Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Russell Wilson to Denver

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deandc
    replied
    So to put something in perspective about some of the things some Seahawks fans say Wilson ant do.

    As of tonight, Seattle is avg
    3 sacks a game that is on par for 51
    8 penalties a game Seattle has always been amongst the tops in penalties even before Wilson and now after
    Throwing to Te avg 3 a game Wilson avg 5, before Wilson they avg 4
    Throwing short over the middle now avg 4 Wilson avg 5 before Wilson they avg 5
    3rd down Conversion now 25% which is lower than Wilson and on par with before Wilson


    Fyi all these before Wilson numbers are on par with every QB that PC has had as an HC prior to Seattle


    In other words, the problem was and is PC and his system

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Originally posted by beastlyskronk View Post

    While I understand Hackett’s logic, I do disagree with it. Having extra padded practices has dwindling benefits over time, as guys are just going to get used to the guys they see in practice everyday. I was never great, couldn’t even crack the edge rotation in high school due to the talent we had with our pass rushers, but I would outplay them in practice constantly just because I knew the QB’s cadence, I knew the offense’s plays, and I knew what each olinemen they had couldn’t block effectively.

    I think it hurts the trenches more than any group as they aren’t dealing with physicality from an opposing team where they don’t quite understand their schemes and tells as much as they do their own teammates. Add in that some guys probably get a tad complacent and expect the physicality to be the same or at least similar to what they’re seeing in practice and I think it’s a recipe for disaster. That’s why I haven’t been surprised to see our trench play so poorly in these preseason games. It was a bit hit or miss against Dallas because of the scrimmages that helped them prepare IMO, but it really fell apart against Buffalo. I expect us to struggle out the gate with our line play on both sides, they’ll probably start to get around the midpoint of the season however, I just hope it doesn’t cost us early. Guys will still make some flash plays though and hopefully that’s enough to
    sustain us until they start functioning well as a unit.

    I could also be totally wrong and they can come out strong against 2 rather weak teams in Houston and Seattle and be all the way ramped up for week 3.
    Right, I share your concern. Also, see post 2457.

    Leave a comment:


  • beastlyskronk
    replied
    Originally posted by samparnell View Post
    Preseason "games" have never been real games anyway. They have always been scrimmages between varying combinations of players in game conditions with a game clock.

    Jim Miller suggested that the inter-squad practices should be broadcast. That would probably be more worthwhile.

    Hackett dispensed with 7 on 7 because it isn't real football, so he seems consistent with spending time only on stuff that directly translates to football games. Preseason games are required, so he uses that to evaluate non-starters.
    While I understand Hackett’s logic, I do disagree with it. Having extra padded practices has dwindling benefits over time, as guys are just going to get used to the guys they see in practice everyday. I was never great, couldn’t even crack the edge rotation in high school due to the talent we had with our pass rushers, but I would outplay them in practice constantly just because I knew the QB’s cadence, I knew the offense’s plays, and I knew what each olinemen they had couldn’t block effectively.

    I think it hurts the trenches more than any group as they aren’t dealing with physicality from an opposing team where they don’t quite understand their schemes and tells as much as they do their own teammates. Add in that some guys probably get a tad complacent and expect the physicality to be the same or at least similar to what they’re seeing in practice and I think it’s a recipe for disaster. That’s why I haven’t been surprised to see our trench play so poorly in these preseason games. It was a bit hit or miss against Dallas because of the scrimmages that helped them prepare IMO, but it really fell apart against Buffalo. I expect us to struggle out the gate with our line play on both sides, they’ll probably start to get around the midpoint of the season however, I just hope it doesn’t cost us early. Guys will still make some flash plays though and hopefully that’s enough to
    sustain us until they start functioning well as a unit.

    I could also be totally wrong and they can come out strong against 2 rather weak teams in Houston and Seattle and be all the way ramped up for week 3.

