IF an offense has just average WRs or blocking, they will be helped more by a mobile QB like Russell Wilson than a pocket passer. The simple reason is offensive plays are much more likely to break down vs. elite defenses. That's where the mobile QB comes into play. Wilson is a rare breed of mobile QB; he is VERY disciplined, keeping his eyes downfield as defenders start to let receivers loose... Seattle's "secret" is very simply they know who they are, devise a gameplan to fit their people, and go out and EXECUTE it. HOWEVER, many are ignoring the flip side, which is... IF the offense has elite receiving and/or blocking, they will be helped MORE by a big, smart, accurate, strong-armed QB with a great game plan. For the simple reason his receivers are more likely to get open, the QB will SEE it and QUICKLY get the ball there. He DOES NOT need to be mobile to accomplish that, as there will be MORE plays there for him to make when the offense is using the whole field.
That is such a silly argument though... That is what really gets me. Maybe I was wrong on that play (I was ha.. I just re-watched it) but his mobility didn't win that game for Seattle. He could have stood in the pocket like a stone and not thrown interceptions (something Glennon is good at) and SEA would have won...
My response was to threadkiller.... Let me read yours quick NotDeadYet..
Okay. Agreed. NotDeadYet. If Peyton would have been "quarterbacking" the Seahawks, they would have won by even more. It's easy to play QB on a team that is dominating... regardless of your scrambling ability.
That is such a silly argument though... That is what really gets me. Maybe I was wrong on that play (I was ha.. I just re-watched it) but his mobility didn't win that game for Seattle. He could have stood in the pocket like a stone and not thrown interceptions (something Glennon is good at) and SEA would have won...
You are now changing the argument. I do not disagree that Seattle was winning last night virtually no matter who they had under center. Or that the game is some clear vindication for the mobile quarterback because of Wilson's mobility. It affected the game, but clearly did not determine the outcome. Peyton's lack of mobility was the much more damning argument against the "pocket quarterback" then Russel's mobility advanced the cause of the mobile version.
I am a little confused at this point then...I'm not trying to argue just to argue. What i was trying to say was that Russell's mobility had nothing to do with the outcome of last nights game. Let me add this...Peyton Mannings lack of mobility had nothing to do with it either. You can't tell me Russell would have won this game if he was wearing orange...The hawks had relentless pressure and stifling coverage.
I don't think Peyton's lack of mobility was a problem for the pocket passer. He obviously got to Super Bowl. When you can turn the hounds loose like the Hawks did the QB's doesn't matter all that much. Frankly, Manning oiver the season has been about 3-4x as "escapable" as Wilson based on their respective sack rates.
As always.... dalbuc has made my point more eloquently than I can...The Seahawks had the perfect team for the situation they were put into (up 2-0 with the ball)
TK, I would argue Denver had a surprisely poor game plan. They barely tried to RUN the ball (which the Bucs DID do in our game), playing right into Seattle's strength. Denver's less-than-elite receivers were not able to shake free on their quick routes, and Manning's less-than-elite (ONLY in his latter years) arm was exposed, as was Denver's less-than-great O'line.
I don't know about that...Denver was losing 12 seconds into that game.It would take a hell of a coach to NOT abandon the run at that point...
Spot Glennon 16 points and 4 turnovers, give him Lynch and Harvin and Tate and Kerse....and yes Glennon would have won that game.
LOL ...exactly.
Of course Peyton Manning's lack of mobility had a huge affect on the game. Have you ever seen Seattle's defensive line THAT dominating? The Bronco's oline underperformed for sure, they were physically manhandled (especially at tackle). That has a lot to do with having to stop someone from going to exactly one spot on the football field. There was no thought of contain by that dline. What happens when you fly your ends around the corner on Cam Newton and leave huge holes in your pass rush? Exactly. Does Denver win last night with Cam Newton instead of Peyton Manning? No, of course not. Denver is closer though. Please don't interpret this as I think Cam Newton is anywhere close to as good a quarterback overall as Peyton Manning. But Cam has the only thing that would have given Denver a CHANCE last night. Last night turned into matchups. The Broncos offensive line could not match up against the Seattle defensive line, the result was a statue quarterback had absolutely 0 chance of moving any offense with any consistency.
TK, I would argue Denver had a surprisely poor game plan. They barely tried to RUN the ball (which the Bucs DID do in our game), playing right into Seattle's strength. Denver's less-than-elite receivers were not able to shake free on their quick routes, and Manning's less-than-elite (ONLY in his latter years) arm was exposed, as was Denver's less-than-great O'line.
No game plan works when your quarterback has 2 seconds or less to get the ball out of his hands and can't avoid the pressure that is coming. You can't move the pocket. You can't sprint out. You can't keep the defensive linemen honest in their rush and in their lanes. They can chose whatever path they want to the spot they know you are going to be standing in 2 seconds. You literally only have one read. Your presnap. So you play right exactly into the hands of what they set that Seattle defense up to do. Play back and smoke you when you catch the ball. They sit on the small stuff and punish you for taking it until your receivers literally don't want it any more.
Of course Peyton Manning's lack of mobility had a huge affect on the game. Have you ever seen Seattle's defensive line THAT dominating? The Bronco's oline underperformed for sure, they were physically manhandled (especially at tackle). That has a lot to do with having to stop someone from going to exactly one spot on the football field. There was no thought of contain by that dline. What happens when you fly your ends around the corner on Cam Newton and leave huge holes in your pass rush? Exactly. Does Denver win last night with Cam Newton instead of Peyton Manning? No, of course not. Denver is closer though. Please don't interpret this as I think Cam Newton is anywhere close to as good a quarterback overall as Peyton Manning. But Cam has the only thing that would have given Denver a CHANCE last night. Last night turned into matchups. The Broncos offensive line could not match up against the Seattle defensive line, the result was a statue quarterback had absolutely 0 chance of moving any offense with any consistency.
I dont disagree with your assessment...but to be fair, Seattle's DL has been that good this year.
I hear ya, SunnyD. It takes patience, and it's been done. I don't get the impression the run was ever much of their gameplan tho', as they seemed to rely heavily on Manning all season.
