead the receiver, it's not like he needed a run after the catch.  Wilson, if anything, was the worst part of the play.  Seattle had the personnell matchup in their favor, and like I've said, a pass was not the worst play call in the world considering IF they have to run 3 plays from the 1, 1 would have to be a pass, why not then when the matchup favored them and open the playbook the next 2 plays.  Wilson never looked at any other receiver and the pass was not good.  IMO, he cost them the game. 

 

This is what is not being talked about. If you run on 2nd down and get stuffed you have to call your timeout.

 

Now it's 3rd down w/no timeouts on the one..........do you pass here ??

 

or take the chance you don't get stuffed again running.

 

If you get stuffed on 2-3 down running...........you might not get a chance for 4th down.

 

IMO..........it was just a bad pass by RW and a great defensive play by Butler.

 

I also believe a better pass play would have been to put RW on the move with run/pass options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Romo had thrown it I think the call would still be a big question mark because they have Murray in the backfield.

 

I have heard some people bring it up, but the fact remains that when you have the best RB in the NFL and you only need him to gain one yard on three attempts to win the Super Bowl then not giving him the ball is awful and should be the biggest talking point regardless of who the QB is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said just that.  Credit to Butler for making a great play and flat out jumping the route, but there was no reason for him to lead the receiver, it's not like he needed a run after the catch.  Wilson, if anything, was the worst part of the play.  Seattle had the personnell matchup in their favor, and like I've said, a pass was not the worst play call in the world considering IF they have to run 3 plays from the 1, 1 would have to be a pass, why not then when the matchup favored them and open the playbook the next 2 plays.  Wilson never looked at any other receiver and the pass was not good.  IMO, he cost them the game. 

 

True. Wilson, did stare down the receiver, and placed a high throw.

 

If he would have thrown it at the receivers feet (for a sliding catch), or even in the gut, with a bit more risk, the ball is probably caught or deflected.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what is not being talked about. If you run on 2nd down and get stuffed you have to call your timeout.

 

Now it's 3rd down w/no timeouts on the one..........do you pass here ??

 

or take the chance you don't get stuffed again running.

 

If you get stuffed on 2-3 down running...........you might not get a chance for 4th down.

 

IMO..........it was just a bad pass by RW and a great defensive play by Butler.

 

I also believe a better pass play would have been to put RW on the move with run/pass options.

 

You run the ball on second down and call the timeout if he does not get in.  Then you look at the clock and take the time to assess what the best play call is and if you can run it twice.  I think you can run two plays from the one in eighteen seconds or so.

 

You could also, like you said, call Wilson on a bootleg with a run/pass option where he can throw it away if neither option is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is their darling, that is for sure.  I think it is funny how he has a RB who gets 5 yards after getting hit at the LOS, a defense that not only keeps the other teams from scoring, but gives him turnovers with great field position.  His "Hail Mary" 2-pointer vs. Green Bay is all I needed to see. 

 

Wilson is staring to believe the hype.  You can tell by his answers when interviewed by the adoring media.  He is not that good--he is elusive and able to improvise, but when you are usually leading the game and you have a defense that has your back, a RB who brings 8 to the box--really?

 

That is like punching another kid on the playground while your buddies hold his arms and legs.  Then walking around like you are one tough hombre.

 

Shoot, the good field position is the short of it. His defense, actually scores points for him, as they did about  24 unanswered in the Superbowl, before he/Seattle's offense, or Denver scored a point. I Heard a stat, that mentioned Seattles Defense Has Led The League in Scoring the Past Two years as well.

 

And yes, he's always had the luxury of playing with a running back that gets the immediate attention of the defense (besides a great OC, and defense), which takes a tremendous amount of play by play pressure off of him and responsibility. This alone, makes him peripheral to what they do on offense (Wilson, works off of the run game and what the defense does to prepare for it). He's not the guy opposing defenses focus on primarily.

 

And I agree; he's letting the media stuff go to his head (which his probably one of the reasons why we saw the stories about many of his teammates not liking him last year). The thought of him talking about winning six Superbowls, with his limited skill set, and the fact that the defense, and other players on the team were the bigger contributors and Super Bowl (or potential Super Bowl MVP, if Seattle won this year), makes his hubris even more classless and unbelievable. Be humble man, the way the media portrays you.

 

He either, truly really believes this junk, or is trying to play up to his fake media image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You run the ball on second down and call the timeout if he does not get in.  Then you look at the clock and take the time to assess what the best play call is and if you can run it twice.  I think you can run two plays from the one in eighteen seconds or so.

 

You could also, like you said, call Wilson on a bootleg with a run/pass option where he can throw it away if neither option is there.

 

 

Agreed but...........you ever see a Lynch run take 2 seconds ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The bottom line is we saw long stretches this season where T-Mac wasn't even targeted.  He had games where he went an entire half without seeing a pass thrown his way, and it lead to a bunch of games with 5 or less targets.  If he's healthy and we're not up a stupid amount and only running the ball, I can't see him having more than a game or two next year with 5 or less targets. We were also only 22nd this year in pass attempts, and that was with a rookie #1 and no legitimate 2nd option for half the season.  And even then, we were only 46 pass attempts above 31st place. If we go into next season with T-Mac improved in his 2nd season and a healthy Coker for 17 games, there is absolutely no reason for us to not throw it more.  That right away increases both of their target totals without sacrificing any targets from each other or other players, add in them taking targets from the TEs and RBs on top of that, and your argument just doesn't hold water anymore. You can't look at targets/yards in a vacuum and think next year Coker just takes some from T-Mac.  You have to look at the team as a whole and our situations this year and then project what will happen next year. If he's healthy for 17 games, I'd bet my life savings that T-Mac sees increases across the board, targets/catches/yards/TDs.   Just as Coker will also see career highs in all categories, it's not one vs the other, it's shifting offensive strategy given our personnel, which next year will be much better for our passing game (QB issues aside).
    • C'mon now.... First, you can't switch up your argument once someone points out a major flaw in your point. You're saying we shouldn't expect a big increase in targets/yards for T-Mac, but then shift to talking about averages with Chase when I point out the significant leap he took there once you factor in his missing games.  He saw an increase in targets in 5 less games, averages aside, he saw a significant increase in targets in his 2nd season, what he then did with those targets is actually irrelevant in this discussion. Puka seeing no increase is pointless, as he saw such an absurd amount of targets for a rookie, it's near impossible to see an increase. But the real issue in this post is that you think I'm proving your point by showing how Waddle had to share targets with Hill. Tyreek Hill was a 1st team All Pro who was 2nd in the NFL in yards that season. If you think Jaylen Waddle sharing targets with a 1st team All Pro and a future HOFer is even remotely in the same category as T-Mac needing to share targets with Coker... then you are certifiably insane, lol. If anything, you could make the argument that Coker is to Waddle as T-Mac is to Hill in that discussion (which would then lead to a serious increase in targets/yards for T-Mac).  But even that is insane, as neither T-Mac or Coker will be as good as Hill and Waddle respectively that season.  I love both of their potential, but c'mon now, T-Mac isn't getting 119 catches for 1,700 yards and Coker isn't getting 117 for 1,350 next season.
×
×
  • Create New...