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Hackett lost his voice yelling at a sloppy padded practice on Wednesday. Preseason is the time for padded practices. Their usage should be more judicious during the season. If Denver's starting units aren't going to play in preseason games, they should have at least one padded practice per week, or two every ten days or so. Don't know how much scouting will be in effect for the opener, but scout teams will probably practice against the starters in pads.
    Last edited by samparnell; 08-26-2022, 09:08 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Preseason "games" have never been real games anyway. They have always been scrimmages between varying combinations of players in game conditions with a game clock.

    Jim Miller suggested that the inter-squad practices should be broadcast. That would probably be more worthwhile.

    Hackett dispensed with 7 on 7 because it isn't real football, so he seems consistent with spending time only on stuff that directly translates to football games. Preseason games are required, so he uses that to evaluate non-starters.
    Last edited by samparnell; 08-25-2022, 04:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Deandc
    replied
    Originally posted by samparnell View Post

    Back when first, second, third team played in preseason, the head coaches would agree on when to switch. Occasionally cameras would catch them signaling across the field to each other.

    Now there are some coaches who don't play starting units and some who do. That leads to uneven results from a game perspective. Not playing starting units affords way more game snaps to non-starters and gives game conditions to evaluate their performances.

    One wonders exactly what a team playing starting units against second/third team guys expects to accomplish? What is being run is probably pretty basic/vanilla, and they will never see a unit of that caliber in season on the other side of the ball.

    Even if one was inclined to play starting offense and defense, don't think I'd do it if the other team wasn't. As far as preparation for the season, more quality reps for the starters can probably be accomplished in practice at reduced risk.

    In the end, Denver’s longer look at non-starters during preseason games may better inform their personnel decisions to assemble the best 53 and PS.
    The other thing to consider is they don't do any game planning in the preseason at all. So what you see if starters were to start is a glorified scrimmage. Nothing more and nothing less. We had one against Dallas. Starters started.

    Leave a comment:


  • samparnell
    replied
    Originally posted by L.M. View Post

    I hear ya, and it's a tough call for coaches to make.

    On the one hand, withholding the starters radically reduces the chances of injury to them and focuses the games upon just weeding out the scrubs, and on the other hand, there is value in building unit cohesion and chemistry and working through rust by giving starters a quarter or a couple of series out there. A lack of the latter might cost us a game or two at the beginning, but losing one or more key starters could cost us even more games. IIRC, we lost a starting corner in preseason a few years ago and put in a rookie (Yiadom) vs. the Raiders week 1, and Carr picked on him, and we lost. If it was Wilson himself who went down with a broken hand (or something else) then our season would be over. Worth the risk?

    Sean McVay and Matt LaFleur don't play their starters and their clubs have done well anyway, perhaps even because of that —as one factor. Hackett had been working under LaFleur the past few years so he's going with what he thinks is a proven model for success. I'm rolling with what Hackett thinks is best and I'm not going to add this to my list of worries —all of which are much bigger than football these days, unfortunately. We'll see what happens. It's a whole new offense and a new (mostly rookie) coaching staff. so it will probably take a lot of time for things to gel whether starters take snaps in preseason or not. That will require some patience.
    Back when first, second, third team played in preseason, the head coaches would agree on when to switch. Occasionally cameras would catch them signaling across the field to each other.

    Now there are some coaches who don't play starting units and some who do. That leads to uneven results from a game perspective. Not playing starting units affords way more game snaps to non-starters and gives game conditions to evaluate their performances.

    One wonders exactly what a team playing starting units against second/third team guys expects to accomplish? What is being run is probably pretty basic/vanilla, and they will never see a unit of that caliber in season on the other side of the ball.

    Even if one was inclined to play starting offense and defense, don't think I'd do it if the other team wasn't. As far as preparation for the season, more quality reps for the starters can probably be accomplished in practice at reduced risk.

    In the end, Denver’s longer look at non-starters during preseason games may better inform their personnel decisions to assemble the best 53 and PS.

