Seahawks make history of most wins vs backup QB's ever

[flyerhawk]

I never said Bridgewater is a backup and I said the SF and STL QB's you have faced were backups at one point.

Right so neither the Niners or the Rams have had a starting QB at all this season. Somehow that makes sense to you.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

I'll fall for the trap I guess

Vs your backup QB.

True, but still a win and 2 playoff games under the belt. I have been doubting the Panthers all year, but I think it's time to take them seriously. If they beat the Giants, they will go 16-0.

 

[Great Dayne]

It is actually not a fact but an opinion. The basis of your opinion is that any qb who has been a backup for any reason all season counts as a backup. Furthermore, any qb that will eventually be a backup in your opinion also counts as a backup (bridgewater). This is not facttual, it is an opinion on what constitutes a backup.

A better definition (and univerally accepted) of backup is a quarterback who is not the team's first choice at the time of the game. It is asinine to count both qb's of the niners as backups when they were actually first choice qb's each time they played the hawks. Same thing goes for the rams, where you listed both qb's as backups.

The Hawks have actually played Bears, Ravens, Cowboys who did not have their first choice qb available. I haven't looked at it, but I am willing to bet 3 games against backups is about average.

What you are actually trying to say is that you don't think the hawks have any quality wins. That would be a clearly stated opinion and then your post is absolutely legitimate. As it is, your initial post is not factual because your definition of "backup QB" is not shared by anyone, and it is frankly the first time I have ever heard anyone define it in that way. You have looked at qb's that are bad and decided to make a definition of backup that allows you to call them backups.

You were probably trolling with your post but on the off chance you were not I thought I would give you a real reply.

NFL definition of a backup QB:

“A member of a team who is considered the primary substitute for a player who plays the majority of the time. The backup will play sparingly, but must be ready to enter the game in the event of fatigue or an injury to the primary player. Backups will also help coach from the sideline, assist in practice, and must have enough of a working knowledge of a position to be able to contribute effectively should they be tasked with entering the game.”

So according the NFL definition of backup it holds true for Kaepernick, Foles, and Gabbert were all backups at one point in this season. Also, Jones came in for Big Ben late in the game for the Steelers. I am not saying that the Steelers would’ve won I am just trying to convey that the Hawks faced another backup late in the game.

According to the NFL definition of backup the Hawks played 6 full games vs QB’s that were backups at one point during the season for an entire game and won 5 of those games. Also, 7 games where backup QB’s contributed to the outcome of the game including the Steelers game.

I live near Seattle and have for nearly a couple decades now and somebody asked the question how many backups have they faced this season. I was curious and amazed after I looked it up. Immediately I thought it must have been a record which is why I posted it. Another poster informed us that Dal might have that record at 8 games in 92. It still proves you can be successful despite having a substantial amount of luck during the reg. season in facing backup QB’s.

This leads to the question do you believe facing Johnny Football counts as facing a starter or a backup QB?

 

[Great Dayne]

True, but still a win and 2 playoff games under the belt. I have been doubting the Panthers all year, but I think it's time to take them seriously. If they beat the Giants, they will go 16-0.

It is a win but I'm with you as I just doubt Cam and the team despite their great defense. Honestly, I hope they beat the Giants because I never want to face them in the postseason again.

 

[Great Dayne]

Right so neither the Niners or the Rams have had a starting QB at all this season. Somehow that makes sense to you.

Well, when I look at the Packers wins vs the Rams and the 49ers I basically count it as wins vs backups. When we faced them they were technically not backups at the time but were playing at a backup level and ended up being backups a few weeks after we faced them.

Anyways good luck in the final weeks and I hope you beat AZ.

 

[flyerhawk]

Well, when I look at the Packers wins vs the Rams and the 49ers I basically count it as wins vs backups. When we faced them they were technically not backups at the time but were playing at a backup level and ended up being backups a few weeks after we faced them.

Anyways good luck in the final weeks and I hope you beat AZ.

If a QB gets becnhed, that doesn't make him a backup in retrospect. It means he was playing poorly and replaced and the new QB is the starter. You don't then call both of them backups.

