Paul Richardson

[NorthHawk]

I was saying at the time, Flynn was almost a rookie himself and his 2 wonder games were not an indication of future performance.
I really thought he was a product of McCarthy's system and coaching which didn't automatically mean he would be real good here.
As it turned out, Wilson stole the job from the start.

Knowing what we know now about Pete and how he looks at players, I think maybe Flynn was somewhat complacent and didn't really compete.
Maybe he just doesn't have the serious focus and drive Pete looks for, either.

[burrrton]

Mel gave us a C+ on the draft.

He's had to eat his words a bit too often on our drafts to really be taken seriously by me anymore.

[HumanCockroach]

There was only two concerns for me regarding Wilson, durability, and he was a rookie. As maybe the last reasonably sane "Flynn" guy, I stuck with that assessment until immediately following the Miami game ( I think it was what week 10 or 11), at that point I was sure he was "ready", before that I was unimpressed ( at least in the sense that he hadn't done anything to that point to change my opinion of what types of limitations a rookie QB has) I certainly do indeed remember "sticking up" for the player and the pick though, there were several PI posters that were down on his size prior to training camp and during pre season, and where and when they selected him.

Hell some didn't quit until the PI shut down in that regard. Never had an issue with his size, or where they picked him, it was one of the few times ( and I do indeed mean few) that me and RD were in agreement. I'm pleased as punch to say I was wrong about him starting over Flynn, but at the time, and to be fair in the future if I live that long, I will ALWAYS be against starting a rookie QB game 1, just never going to change for me.

[NorthHawk]

I'm usually against starting a rookie QB, too, but when the rookie is clearly better than a relatively inexperienced veteran, the choice is obvious.

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry, just don't agree that at the time it was "obvious" and to this day I've never wavered on that, in retrospect it was the right choice, but unlike many here, I wasn't swayed by a great pre season, and as I said, I wasn't swayed until Miami, wrong I may be, but I'm not changing my view then, just to fit in now. The coach made the right choice, I was wrong, but at the time I felt he wasn't playing at the level that Flynn could have for many, many weeks. Whether that assessment is right or wrong, will never be able to be discussed with any real validity on either side, because it simply didn't happen..... I have little trouble now saying I was wrong in my evaluation, but as I already said in the post before, I was not of that opinion ( and the validity of when and why I did, is certainly up for debate, though I won't be engaging in it, as I'm content to say the FO and Coach knew BETTER Than I did, something others could learn to accept on this board) so while I could attempt to hedge what was said, or even have avoided saying anything what so ever, I feel that it's OK to admit the guys getting paid millions of dollars to make those decisions know better than I.

[RiverDog]

I was saying at the time, Flynn was almost a rookie himself and his 2 wonder games were not an indication of future performance.
I really thought he was a product of McCarthy's system and coaching which didn't automatically mean he would be real good here.
As it turned out, Wilson stole the job from the start.

Knowing what we know now about Pete and how he looks at players, I think maybe Flynn was somewhat complacent and didn't really compete.
Maybe he just doesn't have the serious focus and drive Pete looks for, either.

That's not how I remember it. Flynn got most of the reps with the first unit in the first 3 preseason games and although not spectacular, did absolutely nothing to lose the job. Most of Russell's success came while playing against the other team's second and third stringers, a point that I brought up on several occasions. Flynn hurt his shoulder just before the final preseason game, making a tough decision much easier. I do agree that Russell beat Flynn out and that Pete was probably leaning towards Russell before Flynn got hurt, but Russell by no means "stole the job from the start."

FYI I was "sold" on Russell after the Chicago game, one game later than HC.

[monkey]

Wilson was just flat out BETTER than Flynn and it was obvious from the get-go.
Flynn never once did anything that gave me the impression he'd ever be more than a backup QB at best. There was not one thing about him that ever seemed like a starter.
I tried and tried and TRIED to get on board after they signed him...I wanted to like that signing , I wanted to convince myself it was a good signing, but I hated it.

When I first saw the Wilson pick, I assumed he was too small to play, then I started doing some research on him, and saw his amazing track record and I questioned my initial response that he was too short.
Then went to camp and saw him live in practice with everyone else. WOW!!!
He absolutely BLEW me away.
It was SO OBVIOUS that he was way, way, WAY better than Flynn in every possible way. Flynn did nothing, I mean absolutely nothing to impress in any way.
I still don't get what anyone was seeing with him...he was so below average. And with a lousy attitude to boot.

I knew beyond a doubt after just watching that one practice that Wilson would earn that starting spot. He was AWESOME, his intangibles we all know about just JUMPED out at you, he was leading, he was having fun, players were clearly buying in, and Flynn was just... so uninspiring.

