Two 1st round picks for Russell Wilson in '16 and '17 or '17 and '18

[Discuss Thrower]

Clayton on show seems to hint that SEA would be open to non-exclusive Tag for RW in 2016- seems surprising but SEA will study all avenues

— DAVIS HSU (@DavisHsuSeattle) June 20, 2015

Do you sign the offer sheet if the Seahawks non-exclusively tag Russell Wilson?

Pole cumming.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

and I'm doing the new QBR, which is out of 100

His two postseason losses

91 and 93

These are INSANE games. Just INSANE.

FOR REFERENCE, Tom Brady's record breaking year he posted a QBR of 87. In the Super Bowl this year, his QBR was 82. Those are RIDICULOUS games.

Russell?

91 and 93.

Anything over 60 is good.

I honestly don't want to diss Wilson, because I'm largely on your side on this, but I will say this:

1. the less a guy has to pass, because he is relying on his legs and his running game, and because he knows he doesn't have to score big points because his defense is likely to control the other team's offensive output, the easier it is to avoid mistakes. This isn't a Wilson thing, it's a good decision-making, good coaching thing.

2. QBR and similar can be useful, but I dont' think too many people think Wilson outplayed Brady that game, though Wilson's QBR was higher than Brady's.


AGAIN, I do tend to agree with you on your points overall in this thread, so don't take it as a massive attack on what you're arguing here.

[Hootie]

I can show you 5 Brady playoff games where he has a terrible QBR and his team has won.

[O.city]

Luck isn't elite yet, too many turnovers.

Wilson isn't elite yet, doesn't have the numbers. In his case, it's not really his fault, he hasn't been asked to do as much or enough to out up the numbers.

[Mother****erJones]

Originally Posted by BigMeatballDave

Learn how this ****ing sport is played, and how these 2 QBs are used and it's really quite simple.

And, overall, Indy does not have near the talent Seattle has.

Learn how this sport is played? Wilson plays it just fine.

Indy doesn't have the talent nor coaching that Seattle has but Wilson still makes clutch plays and isn't carried by the team.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I can go to any QB and cherry pick 5 regular season games where they didn't play well. Peyton, Tom, Aaron ... anyone.

Wow, what an insane cherry pick

The point they are making, not completely invalid, is that if a Manning, Brady or Rodgers have a QBR of 13.6, as Wilson did against the Packers, there is no way in hell their team wins. Completely impossible. Their teams are too reliant on them, because their defenses and run games are not nearly as dominant as Seattle's.

Not completely invalid, but I agree with you that I think Wilson has "it", and that as the years go by more evidence will build in support of Wilson being an exceptional player.

[O.city]

It's why it's ridiculous to use wins and losses as a qb statistic. Wilson's best playoff performance, he lost. His worst 2, he's won.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

I honestly don't want to diss Wilson, because I'm largely on your side on this, but I will say this:

1. the less a guy has to pass, because he is relying on his legs and his running game, and because he knows he doesn't have to score big points because his defense is likely to control the other team's offensive output, the easier it is to avoid mistakes. This isn't a Wilson thing, it's a good decision-making, good coaching thing.

2. QBR and similar can be useful, but I dont' think too many people think Wilson outplayed Brady that game, though Wilson's QBR was higher than Brady's.


AGAIN, I do tend to agree with you on your points overall in this thread, so don't take it as a massive attack on what you're arguing here.

It's hard to say on point 2.

No one will remember how amazingly clutch the TD drive at the end of the 1st half was for Wilson. That was a 29 second TD drive against the NE Pats to tie the game (while getting the possession back in the 3rd) in the Super Bowl.

Wilson also played a great 3rd quarter, while Brady played a poor 3rd quarter.

Brady played an all-time 4th quarter, while Seattle was in "let the defense finish the game mode" and neutered the offense in the 4th quarter.

The aforementioned Butler/Lockette trip was a HUGE momentum shift in the game. That play probably saved the day almost as much as the Butler pick.

...but you can't take away the drive that got them to the 1 from Wilson, either. He made a HUGE 3rd and 10 completion and then got fairly lucky on a 1st down bomb to Kearse on that deflected pass ... but you can't just say if that's incomplete Russell doesn't drive them down and score anyway being on the NE 40 with 50 seconds, 2 timeouts, and 2nd and 10.

and I will never, ever, ever put that pick on Russell Wilson. That was a terrible play call and he made the 100% correct read and was 100% right to throw it because it was the design of the play. Could he have made a better throw? Maybe. But come on. That's pretty insane to ask of someone. It was still such an unnecessary play call.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

The point they are making, not completely invalid, is that if a Manning, Brady or Rodgers have a QBR of 13.6, as Wilson did against the Packers, there is no way in hell their team wins. Completely impossible. Their teams are too reliant on them, because their defenses and run games are not nearly as dominant as Seattle's.

Not completely invalid, but I agree with you that I think Wilson has "it", and that as the years go by more evidence will build in support of Wilson being an exceptional player.

[Mother****erJones]

All you need to do is watch Wilson in the fourth quarter and crunch time. He's money. (Outside of that great play by the NE DB to win the super bowl).

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

The point they are making, not completely invalid, is that if a Manning, Brady or Rodgers have a QBR of 13.6, as Wilson did against the Packers, there is no way in hell their team wins. Completely impossible. Their teams are too reliant on them, because their defenses and run games are not nearly as dominant as Seattle's.

Not completely invalid, but I agree with you that I think Wilson has "it", and that as the years go by more evidence will build in support of Wilson being an exceptional player.

This is wrong, as I have shown you in the Baltimore win Brady had in the AFCCG the 2nd year they lost to NYG.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by O.city

It's why it's ridiculous to use wins and losses as a qb statistic. Wilson's best playoff performance, he lost. His worst 2, he's won.

I don't even hate Wilson. I think he's a good QB who could be a franchise QB someday.

But he's not in Aaron Rodgers class. No ****ing way.

If his defense completely bottoms out and he got in a shoot out in the 30's or even 40's with an elite QB like Rodgers, he's going to lose.

[Hootie]

2007 Tom Brady won against San Diego in the postseason with a 19 QBR

[O.city]

He brings stability to the qb spot, he's a franchise qb.

Of course he's not Rodgers, but because he isn't asked to do what Rodgers is doesn't mean he cant, we don't know.

It's the same dumb rhetoric chiefs fans have. No shit Alex smith isn't Rodgers, last I checked, those guys aren't laying around everywhere.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

This is wrong, as I have shown you in the Baltimore win Brady had in the AFCCG the 2nd year they lost to NYG.

2011 then. I looked it up. QBR of 59.6, which is alot more than 13.6, which is what Wilson had against GB.

There could be a game here or there, but I'd be fairly surprised.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

2011 then. I looked it up. QBR of 59.6, which is alot more than 13.6, which is what Wilson had against GB.

There could be a game here or there, but I'd be fairly surprised.

but not much more than 19.6 that Brady had in 2007 with his 18-1 super team ... correct?