Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

With the 194th overall pick, RB Spencer Ware
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Seattle Seahawks
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
chpjns15


Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 1700
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wee-Bey wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
imani wrote:
Btw, the best play in seahhawks history doesn't happen if 24 lines up without a fullback.
Ok? Michael Robinson didn't do anything special on that play. Most fullbacks could've done what he did. Lynch didn't even do what he was supposed to do on the play.


2 years ago, Michael Robinson was incredibly underrated. Most Seahawks fans despised the guy. I didn't really get the hate. He was solid.

Today, he has progressed some. Given more time in the system, he's gotten better at blocking to create seams for 'Shawn.

However, now he's overrated. In part to his probowl selection, in part to the Real Rob Report. Everyone loves him and it gives you all a jaded perspective.

He has nice hands, solid with the ball, and knows how to wall off defenders. He'll almost never blow a guy up, but that's not needed in our system.

Fact of the matter is, there's quite a few guys that I think we could bring in to nearly duplicate what Robinson can do as a player. Wilson is the leader of our skill guys and Unger the leader of the line. Robinson isn't needed as a leader.

1 year from now, the only thing we're going to miss about Robinson if he's gone is the Real Rob Report and some veteran savy. Oh, and about $1.5-2M.


You're presumptuous. Not only are you familiar with the influences of our respective perspectives, but you're in tune with the spirit of the lockeroom, and the relationships of the players therein.

Edit:

http://youtu.be/fEfZR3_qnIo

Mike Robinson isn't a leader. He isn't a true lead blocker. Rob needs to improve his physicality and blocking because he doesn't bulldoze people. It's as simple as tape, indeed.


Confused

He is one of the bigger leaders on our O. All of the 2011 season and the beginning of 2012, it seemed like he was THE leader. I dont know how you come to this conclusion.
_________________
"Trying is the first step towards failure"


"If you can't win, cheat. If you can't cheat, don't play."


"Getting a paper cut, that is tragedy. Someone falling down a sewer and dying, that is comedy."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bill21792


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 454
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Robinsons is the Jack of all trades. Which seems to be considered a major negative, but not so much to me. One thing that I worry about is if we replace him, we need to have a guy that can catch the football out of the backfield. I've heard Ware has solid hands, but Robinson going out to the flat has become a staple to our offense. If he's replaced, Ware NEEDS to be able to catch the ball 99% of the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tooki


Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 10744
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wee-Bey wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
and you say I'm presumptuous?


Yes.

Quote:
SoS is indicating that of our 11 starters, our offense would fall apart the least with no Mike Rob. If I may be so bold as to make an accurate presumption.


SoS stated of the players on offense, he wouldn't mind losing Mike Rob to injury. No presumptions are necessary, his statement was clear. If he intended to say the offense would suffer least from a Mike Rob injury than any other starter, I would disagree and suggest he better word his points.

Personally, I would mind any Seahawk losing his job to injury, because it affects that individuals career and livelihood absent of his control. Just me though.


His statement is clear indeed. He said that he would rest easiest if Mike Rob of all the starters got an injury. He isn't wishing an injury upon him, but everybody would be a lot more worried if Russell Okung or Russell Wilson or Marshawn Lynch were to be injured.

Also Mike Rob is definitely a leader on the team. He is a ST captain and he leads the team huddle for gods sake Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SoS


Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 3648
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tatupu_64 wrote:
Wee-Bey wrote:
SoS wrote:
It's not like I'm wishing the guy to get an injury, I think it's clear what I'm trying to say Laughing


I think it's clear it was a low statement to make.

I've never been one to diminish veterans because I'd assumed they'd served their usefulness, and in this case I'm not even sure that's true.

But carry on.
and you say I'm presumptuous?

SoS is indicating that of our 11 starters, our offense would fall apart the least with no Mike Rob. If I may be so bold as to make an accurate presumption.


Thank you, this is exactly what I'm trying to say. Rob essentially has the least impact of any starter on this offense and wouldn't really lose a thing if he went down with an injury.

Apparently I just didn't convey that clearly Laughing
_________________
DudeWhat?? wrote:
If I am a starting QB and my back up is Kellen Clemens..i would only have one question...."Turn up for what?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tooki


Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 10744
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SoS wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
Wee-Bey wrote:
SoS wrote:
It's not like I'm wishing the guy to get an injury, I think it's clear what I'm trying to say Laughing


I think it's clear it was a low statement to make.

I've never been one to diminish veterans because I'd assumed they'd served their usefulness, and in this case I'm not even sure that's true.

But carry on.
and you say I'm presumptuous?

SoS is indicating that of our 11 starters, our offense would fall apart the least with no Mike Rob. If I may be so bold as to make an accurate presumption.


Thank you, this is exactly what I'm trying to say. Rob essentially has the least impact of any starter on this offense and wouldn't really lose a thing if he went down with an injury.