Jimmy Clausen was a backup both times played him. Matt Cassel was a backup. That's it. The rest of your claims are just nonsense.

 

[seafandoghawk]

Exactly, it's like someone saying the sky is blue and then some kids whine and cry that it isn't. I'm glad you're coming along.

Such mean talk and everything. You sir are a destroyer of worlds with your powerful proclamations. How did you get to be so impressive like that?

 

[seafandoghawk]

Okay, enough sarcasm. Here's the deal Great Dayne. I just don't care if you think too many Seahawk fans are defensive. There's nothing at all wrong with defending something that you believe in, and least of all on a sports discussion forum. If that doesn't sit well with you, then I guess you have a problem.

And your attempts to belittle them for it just seem dumb to me. Have the Seahawks truly 'made history with the most wins over backup QBs ever'-- do you have those statistics handy comparing the Seahawks in this regard with every other team that has ever played? Of course not-- you make an empty but provocative statement and then belittle the blowback that you invited in the first place. Sorry, but all I'm seeing is dumbness in all of it.

Other than that, it really doesn't matter how many QBs that you choose to define as back-ups that the Seahawks have faced. The Hawks have beaten back-up QBs, bad QBs, good QBs, and even great QBs, several times over the past four years, including your own Aaron Rogers (and Brees, Brady, Manning, Rothlesberger, Newton, etc).

 

[Uhsplit]

Okay, enough sarcasm. Here's the deal Great Dayne. I just don't care if you think too many Seahawk fans are defensive. There's nothing at all wrong with defending something that you believe in, and least of all on a sports discussion forum. If that doesn't sit well with you, then I guess you have a problem.

And your attempts to belittle them for it just seem dumb to me. Have the Seahawks truly 'made history with the most wins over backup QBs ever'-- do you have those statistics handy comparing the Seahawks in this regard with every other team that has ever played? Of course not-- you make an empty but provocative statement and then belittle the blowback that you invited in the first place. Sorry, but all I'm seeing is dumbness in all of it.

Other than that, it really doesn't matter how many QBs that you choose to define as back-ups that the Seahawks have faced. The Hawks have beaten back-up QBs, bad QBs, good QBs, and even great QBs, several times over the past four years, including your own Aaron Rogers (and Brees, Brady, Manning, Rothlesberger, Newton, etc).

GD is a troll and he is trolling us. Once realized, his posts are funny in the way that he tries to get a reaction.
Normally I get drawn in, but in this case I kind of enjoyed watching him volley in his attempts to elicit comments.
He succeeded rather well.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

If we played some back-ups it's because that is who the other team put in front of us. Not much we can do about it and I'm not going to complain if it made our game easier.

As for saying we ended up playing a back-up in the Pitts game, well that is true, but only because our team forced that to happen by playing smash mouth football and sending Ben to the bench. And we did it in a legal way too, no flags, no penalties, just a legal hit that allowed us to end up playing the back up.

 

[France_Steve]

NFL definition of a backup QB:

“A member of a team who is considered the primary substitute for a player who plays the majority of the time. The backup will play sparingly, but must be ready to enter the game in the event of fatigue or an injury to the primary player. Backups will also help coach from the sideline, assist in practice, and must have enough of a working knowledge of a position to be able to contribute effectively should they be tasked with entering the game.”

So according the NFL definition of backup it holds true for Kaepernick, Foles, and Gabbert were all backups at one point in this season. Also, Jones came in for Big Ben late in the game for the Steelers. I am not saying that the Steelers would’ve won I am just trying to convey that the Hawks faced another backup late in the game.


According to the NFL definition of backup the Hawks played 6 full games vs QB’s that were backups at one point during the season for an entire game and won 5 of those games. Also, 7 games where backup QB’s contributed to the outcome of the game including the Steelers game.

I live near Seattle and have for nearly a couple decades now and somebody asked the question how many backups have they faced this season. I was curious and amazed after I looked it up. Immediately I thought it must have been a record which is why I posted it. Another poster informed us that Dal might have that record at 8 games in 92. It still proves you can be successful despite having a substantial amount of luck during the reg. season in facing backup QB’s.

