Wilson rated by the so called experts

[bksballer89]

Romo isn't a bad QB at all. His issue is with the game on the line he is likely to fail and throw an INT but he's actually pretty good.

 

[SonnyCID]

Romo isn't a bad QB at all. His issue is with the game on the line he is likely to fail and throw an INT but he's actually pretty good.

Man.... But if you're going to have a flaw, can it get any worse than the inability to close?

 

[bksballer89]

Man.... But if you're going to have a flaw, can it get any worse than the inability to close?

Don't think so.

 

[jerseyhawksfan79]

Romo isn't a bad QB at all. His issue is with the game on the line he is likely to fail and throw an INT but he's actually pretty good.

Sept thru Nov he's a good QB usually with stats towards the top of the list, he just lacks the mental toughness when a playoffs are on the line in Dec. He's not worth the contract Jerry Jones gave him.

 

[JDM]

Romo isn't a bad QB at all. His issue is with the game on the line he is likely to fail and throw an INT but he's actually pretty good.

He's a terrible decision maker without the game on the line too. He has the physical tools but mentally he has less than nothing. He is among the worst QBs in the league if your goal is to win football games.

 

[antone112]

You all know you won the Super Bowl last year right? Why the fuck do you care about meaningless shit like QB rankings?

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct...jc-5P8VjnhB7uOMJ6YwXQcZw&ust=1404595692735101

 

[iowajerms]

I'm not totally sure where I would put him. I would have him over Ben Roethlisberger and Tom Brady right now. I feel Roeth. has had a great career, not HOF but great. Tom Brady defined the era with Peyton Manning, but I think he is on the downslope. He's getting old for a QB.

Did he really say Joe Flacco? Talk about a QB that lived off a defense. Eli? really?

I still say Rodgers (I hate saying that), Manning (I can see age really getting him), Phillip Rivers, Brees, and Andrew Luck are better.

I would say he's even with Tony Romo, Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford, and Nick Foles

So, I would put him somewhere 6th-10th.

 

[Uhsplit]

When did I say he's not a good QB?

When I say he's under no pressure, I mean pressure to score points not actual pressure from the opposing defense. You don't think things will be different if he had to play with a defense as bad as the 2012 Saints or 2013 Cowboys where you needed to basically score 30 PPG WEEKLY?

Yes his comeback vs ATL was great but it was a one time deal and when you have a great defense as Seattle does, you know eventually your defense will get their act together and start forcing some 3 & outs and/or some turnovers also. On a bad defense if you go down 20 it is over for that game.

Russel is a good QB but all I'm saying is I'm not sure how he would be in a different situation with a shitty defense and in a pass first offense.

As much as you guys want to hype up Wilson, let's all remember he was shit for about a month and a half leading up to the NFC title game. I have the numbers to prove this

As much as you guys want to hype up Wilson, let's all remember he was shit for about a month and a half leading up to the NFC title game. I have the numbers to prove this

Look at the defenses Seattle faced in those games. Most of them top 10 D's. Half of those divisional games IIRC. Our D has made many QB's look very bland.

 

[Uhsplit]

I have him in my top 10. What more do you want? Not like I'm shitting on him

Coulda sworn it was you who said 12th was about right.

My bad.

 

[Uhsplit]

From a none Seahawks hater just find them pretty annoying I would take six Qbs over Wilson. I would put him in the same pack as Ryan a healthy RG3 and Newton.

Wrong again.
Newton has a very solid D so that team is a good comp.
The diff is, some QB's win and most don't.
It is really simple.

 

[Uhsplit]

It's funny. In the worst stretch of Wilson's career you could find, he still had a 77.4 QB Rating. Andrew Luck's career QB Rating is 78.0.

...and the hits keep on coming.

 

[Screamin12th]

I'm not totally sure where I would put him. I would have him over Ben Roethlisberger and Tom Brady right now. I feel Roeth. has had a great career, not HOF but great. Tom Brady defined the era with Peyton Manning, but I think he is on the downslope. He's getting old for a QB.

Did he really say Joe Flacco? Talk about a QB that lived off a defense. Eli? really?

I still say Rodgers (I hate saying that), Manning (I can see age really getting him), Phillip Rivers, Brees, and Andrew Luck are better.

I would say he's even with Tony Romo, Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford, and Nick Foles

So, I would put him somewhere 6th-10th.

Spoken like a true hater. Sorry but Luck is not on Wilsons level just look at stats and YPA not total yards also rating, comp % TD% and INT% Wilson wins every one of those over Suck lmao. Rivers is not a leader he is a crybaby. He has had all kinds of weapons in SD so his numbers should be better but lets look at that will we.

Wilson averages the past two seasons
TD 26 INT 9 Yards per Att. 8.09 Career rating 100.2
Rivers Averages the past two seasons
TD 29 INT 13 yards per Att. 7.54 Career rating 92.3

Rivers had a great season last year but this will not carry over. His time playing at that level is coming to a end. He had a return to his 2008-2010 form and had his best season ever. Do not expect it to happen again. As far as Wilson goes, we have not seen the best out of him yet but even so his numbers are better.

 

[JDM]

It's funny. In the worst stretch of Wilson's career you could find, he still had a 77.4 QB Rating. Andrew Luck's career QB Rating is 78.0.

Efficiency numbers are going to look different when your team is on your back instead of the other way around.

You can't realistically compare those number when one guy has thrown 1.5 times as many passes.

 

[WizardHawk]

Efficiency numbers are going to look different when your team is on your back instead of the other way around.

You can't realistically compare those number when one guy has thrown 1.5 times as many passes.

Efficiency is efficiency.

We have pointed out numerous time that the Seahawks had statistically one of the very worst offensive lines in the league last year. This notion that you have to make excuses for Luck, or any other QB for why their numbers are worse is ludicrous. Seattle does have a top flight running game, but third and long is the same on every team whether they can run it or not. Everyone knows a pass is coming. When that happened Wilson delivered incredibly well despite collapsing pockets and running for his life while trying to complete the play.

Weapons? I can name a dozen teams with a better receiving corp.

Wilson overall has the best stats over the first two years of any active QB and I'm not aware of any QB in history better. That, despite having a garbage Online and average receivers.

Is he a top 3 QB right now? No. He hasn't been in the league long enough to put him up there. To deny what he has done and the situation he did it in says you only saw highlights and didn't actually watch him play. That, or you are a football retard. Only two options.

 

[bksballer89]

Why is it such a big deal if other fans doesn't agree with Seahawks fans on your QB?

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Why is it such a big deal if other fans doesn't agree with Seahawks fans on your QB?

You are on a Hawk thread on a Hawk board... defend the flag, I would.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Why is it such a big deal if other fans doesn't agree with Seahawks fans on your QB?

This is a sports forum and sticking up for your team and players are what folks do on sports forum.

 

[SonnyCID]

Efficiency numbers are going to look different when your team is on your back instead of the other way around.

You can't realistically compare those number when one guy has thrown 1.5 times as many passes.

By that logic Ryan was better than Luck last year, as he had significantly more attempts and better efficiency.

 

[SonnyCID]

Why is it such a big deal if other fans doesn't agree with Seahawks fans on your QB?

Why are you here?