Apparently I just didn't convey that clearly Laughing


I no speak a Americano and I undetstood you Very Happy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tatupu_64


Moderator
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 21427
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tatupu_64 wrote:
imani wrote:
Lynch is noticeably less effective in a single back set or in the shotgun.

From ESPN. Lynch's success by formation.
I Formation: 137 carries, 655 yards, 4.8 YPC, 5 TDs
Lone Setback: 148 carries, 792 yards, 5.4 YPC, 6 TDs
Shotgun: 54 carries, 421 yards, 7.8 YPC, 3 TDs

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/10456/marshawn-lynch

_________________
<Ram
BlaqOptic wrote:
...13 Seahawks one spot over the 08 Steelers

ram29jackson wrote:
LO freaking L...Seahawks aren't repeating crap and you can book that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hawksman81


Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 2571
Location: I am the Eyas
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tatupu_64 wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
imani wrote:
Lynch is noticeably less effective in a single back set or in the shotgun.

From ESPN. Lynch's success by formation.
I Formation: 137 carries, 655 yards, 4.8 YPC, 5 TDs
Lone Setback: 148 carries, 792 yards, 5.4 YPC, 6 TDs
Shotgun: 54 carries, 421 yards, 7.8 YPC, 3 TDs

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/10456/marshawn-lynch


Those numbers are most likely skewed though, as we probably used a fullback in short yardage situations when yardage is harder to come by.

My take on this situation is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I don't see why we should be in such a rush to get rid of mike rob when he is playing at a high level on a good contract.
_________________


SaveourSonics wrote:
I love D!ck

JustisM wrote:
Why'd they turn the lights on?
Big Ben is more effective in the dark.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
imani


Moderator
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 28132
Location: Harlem, NY
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 2:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tatupu_64 wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
imani wrote:
Lynch is noticeably less effective in a single back set or in the shotgun.

From ESPN. Lynch's success by formation.
I Formation: 137 carries, 655 yards, 4.8 YPC, 5 TDs
Lone Setback: 148 carries, 792 yards, 5.4 YPC, 6 TDs
Shotgun: 54 carries, 421 yards, 7.8 YPC, 3 TDs

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/10456/marshawn-lynch


You're right, i chose my own (and, likely, skewed) memory over research. That's my bad. I really thought the numbers would turn out the opposite. I expected shotgun to be a smidge over, but clearly the numbers show that it's merely a formation with a FB in it. Even if it's the QB run threat that fuels it, we have to go with what's efficient.

Maybe Russell Wilson's emergence and Max Unger's growth make the need for M-Rob obsolete if we have a more athletic option coming in. I hope he can assume the role well. I apologize
_________________


wwhickok wrote:
I don't believe for one second that Seattle makes it out of their first playoff game.

Russell Wilson Fan since July 2012
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tatupu_64


Moderator
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 21427
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hawksman81 wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
imani wrote:
Lynch is noticeably less effective in a single back set or in the shotgun.

From ESPN. Lynch's success by formation.
I Formation: 137 carries, 655 yards, 4.8 YPC, 5 TDs
Lone Setback: 148 carries, 792 yards, 5.4 YPC, 6 TDs
Shotgun: 54 carries, 421 yards, 7.8 YPC, 3 TDs

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/10456/marshawn-lynch


Those numbers are most likely skewed though, as we probably used a fullback in short yardage situations when yardage is harder to come by.

My take on this situation is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I don't see why we should be in such a rush to get rid of mike rob when he is playing at a high level on a good contract.
Let's say he had 25 goaline carries, more than I'm sure he had, for only 2 YPC. That would mean on the other 112 i-formation carries, he has 605 yards. Good for, wait for it, 5.4 YPC. Only equal to his YPC out of the lone setback. Additionally, his longest run of the season came out the I-form set. So if you want to talk about skewed stats, we could take out that 75+ yard run as well.

No one has said we should cut Mike Rob this year. I don't understand why some of you keep insinuating as much. All SoS, Tooki, and myself are trying to convey is that Mike Rob is not as vital to the success of the running game as some of you think. His contract ends next year, so it is a very real thing to consider whether or not he's worth paying big money to next offseason.
_________________
<Ram
BlaqOptic wrote:
...13 Seahawks one spot over the 08 Steelers

ram29jackson wrote:
LO freaking L...Seahawks aren't repeating crap and you can book that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hawksman81


Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 2571
Location: I am the Eyas
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tatupu_64 wrote:
hawksman81 wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
imani wrote:
Lynch is noticeably less effective in a single back set or in the shotgun.

From ESPN. Lynch's success by formation.
I Formation: 137 carries, 655 yards, 4.8 YPC, 5 TDs
Lone Setback: 148 carries, 792 yards, 5.4 YPC, 6 TDs
Shotgun: 54 carries, 421 yards, 7.8 YPC, 3 TDs

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/10456/marshawn-lynch


Those numbers are most likely skewed though, as we probably used a fullback in short yardage situations when yardage is harder to come by.

