I went with Matt Flynn. Not because I wasn't in love with Wilson, rather it was because I actually thought this team was good and didn't want to derail the season with a rookie QB. I didn't see a reason to toss the rookie into the deepend when we had recently signed a player who in his second career start tossed 6 touchdowns.
I wanted to see the Seahawks demonstrate patience, or as I called it "Let Russell Wilson 'Carson Palmer' " because I felt Matt Flynn had done enough to atleast prove that he wasn't good enough. If that doesn't make sense, let me restate it: Matt Flynn in his two regular season starts for Green Bay had shown enough to atleast get the oppertunity to fail in Seattle.
It's not like Russell is making a lot of money. He was a 3rd round pick. It's not like he is an aging veteran who came here with the intention to start. He is 24 and we drafted him. Why did we not let Russell watch for a bit?
Now hindsight is 20/20. And Wilson has not looked good. He has had moments, like the begining of the Ram's game, where you send a text message to your brother saying "he's turning the corner." But so far those moments have been immidiately followed by a punt (or in Sundays case: an interception).
I haven't turned my back on Russell. In the August piece, I said that "I think Russell Wilson will be our starting Quarterback when we contend for Superbowls." And I still do. I think he is a playmaker and smart. I just don't think he was ready. Through four games: 73.5 QBR, 594 yards, 4 td's, 4 picks. He has completed 60 percent of his balls, but they're only going for 5 yards a clip (translation: check down machine).
Matt Flynn could've atleast done that.
Just to see what life would've been like with Flynn under center, I stared a Madden 13 Connected Career (this years Franchise mode). The first half of the week 1 Cardinals game saw him go 11/13 and we had a 17-3 lead. That would've been a lot better.
Had Pete Carroll gone with Flynn, there would've been 4 likely scenereos: 1, Flynn sucks. If that was the case, Pete would be able to pull him after proving that he isn't the guy and seemlessly move to Wilson. 2, Flynn is great. And Seattle beats Arizona, crushes Dallas, doesn't need the hailmary against Green Bay, and doesn't throw 3 picks against STL. We start off 4-0 and he looks like the franchise. No big deal here, because again, Wilson isn't getting paid much.
3, Flynn is average. You take your 8-8, 7-9 record and move on to Wilson next year. You developed a franchise QB, while remaining competative. No one is upset. Or the last one, Flynn plays and slips a hamstring a couple weeks in, Wilson comes in and plays like he should be the starter. If Wilson plays good, Pete can justify staying with him. If Wilson plays bad, you go back to Flynn because he was the original starter and you let Wilson continue to study what he saw.
By going with Wilson first, none of those can happen. You don't want to 'Alex Smith' him and damage his confidence. Pete took a gamble and so far it hasn't paid off like he had hoped. But there is no recovery from this unless Russell gets hurt. That is the only way a change under center can happen and the franchise can save face.
Our bed is made. Lets hope Wilson turns it around in Carolina (for the record: This is NOT anti- Wilson. Again, this is pro-patience)
- Arizona Cardinals vs St.Louis Rams +1 I don't see how we could wake up tomorrow morning in a world where Arizona is 5-0. Should the beat St. Louis? Absolutely. But Green Bay couldn't go undefeated because they lost to a terrible KC team last year, and St. Louis has a kicker who drops 60 yard field goals like it's a video game.
- Cleveland Browns vs New York Giants -8 1/2 Giants by over a td? I don't really want to do that, but the Giants are following a loss. The lack of Giant homefield concerns me though. Screw it. I'm going G-Men.
- Green Bay vs Indianapolis Colts +7 I hope this game is on tv. It's goign to be a wild shoot out. The Packers on turf? Oh man. Whatever the over/under is... take the over.
- Philadelphia Eagles vs Pittsburgh Steelers -3 when I first went through the weeks slate, I found myself picking basically all road teams to cover. This was the exception. Rashard Mendenhall is returning and for fantasy purposes I need him to go ape shit. So, GO STEELERS.
- Atlanta Falcons vs Washington Redskins +2 1/2 Yeah, the Redskins are depleted. Atlanta managed to escape last week with the win. Atlanta needs to make a statement.
- Baltimore Ravens vs Kansas City Chiefs +6 Sometimes games are as simple as this: Kansas is very bad. Baltimore is very good. Now some might say, "But Kansas is at home, bro." To those I say this, " KC is 0-2 at home this season and have given up 38.5 points in those two games."
- Miami Dolphins vs Cinncinati Bengals -3 this is one of those instances where I hope I'm wrong for fantasy purposes. But Miami is giving up 56 yards a game in the rushing department. Thats 2000 Baltimore good. Poor, poor Ben Jarvis.
- Chicago Bears vs Jacksonville Jaguars +6 Cutler was decent last week. Chicagos defense was insane. Jacksonville got blasted at home by the Bengals. Am I really about to pick Cutler to cover on the road when they are giving a touchdown? Yes (DeMarco Murray 11 carries 24 yards last week).
- Seattle Seahawks vs Carolina Panthers -3 Remember 2 picks ago when I talked about Miami being great against the run? Well Seattle is only giving up 6 more yards a game. They also sent 3/4's of their secondary to the pro-bowl last year. They also sacked Aaron Rodgers 9 times two weeks ago, and Cam Newton isn't Aaron Rodgers. Seattle baby.
- Bufalo Bills vs San Fransico 49ers -5 1/2 I hope I'm wrong.
- Denver Broncos vs New England Patriots -8 1/2 Here is what I think: I think The Hoodie will game plan for Mannings lack of arm strength and plan to take away the short throws. On the otherside, Brady will cut the head off the Bronco's similar to how he did the Bills for 45 points in the second half on Sunday. In other words, I need to find a way to get Manning out of my fantasy lineup.
- San Diego Chargers v New Orleans Saints -3 Because they can't lose every game, right?
- Houston Texans v New York Jets +8 I was wrong about Mark Sanchez. That dude needs a change of scenery. Houston wins, and Tebow is starting within two weeks.
2 comments:
I am of the old school too. I think that rookie QBs need to sit as long as they can before starting. I think that watching and learning the offence from the sideline does help a qb, more than throwing them in to the lions.(although the Lions this year arent as good. See Madden curse)I think you are forgeting that this is a contract year for Cheat Carroll, and if he doesnt improve on his 7-9 season(s) He will be out of a job. So he is going to give everything he has to keep his job for another season. I translate it to this: Even if Flynn showed to be the better qb for the long run, Pete doesnt have the time to let the qb situation unfold, and at the very least doesnt want a fan based qb controversy(like the Jets)to put him in a bad light for next years new contract, the shoulda game can be very damaging to a coach. He is putting it all out on the line. He has to make it work if he wants to be on the home sideline in the CLink next year.
Doesn't the idea that Pete is in a contract year argue against the merits of starting Flynn?
If he was in danger of not getting his extension, and Flynn is more prepared to be the starting qb right now, then he would be in there.
I think the fact that Pete is in a contract year makes it more likely that Wilson to Flynn move could be made. Which is the wrong move. You made the bed, you should stick with it. Benching your rookie is gonna destroy his confidence and the confidence his team has in him.
Flynn should only be put in if Wilson gets hurt (or if does a Romo/Cutler)
Post a Comment