[NorthHawk]

We don't see what goes on behind the scenes in the film and locker rooms or how players relate to their teammates.
As we know now, strength of character is a big deal to PC so if Flynn didn't show much leadership or "presence" while Wilson did then the choice would have been easy for Pete.
They were building a locker room with very strong personalities and if Flynn was in any way lacking, Pete could not start him no matter if he was 100% if he was to be true to his philosophy.

Regarding the play on the field, from what I saw I didn't see much separation at first which to me meant the rookie had more upside.
What I didn't know was if he had enough character to survive the questions that would come from the entrenched doubters when he made a mistake.
It took guts to start Wilson, and I wouldn't have done that, but that's why I'll never be a coach.

Some say it was a gamble to start Wilson, but there would have been a gamble to start Flynn, too. Sometimes being too conservative costs you more than taking a good risk and obviously in hindsight Wilson was a good risk at that time. Again, we didn't see if either was respected or favored over the other behind the scenes by the coaching staff and/or players but I bet that was a huge factor in the decision.

Lucky for Pete, the shoulder injury to Flynn took care of a lot of the decision for him during TC and the rest is history.

[RiverDog]

We don't see what goes on behind the scenes in the film and locker rooms or how players relate to their teammates.
As we know now, strength of character is a big deal to PC so if Flynn didn't show much leadership or "presence" while Wilson did then the choice would have been easy for Pete.
They were building a locker room with very strong personalities and if Flynn was in any way lacking, Pete could not start him no matter if he was 100% if he was to be true to his philosophy.

Regarding the play on the field, from what I saw I didn't see much separation at first which to me meant the rookie had more upside.
What I didn't know was if he had enough character to survive the questions that would come from the entrenched doubters when he made a mistake.
It took guts to start Wilson, and I wouldn't have done that, but that's why I'll never be a coach.

Some say it was a gamble to start Wilson, but there would have been a gamble to start Flynn, too. Sometimes being too conservative costs you more than taking a good risk and obviously in hindsight Wilson was a good risk at that time. Again, we didn't see if either was respected or favored over the other behind the scenes by the coaching staff and/or players but I bet that was a huge factor in the decision.

Lucky for Pete, the shoulder injury to Flynn took care of a lot of the decision for him during TC and the rest is history.

Absolutely true, and I disagree with Monkey when he says that Flynn didn't show any leadership skills. That's not something you can see on the field, at least not us. It's one of those subjective things that you have to be there in person to witness.

I guess I feel, or rather, felt, the opposite if it were my decision. If the on field performance was a toss up, I would tend to lean towards age/experience, especially at the quarterback position. In any event, Pete made the right call, perhaps the best single call he's made during his tenure. The whole Russell Wilson experience has caused me to re-think some of my basic assumptions.

[NorthHawk]

We don't see what goes on behind the scenes in the film and locker rooms or how players relate to their teammates.
As we know now, strength of character is a big deal to PC so if Flynn didn't show much leadership or "presence" while Wilson did then the choice would have been easy for Pete.
They were building a locker room with very strong personalities and if Flynn was in any way lacking, Pete could not start him no matter if he was 100% if he was to be true to his philosophy.

Regarding the play on the field, from what I saw I didn't see much separation at first which to me meant the rookie had more upside.
What I didn't know was if he had enough character to survive the questions that would come from the entrenched doubters when he made a mistake.
It took guts to start Wilson, and I wouldn't have done that, but that's why I'll never be a coach.

Some say it was a gamble to start Wilson, but there would have been a gamble to start Flynn, too. Sometimes being too conservative costs you more than taking a good risk and obviously in hindsight Wilson was a good risk at that time. Again, we didn't see if either was respected or favored over the other behind the scenes by the coaching staff and/or players but I bet that was a huge factor in the decision.

Lucky for Pete, the shoulder injury to Flynn took care of a lot of the decision for him during TC and the rest is history.

Absolutely true, and I disagree with Monkey when he says that Flynn didn't show any leadership skills. That's not something you can see on the field, at least not us. It's one of those subjective things that you have to be there in person to witness.

I guess I feel, or rather, felt, the opposite if it were my decision. If the on field performance was a toss up, I would tend to lean towards age/experience, especially at the quarterback position. In any event, Pete made the right call, perhaps the best single call he's made during his tenure. The whole Russell Wilson experience has caused me to re-think some of my basic assumptions.

Remember Flynn's experience was only a few games. I believe by game 4 Russell had more game experience than Flynn so he wasn't a savvy veteran that many portray him to be.
If he was equivalent to McCown (last years Bears QB) who played a good part of the season with consecutive games as well as previous years game experience then it might have been a different story.
But having only 2 full starts and playing in a few other games didn't give me the confidence he could be the answer or better player.
Having said that, I might have started him if I thought it was close or I thought Wilson's development would be hurt by any mistakes he made and the pressure to answer for those mistakes. That's where the behind the scenes work is invaluable.

