I suppose it would be silly for me to underestimate the power of fanaticism and blind political partisanship, so I will anticipate the tenor of the chatter we can expect to hear from local and national sports commentary following the Seattle Seahawks’ 27-17 preseason win over Tennessee this weekend—especially from those who unabashedly have a “mancrush” on Russell Wilson. Wilson certainly appeared—at least on paper—to have the better game than Matt Flynn. Flynn finished with “only” 11 completions in 13 attempts for 71 yards and one interception, while Wilson was 12 of 16 for 124 yards, one touchdown pass and one interception; he also ran for a 32-yard touchdown near game end—during which the third-stringers, rookies, practice squad holdovers and walk-ons the Titans had on the field looked as if they were just taking the rest of the night off to marvel at the scene.
Braylon Edwards caught a 39-yard TD pass from Wilson, which I would hope that a veteran who has had success in the past can still do against the aforementioned competition. Take away that pass play, Wilson’s passing numbers were no better than Flynn’s; still, there is no doubt that Wilson not only didn’t flop against “real” competition, he probably had some people’s minds fill with visions of Cam Newton and Michael Vick, running like gangbusters, and passing passably to boot. There was some “fear”—such as by Ian Furness on the local Fox Sports affiliate, and someone other guy who admits to having a “mancrush” on Wilson—that even if Wilson played well, there would be some people who would doubt his performance because of the competition he faced. That may or may not be a legitimate concern, but a bigger concern would have been if Wilson’s much vaunted skills and athleticism (assumed by most everyone who has an opinion) had not been apparent against such competition, then people should have a reason to be “concerned.”
For myself, I was not particularly concerned with Flynn’s “fair” performance; he showed efficiency and “touch” required of the West Coast offense (save on the interception, when he missed the linebacker coming underneath). My only real concern is that the Wilson partisans will choose to misinterpret what they saw. Flynn had a slow start in that Detroit game last year, 10-19, 100 yards and an INT before hitting an amazing 21 of 24 passes for 380 yards. It is also useful to point out that even the “elite” quarterbacks do not look particularly good in their first preseason games:
Aaron Rodgers 2-8 16 yards 1 int
Drew Brees 1-4 4 yards
Tom Brady 4-7 30 yards
Peyton Manning 4-7 44 yards 1 int
Their back-ups actually put-up better numbers, but what does that tell us? For those who put Flynn in the same class as Kevin Kolb, his numbers were 1-5, 21 yards. Other quarterbacks who put-up similar or better numbers as Wilson:
Ryan Tannehill 14-21 167 yards 1 TD
Jordan Palmer 9-13 110 yards
Andrew Luck 10-16 188 yards 2 TDs
Remember Scott Tolzien, who preceded Wilson at Wisconsin? As the fourth quarterback in San Francisco, he was 10-13 for 84 yards. The point here is that everything is subject to interpretation.
Wilson was, as I mentioned, very impressive running with the ball, leading the team in rushing with 59 yards on just three attempts. Was this part of the game plan, or was this Wilson doing what comes "natural"? If it is the latter, it is a calculated risk. The problem with “running” quarterbacks, according to John Maxymuk in his well-researched tome “Strong Arm Tactics: A Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Professional Quarterback,” is that they are injury prone, undisciplined—and worse, resistant to coaching. Quarterbacks who think “run” as an option generally do not “read” defenses well—not because they can’t necessarily, but because they don’t feel they need to. If their pass options do not immediately materialize, they run.
Other problems: Running quarterbacks don’t have patience; running quarterbacks cause teammates to be less functional at their jobs; 300-pound linemen and receivers have to work harder for a running quarterback—thus tiring them out. A running quarterback can win in the regular season, but that is like a novice chess player who at first confuses a competent chess player who thinks he actually has a “strategy” he can’t figure out; once he figures out his opponent has no clue what he is doing, he is easily beaten. It is thus in the playoffs: A good defense will clog the running lanes and render the running quarterback largely ineffective. No running quarterback has ever won a Super Bowl, and the last time a running quarterback led his team that far was over a decade ago when Steve McNair did it with the Titans. Although Steve Young and John Elway had reputations as “running” quarterbacks, by the time they won their Super Bowls they had long given-up that part of their game.
Cam Newton may be the exception, having passed for 4,000 yards and run for 706 yards as a rookie. But it should be noted that after two 400+ passing yard games to start the season, his passing numbers became more pedestrian as he tried to become a one-man team. “Doing it all” may make the player a superstar in some people’s eyes, but if it is to the detriment to team play—and victories—then all you have is a “franchise” quarterback who is nothing more than his reputation and statistics. Of course, fans can daydream that it is not impossible for a running quarterback to win a championship in the NFL; they certainly did back in the 1930s and 1940s, when the passing game was more of a fad than a legitimate offensive weapon. But today, that seems only likely if most teams decide they want an “all-purpose” quarterback because they are “exciting,” rather than one who focuses on his job, which is efficiency in moving the ball down the field via the forward pass.
There is no doubt now that Flynn is going to have to “prove” that he can throw the ball downfield, especially on third-and-long situation. But commentators and fans will go gaga over the “flashy” player and forget the fact that the Manning brothers have almost no personality (in Eli’s case, slightly on the moronic side). The quarterback who can’t or won’t run is like a boxer fighting a puncher: He has to outthink and outmaneuver his opponent in order to win. The pocket passer is not a running back; he is on the field to handoff or throw the football. Running is for the specialist. For this quarterback, passing the ball doesn’t begin after the snap, but before it. That is what Flynn was taught to do in Green Bay. I fully expect him to bring those qualities to the fore, if allowed a proper chance.
No comments:
Post a Comment