that suggest in no uncertain terms that O-lines always look bad blocking for mobile QB's. Some of that's the nature of the slow-developing-play, and some of it is due to the intentional trade-offs made by teams with mobile QB's. But, clinically speaking, mobile QB's tend to create their own pressures to such a degree that a studly O-line is largely nullified by them. Hence, why a team like Seattle refuses to invest heavily in the O-line.
I've also wondered about opposing team morale when playing someone like Russell. If you're a pass rusher and you know that RW3 is going to get sacked more often because of his scrambling, wouldn't you churn the legs a little harder, and a little longer, on otherwise routine plays? I suspect that's going to be near-impossible to pin down, stats-wise, but it seems consistent with human nature (to me) that we rise to the challenge when there's a carrot dangling in front of us. When you're pass-rushing Dallas' O-line, and you've got a dozen dings and scrapes--any one of which *might* be a potential season-ender if it gets tweaked the wrong way--are you really going to drive as hard as you would against an O-line like Seattle's? 'Professionalism' only goes so far in the real world.