[RiverDog]

Remember Flynn's experience was only a few games. I believe by game 4 Russell had more game experience than Flynn so he wasn't a savvy veteran that many portray him to be.
If he was equivalent to McCown (last years Bears QB) who played a good part of the season with consecutive games as well as previous years game experience then it might have been a different story.
But having only 2 full starts and playing in a few other games didn't give me the confidence he could be the answer or better player.
Having said that, I might have started him if I thought it was close or I thought Wilson's development would be hurt by any mistakes he made and the pressure to answer for those mistakes. That's where the behind the scenes work is invaluable.

Flynn's playing experience was only 4 games. He spent 4 years in one of the better offensive systems in the league backing up a future HOF'er, experience which can't be easily dismissed. Russell had zero experience of any kind in the NFL.

[NorthHawk]

Remember Flynn's experience was only a few games. I believe by game 4 Russell had more game experience than Flynn so he wasn't a savvy veteran that many portray him to be.
If he was equivalent to McCown (last years Bears QB) who played a good part of the season with consecutive games as well as previous years game experience then it might have been a different story.
But having only 2 full starts and playing in a few other games didn't give me the confidence he could be the answer or better player.
Having said that, I might have started him if I thought it was close or I thought Wilson's development would be hurt by any mistakes he made and the pressure to answer for those mistakes. That's where the behind the scenes work is invaluable.

Flynn's playing experience was only 4 games. He spent 4 years in one of the better offensive systems in the league backing up a future HOF'er, experience which can't be easily dismissed. Russell had zero experience of any kind in the NFL.

I'm of the opinion that playing experience is the key and holding a clipboard might give you an idea of what the game plans look like but only game experience counts in a big way.
You just can't replicate the pressure and expectations from your teammates, crowds, speed and intensity of a real game in practice.
For those reasons I saw Flynn as little more than a lightly experienced rookie.

[RiverDog]

I'm of the opinion that playing experience is the key and holding a clipboard might give you an idea of what the game plans look like but only game experience counts in a big way.
You just can't replicate the pressure and expectations from your teammates, crowds, speed and intensity of a real game in practice.
For those reasons I saw Flynn as little more than a lightly experienced rookie.

Understood and agreed. I'm not saying that holding a clipboard carries the same weight as playing in a live, regular season game. But it's still valuable experience, the type of experience that Russell didn't have and the reason why many coaches opt to let their rookie quarterback sit the first year even when they have greater on field ability than the starter.

[NorthHawk]

There's definitely a comfort level that a raw rookie wouldn't have by charting plays and watching.
However, with good quality QBs it's not as much of an issue these days because they are far better coached at the collegiate level and much more ready to play.

The coaches that say every QB should sit a year are probably the same ones that say 5'10 is too short to play QB.
It's hard to break out of patterns.

[RiverDog]

There's definitely a comfort level that a raw rookie wouldn't have by charting plays and watching.
However, with good quality QBs it's not as much of an issue these days because they are far better coached at the collegiate level and much more ready to play.

The coaches that say every QB should sit a year are probably the same ones that say 5'10 is too short to play QB.
It's hard to break out of patterns.

Russell was ready to play, no doubt about it, and had we known just how well he was, a lot of us might have felt differently about starting him over Flynn. But that's all hindsight. It wasn't apparent, at least not to us, back then that he was as well prepared as he was.

[monkey]

I deleted my last post because I misread what Riverdog said.
If you read that Riv, ignore it, I misread you.

I'll just say this, Flynn showed ZERO leadership in the practice I went to. Zero.
There was not one single aspect of QBing, that Wilson wasn't LIGHT YEARS ahead of Flynn at, before even taking one single NFL snap. Not one.

Wilson was hands down better BY FAR, in every single possible imaginable way, and it was GLARINGLY apparent...at least to me it was.

I honestly never could understand what any of you guys saw in Flynn's game. There was not one aspect of his game that stood out as anything other than average at best.

This was part of why I was so irked with Pete's moves at first. I mean, it was clear that he was building a heckuva defense, but I knew that until he brought in a decent QB at least, we weren't going anywhere. Whitehurst clearly wasn't the answer, and they overspent to get him, (still the worst trade they have made...that one was terrible), Jackson clearly wasn't the answer, as I said from the start, and it was VERY clear to me that Flynn wasn't the answer either.
That's why I was so frustrated with Pete for so long.

Then I saw Wilson in that practice, and I knew we were FINALLY going to win a Super Bowl.

[HumanCockroach]

Hey look River, we agree..... might be the only time, or at least the only subject, but it was there for a fleeting moment in time. .... it really is irrelevant, as the past belongs in the past, but I will throw a touch of information out to be digested. A LOT of QB's have come into this league, with ALL of the tools, AND were clearly "better" on the practice field, in the QB room, it every intangible way, and have not been able to "translate" that onto to an NFL field during the regular season, FAR, FAR,FAR to many to list, so at this point, now that Wilson has accomplished what he has, going back and saying "it was obvious 'really just shows that hindsight is twenty/twenty, NOT that you had some "insight" as to how it would play out.