My take on this situation is, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I don't see why we should be in such a rush to get rid of mike rob when he is playing at a high level on a good contract.
Let's say he had 25 goaline carries, more than I'm sure he had, for only 2 YPC. That would mean on the other 112 i-formation carries, he has 605 yards. Good for, wait for it, 5.4 YPC. Only equal to his YPC out of the lone setback. Additionally, his longest run of the season came out the I-form set. So if you want to talk about skewed stats, we could take out that 75+ yard run as well.

No one has said we should cut Mike Rob this year. I don't understand why some of you keep insinuating as much. All SoS, Tooki, and myself are trying to convey is that Mike Rob is not as vital to the success of the running game as some of you think. His contract ends next year, so it is a very real thing to consider whether or not he's worth paying big money to next offseason.


I知 not just referencing goal line carries, I知 also talking about 3rd and short or fourth and short. A three yard carry won稚 look pretty on the stat sheet on YPC, but those are such meaningful yards.

Also, Mike Rob was nearly perfect on converting 4th and short carries for first down (most efficient in the NFL?), so it痴 not just the blocking he helps with in short yardage.

I知 not saying there is absolutely no one else that can do MRobs job successfully, but I would want to keep him for as long as he can keep up his high level of play, which I think is around three years.
_________________


SaveourSonics wrote:
I love D!ck

JustisM wrote:
Why'd they turn the lights on?
Big Ben is more effective in the dark.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tatupu_64


Moderator
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 21427
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hawksman81 wrote:
I知 not saying there is absolutely no one else that can do MRobs job successfully, but I would want to keep him for as long as he can keep up his high level of play, which I think is around three years.
Cap is going to start getting VERY tight in the near future. I'd rather let Robinson walk if it means we get to retain a guy like Bennett.
_________________
<Ram
BlaqOptic wrote:
...13 Seahawks one spot over the 08 Steelers

ram29jackson wrote:
LO freaking L...Seahawks aren't repeating crap and you can book that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wee-Bey


Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Posts: 674
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tatupu_64 wrote:
hawksman81 wrote:
I知 not saying there is absolutely no one else that can do MRobs job successfully, but I would want to keep him for as long as he can keep up his high level of play, which I think is around three years.
Cap is going to start getting VERY tight in the near future. I'd rather let Robinson walk if it means we get to retain a guy like Bennett.


Bennett hasn't even played a down as a Seahawk yet. Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tooki


Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 10744
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wee-Bey wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
hawksman81 wrote:
I知 not saying there is absolutely no one else that can do MRobs job successfully, but I would want to keep him for as long as he can keep up his high level of play, which I think is around three years.
Cap is going to start getting VERY tight in the near future. I'd rather let Robinson walk if it means we get to retain a guy like Bennett.


Bennett hasn't even played a down as a Seahawk yet. Rolling Eyes


Seriously? Laughing

His point is that as core players get their big contracts, the team will need to strip down the contract to find the necessary $$$. Spencer Ware does things that the team may want in a FB, especially the ability to run the ball much better than Mike Rob.

Once Christine takes over for Marshawn, a FB will be even less necessary because he is a true 1-cut runner.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tatupu_64


Moderator
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 21427
Location: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wee-Bey wrote:
Tatupu_64 wrote:
hawksman81 wrote:
I知 not saying there is absolutely no one else that can do MRobs job successfully, but I would want to keep him for as long as he can keep up his high level of play, which I think is around three years.
Cap is going to start getting VERY tight in the near future. I'd rather let Robinson walk if it means we get to retain a guy like Bennett.


Bennett hasn't even played a down as a Seahawk yet. Rolling Eyes
First of all, not true. He was an UDFA we picked up as a rookie who was killing it. A couple of us have wanted him back ever since.

But anyways, what Bennett provides if he lives up to last years play provides a lot more snaps and importance than what MRob does.
_________________
<Ram
BlaqOptic wrote:
...13 Seahawks one spot over the 08 Steelers

ram29jackson wrote:
LO freaking L...Seahawks aren't repeating crap and you can book that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SoS


Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 3648
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tatupu_64 wrote:
hawksman81 wrote:
I知 not saying there is absolutely no one else that can do MRobs job successfully, but I would want to keep him for as long as he can keep up his high level of play, which I think is around three years.
Cap is going to start getting VERY tight in the near future. I'd rather let Robinson walk if it means we get to retain a guy like Bennett.


This is the thing people aren't understanding. Yes, we may have room for these players now, but in the near future we are going to seriously need to start pinching pennies. We only have so much money, and if the difference between Rob and Ware means resigning a guy like Michael Bennett, I'm all for it. The difference isn't big to us, but 1 million here and 1 million there is a new contract.
_________________
DudeWhat?? wrote:
If I am a starting QB and my back up is Kellen Clemens..i would only have one question...."Turn up for what?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Seattle Seahawks All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group