This leads to the question do you believe facing Johnny Football counts as facing a starter or a backup QB?

As I said, At the time of the game, Kaep Gabbert, Foles, bridgewater were all starters, not backups. I know what a backup is, we are in agreement about this definition.

You have made a jump in logic here, one that I pointed out earlier. Just because a player is a backup at some point in the season does not mean they are a backup the entire season. This seems patently obvious yet you continue to try to frame your opinion on the matter as some kind of fact.


Agan, you are repeating your opinion just using more words. So i will repeat the obvious counter to your opinion. Just because A QB is benched at some point does not mean he is backup the entire season. The definition of backup directly contradicts what you are saying. At the TIME OF THE GAME foles, kaep, and Gabbert were NOT "a member of the team who is considered the primary substitute." They were in fact the the "player who plays the majority of the time."

Yes, when you change the definition of backup then they have played many backups.

Johnny football is a starter. They have all their qb's available and he is the one who has earned the start. Therefore there is not a scenario where he is taking over for an injured player.

 

[seafandoghawk]

GD is a troll and he is trolling us. Once realized, his posts are funny in the way that he tries to get a reaction.
Normally I get drawn in, but in this case I kind of enjoyed watching him volley in his attempts to elicit comments.
He succeeded rather well.

I kinda' figured that he must be. What other point could there have been for the discussion in the first place? But I probably don't visit here quite often enough to recognize who to take seriously and who not to take seriously. Appreciate the perspective.

 

[WizardHawk]

Their are some power rankings for the NFL that take into consideration SOS, opponent record, home or away, injuries (based on talent level or overall effect the player has on the game), beneficial or bad calls, etc. That's a substantial amount of statistics but it might be the most effective way to rank a team at a point in the season.

Lol at caring about power rankings.

Only rank that matters is where your team finishes at the end of the season. It's easy to figure out why you are so obsessed over trying to knock down the Seahawks given their domination in the post season the last two years and their part in ending your teams season more than once recently, but power rankings?

Carolina will have the easiest road to the SB and whoever ends up as the 6th seed probably has the toughest. None of that tells you who WILL win it.

When all you have is trying to discredit other teams instead of talking about your own it really says a lot about where your team is. Personally I'd worry a lot more about Arizona and Carolina if I was you, but either way I think we all agree the cheese derps are probably not most peoples pick to win the NFC.

 

[Anointed One]

You are completely right. Russell "11-2 against Super Bowl winning QBs" Wilson is incapable of beating good quarterbacks. Nice call.

Game... Set... Match...

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I made no theory I was simply making an observation that had not been discussed yet. As it stands they could still win in the first round at least if they play a backup QB I would give them a decent chance.

theory, observation, insinuate...6, half dz, VI, as your last sentence confirmed.

Point well taken...on the road especially, I don't fear the front 7 of the D as much as I once I did. But, the recent uptick on OFC, makes them a dangerous WC.

 

[JMR]

Correction Big Ben was injured during the Hawks game and the Steelers were winning until he was injured. The second stringer came in and threw 2 picks to give the Seahawks the game.

You're not correct in either statement here. Easy enough to look it up.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

You're not correct in either statement here. Easy enough to look it up.

Correct. Roethlesberger was still the QB when he led the drive ending in a FG with approx 5 minutes left in the game. That Pitts FG made the score 32-30 for Seattle. That's as close as Ben got to gaining the lead. Seattles next drive was a TD making it 39-30 Seattle. So even BR returned he would have needed 2 scores in 2 minutes and 1 second. Bottom line is that Seattle was winning when Roethlesberger left the game. I don't know why people would say otherwise when it's so easy to check.

 

[Great Dayne]

Johnny Football was the most recent victim of the Hawks. The only question is which backup QB is next?

 

[Great Dayne]

Game... Set... Match...

That's old news. However this year they have only beat 2 starting QB's that have been starters for the entire season and played the entire game vs the Hawks.

 

[flyerhawk]

That's old news. However this year they have only beat 2 starting QB's that have been starters for the entire season and played the entire game vs the Hawks.

It just gets better and better. So now if a player is benched at any point that makes them the backup.

So I guess Peyton Manning is now a backup.