IMHO River's and My opinions were based in past experience, and knowledge of those facts. It wasn't a "slight" directed at Wilson, but more of an accumulated knowledge of how rookie QB's perform. I agree with RD that Flynn did nothing to "lose" the job during pre season, Wilson took it, but certainly didn't look like he had for the first 8-9 games. His performance that first half of the year, wasn't light years ahead of what Flynn probably could have done, hell it wasn't light years ahead of what Jackson had done the year before ( which means it was of the "average" variety). This seems to be another example of people adjusting after the fact and romantising what occured.

[NorthHawk]

Flynn was out for some time (a couple of weeks or parts of? I think I remember 2 games missed) with a sore shoulder.
For a QB with a paper thin resume competing against a true rookie on a new team, missing time like that puts him behind.

It might be different had Flynn been here under Bevell for a couple of years so he had a rapport with the other players and fully understood the Offense, but to come in fresh then miss time when neck and neck with another player makes it kind of obvious who should have started. At the very least it would make it difficult to justify to the team starting Flynn when most of the #1 reps would have gone to Wilson during Flynn's down time. That would have set Pete's best player plays buy-in from players back quite a lot.
As it turns out, it might have convinced any fence sitters that were left on the philosophy to commit to winning knowing they had as much chance as any other player on the roster - starter or not.

[monkey]

Getting back to the topic of Paul Richardson...you guys should check out Field Gulls two new articles about him.
You'll be drooling.

A poster there said, (in reference to the numbers of Richardson and Harvin) "10, 11, 10, 11, 10, 11, 10, 11".
Another poster replied, "It's a binary set, all right. Two answers for the defense, both of them wrong."

I read that and it was, coffee meet computer screen.
Would make a terrific T-Shirt concept.

BTW if we have the "Legion of Boom" on defense, can we start referring to our receivers as the "Legion of Zoom" now?

[Eaglehawk]

Mel gave us a C+ on the draft.

He's had to eat his words a bit too often on our drafts to really be taken seriously by me anymore.

+1

[monkey]

*In the voice of Dennis Hopper*

Pop quiz hotshot. The offense needs 6 yards for a first down. There's Harvin on one side, Richardson on the other, Lynch in the backfield, and Wilson can run. What do you do? What do you do?

[nlbmsportin]

My least favorite parts of the draft are the pre-draft mocks (which are an internet echo chamber for the most part) and the post-draft grades. I get having an immediate reaction to a draft, as we all have an initial reaction. The problem is how much is it really worth outside of looking back in a few years and saying "told ya so"?

This isn't just for negative reactions, but for positive reactions as well.

Here's a list of players that a lot of people wanted early in the PCJS drafts that haven't done much for various reasons:

2010
Taylor Mays
Jimmy Clausen

2011
Prince Amukamara
Danny Watkins
Jimmy Smith
Gabe Carimi
Derek Sherrod

2012
Quinton Coples
Melvin Ingram (injury)
David DeCastro (injury)
Nick Perry
Mychal Kendricks

[HumanCockroach]

https://m.facebook.com/OfficialTheLegio ... attle?_rdr

you're a bit late Monkey.....

[monkey]

https://m.facebook.com/OfficialTheLegionOfZoomSeattle?_rdr

you're a bit late Monkey.....

Figures...always a day late, and a dollar short.

[Eaglehawk]

I'm usually against starting a rookie QB, too, but when the rookie is clearly better than a relatively inexperienced veteran, the choice is obvious.

+1

Key, inexperienced vet.

[Eaglehawk]

*In the voice of Dennis Hopper*

Pop quiz hotshot. The offense needs 6 yards for a first down. There's Harvin on one side, Richardson on the other, Lynch in the backfield, and Wilson can run. What do you do? What do you do?

You blow up the O line!

[HumanCockroach]

*In the voice of Dennis Hopper*

Pop quiz hotshot. The offense needs 6 yards for a first down. There's Harvin on one side, Richardson on the other, Lynch in the backfield, and Wilson can run. What do you do? What do you do?

You blow up the O line!

And hence give up a huge 80 yard TD to either Richardson or Harvin that starts as a bubble screen or 5 yard slant...... works for me

[Eaglehawk]

*In the voice of Dennis Hopper*

Pop quiz hotshot. The offense needs 6 yards for a first down. There's Harvin on one side, Richardson on the other, Lynch in the backfield, and Wilson can run. What do you do? What do you do?

You blow up the O line!

And hence give up a huge 80 yard TD to either Richardson or Harvin that starts as a bubble screen or 5 yard slant...... works for me

No chit.