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoBreeder
    replied
    Originally posted by Deandc View Post

    That's a curse in ancient Hebrew? Learn something new every day LOL
    I did a Translate-To-English: yhebonl = Brady

    Leave a comment:


  • Deandc
    replied
    Originally posted by Spice 1 View Post

    Take the Rams game out and they averaged 6.4 yards per carry in the other 5 games from SF to Arizona. They called more run plays than pass plays. I know Wilson was back and they weren't playing the best run defenses in the league, but that's impressive by NFL standards. I would bet the farm Carroll is going to try to keep doing that this year. Not that it'll work, given the QB stich, but that's where I'd start if I was trying to stop their offense. They're going to be as run heavy as the scoreboard allows them to be.
    Again ranked 20th. Not good.

    Leave a comment:


  • CanDB
    replied
    Originally posted by L.M. View Post

    Didn't you read the CoC? No cursing in ancient Hebrew!
    Originally posted by Deandc View Post

    That's a curse in ancient Hebrew? Learn something new every day LOL
    This place has so much to offer!!! We should probably pay just to become members!

    Maybe forget I mentioned that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spice 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Deandc View Post

    Actually, Seatle was 20th in rushing which is not good. In fact, they did not start doing well running until Wilson got back, and even then only 4 games. All against some not-great run defenses
    Take the Rams game out and they averaged 6.4 yards per carry in the other 5 games from SF to Arizona. They called more run plays than pass plays. I know Wilson was back and they weren't playing the best run defenses in the league, but that's impressive by NFL standards. I would bet the farm Carroll is going to try to keep doing that this year. Not that it'll work, given the QB stich, but that's where I'd start if I was trying to stop their offense. They're going to be as run heavy as the scoreboard allows them to be.

    Leave a comment:


  • Capt. Jack
    replied
    I get it, not playing the veteran quarterbacks or veteran players in the preseason.
    I don't see why they wouldn't come in just for the first series as like a warm-up kinda thingy?
    However they figure it out is fine with me. I'm looking forward to some good Broncos football this year, and the last thing we need is for RW to get hurt in the preseason.

    Preseason games are kind of boring to me, the stats don't mean anything, the score doesn't mean anything, winning or losing doesn't mean anything, it's more like organized practice or scouting games. And that's fine, it's just boring.


    Leave a comment:


  • Deandc
    replied
    Originally posted by L.M. View Post

    Didn't you read the CoC? No cursing in ancient Hebrew!
    That's a curse in ancient Hebrew? Learn something new every day LOL

    Leave a comment:


  • L.M.
    replied
    Originally posted by Deandc View Post

    He played already against Dallas. Why take another chance for him to get hurt. Haven't we lost enough to pre season injuries. He is not yhebonl QB not playing in much preseason.
    Didn't you read the CoC? No cursing in ancient Hebrew!

    Leave a comment:


  • L.M.
    replied
    Originally posted by Capt. Jack View Post

    I think even Elway took some preseason snaps didn't he???
    It would be a disaster if Drew Lock lit it up, and RW stunk up the place.
    Every game during the season is important, and we need to come out on the right foot and win the first game especially against Drew Lock and Seattle.
    I hear ya, and it's a tough call for coaches to make.

    On the one hand, withholding the starters radically reduces the chances of injury to them and focuses the games upon just weeding out the scrubs, and on the other hand, there is value in building unit cohesion and chemistry and working through rust by giving starters a quarter or a couple of series out there. A lack of the latter might cost us a game or two at the beginning, but losing one or more key starters could cost us even more games. IIRC, we lost a starting corner in preseason a few years ago and put in a rookie (Yiadom) vs. the Raiders week 1, and Carr picked on him, and we lost. If it was Wilson himself who went down with a broken hand (or something else) then our season would be over. Worth the risk?

    Sean McVay and Matt LaFleur don't play their starters and their clubs have done well anyway, perhaps even because of that —as one factor. Hackett had been working under LaFleur the past few years so he's going with what he thinks is a proven model for success. I'm rolling with what Hackett thinks is best and I'm not going to add this to my list of worries —all of which are much bigger than football these days, unfortunately. We'll see what happens. It's a whole new offense and a new (mostly rookie) coaching staff. so it will probably take a lot of time for things to gel whether starters take snaps in preseason or not. That will require some patience.
    Last edited by L.M.; 08-24-2022, 05:59 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X