Is Russel Wilson an ELITE QB?

[WizardHawk]

LOL. You must have expected Seattle to go 16-0 or 15-1 in the regular season.
Indy road game was tough. Barely over 200 yards passing and completed under 50% IIRC. Yet, he ran the ball for over 100 yards extending the lead to 8 in the 3rd QTR.
If our D could have held up, that would have been a W.
Az, was just plain ugly. RW had a bad game.
Heads up. You can cherry pick a couple of bad games for anyone.

And yet it took a lucky once in a lifetime play for Az to win that game. Defender was right where he should be and got his hand on the ball. If that doesn't bounce to the receiver Seattle wins.

 

[flyerhawk]

It's not they don't count...RW made plays for that OFC...but his role...(really any QB besides Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers) is to play mistake free football, make the throws down field when they are called...you're not going to be viewed in the same light as a QB that wins and loses on his arm.

I agree with this. Which is why those 4 guys are in their own class.

But I'm not sure why that matters...the guy can play...I don't believe any QB would've won the SB on that team...he's going to get a Kaep type contract, his performance is right up there in the top 10 in the NFL...but if he had to throw it 30 times a game to win football games the question is legit...we haven't seen him do it on a consistent basis.

Also true. There is also a difference between throwing the ball a lot and making big mistakes as well as big plays and throwing the ball a lot and consistently doing well.

Somebody mentioned Tony Romo. The problem with Romo has been his penchant for costly mistakes that ultimately do him in. So while he had games like the one he had against Denver last year but he also has a bunch of not so good starts. And the same could be said of Cutler or Stafford or Rivers for most of the last 4 years save last year.

And there is a reason why those prolific passers tend to not do so well in the post season.

 

[flyerhawk]

The question is why haven't you seen him throw 30+. The problem we fans have seen over and over (at least the last couple of years) is times where none of the receivers get any separation and many many plays where Wilson can't drop back and set before the line is fully collapsed. They had a lot of injuries on the line last year and it was a line that when fully healthy was only so-so at best in pass protection. Of course it was geared for the run.

I do think that Wilson needs to improve on his blitz reactions some. But there is no denying that the Seahawks OL last year varied anywhere from mediocre to absolutely atrocious. The Texan game in particular stood out to me.

 

[wazzu31]

After seeing both of them for 2 full years now you'd still take Luck over Wilson? Ok. Not me. It's not all about passing yards or attempts. Wilson keeps the drive alive by passing or rushing. I don't care which. I actually like Luck a lot but you couldn't give me him over Wilson.

There is more on the plate for Luck where he has to throw the ball more. Andrew Luck is just a bigger and faster version of Wilson but is at the disadvantage of having to win games on his own. Russell has the luxury of only having to keep plays alive for a first down, Luck needs to keep plays alive for touchdowns or they lose.

Ya you wouldn't take Luck over Russell Wilson but the Seahawks would swap those two in a second.

 

[SonnyCID]

I guess I don't see it that way. I get stuck with watching the Seahawks every week and the two games that jump out to me was the Colts game and the Cardinals game last season. The team needed some help on offense and he played pretty mediocre if not worse. Consequently, the Seahawks last those two games. Luckily, like you just said... the Seahawks have a great system in place ... and they don't have to rely on Wilson.... and they ended up hoisting the Lombardi because of it.

Oh, you watch him every week and those are the two games that jump out?

In the Cards game he led them for the tying score late in the 4th, but Arizona scored the winning TD in the next possession. He pressed and threw an int on the next series. But you're a Cowboy fan, you know about that, he basically pulled a Romo. Made the plays to keep it interesting, but ultimately fell short. Now what's different than Romo is that this was an aberration, usually when he's called upon late he gets it done.

And the Indy game was basically the same, he and Luck went back and forth and Wilson fell late on the road. Just like Romo does almost every week. Except like I said, when Wilson does it, it's out of character.

 

[Smart]

There is more on the plate for Luck where he has to throw the ball more. Andrew Luck is just a bigger and faster version of Wilson but is at the disadvantage of having to win games on his own. Russell has the luxury of only having to keep plays alive for a first down, Luck needs to keep plays alive for touchdowns or they lose.

Ya you wouldn't take Luck over Russell Wilson but the Seahawks would swap those two in a second.

Do you or anybody else have any proof that throwing the ball more decreases a QB's stats? It seems to be the entire premise of the anti-Wilson argument, but it doesn't seem to have any qualitative basis in reality.

Also, in what world is Luck faster than Wilson? Wilson outran him by .13 at the combine, and the gap seems bigger on game film. And as for Luck being "bigger," he is 5 inches taller and weighs about 30 pounds more. If either is more muscular, it is Russell. The core of your "argument" that Luck is better is that he is taller and throws more. Hilariously, those were the same reasons Wilson haters gave for him never possibly succeeding in the NFL.

So now stats and results prove you were wrong, and what do you do? Why, let's make the same complaints about Russell which he has already disproven. That makes perfect sense!

 

[bigdaddytorr]

Oh, you watch him every week and those are the two games that jump out?

In the Cards game he led them for the tying score late in the 4th, but Arizona scored the winning TD in the next possession. He pressed and threw an int on the next series. But you're a Cowboy fan, you know about that, he basically pulled a Romo. Made the plays to keep it interesting, but ultimately fell short. Now what's different than Romo is that this was an aberration, usually when he's called upon late he gets it done.

And the Indy game was basically the same, he and Luck went back and forth and Wilson fell late on the road. Just like Romo does almost every week. Except like I said, when Wilson does it, it's out of character.

Lol... Gotta love Seahawk fans.

 

[SonnyCID]

Lol... Gotta love Seahawk fans.

Hey, when I'm right, I'm right.

LOL "These two cherry picked games are the ones that define Wilson - derp"

 

[bigdaddytorr]

Hey, when I'm right, I'm right.

LOL "These two cherry picked games are the ones that define Wilson - derp"

Hardly, The two games I pointed out were the two games the Seahawks needed Wilson to put them on his back and he couldn't. Tell me I'm wrong all you want and that Wilson is an elite QB that makes all the right decisions.... and feel free to continue to deflect by saying Romo turns over the ball all the time.

 

[wazzu31]

Do you or anybody else have any proof that throwing the ball more decreases a QB's stats? It seems to be the entire premise of the anti-Wilson argument, but it doesn't seem to have any qualitative basis in reality.

Also, in what world is Luck faster than Wilson? Wilson outran him by .13 at the combine, and the gap seems bigger on game film. And as for Luck being "bigger," he is 5 inches taller and weighs about 30 pounds more. If either is more muscular, it is Russell. The core of your "argument" that Luck is better is that he is taller and throws more. Hilariously, those were the same reasons Wilson haters gave for him never possibly succeeding in the NFL.

So now stats and results prove you were wrong, and what do you do? Why, let's make the same complaints about Russell which he has already disproven. That makes perfect sense!

That wasn't a knock on your love nut hugging of RW, it was to the ripping on Andrew Luck as though he is some scrub or bust.

But stats don't prove anyone wrong that which is better since it is an apples to oranges argument.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Hardly, The two games I pointed out were the two games the Seahawks needed Wilson to put them on his back and he couldn't. Tell me I'm wrong all you want and that Wilson is an elite QB that makes all the right decisions.... and feel free to continue to deflect by saying Romo turns over the ball all the time.

Tell you what, we'll pick this up after this season is done. Now with a couple of seasons experience and a better WR corp, I think the Seahawks are going to start leaning more on Wilson, and he's going to shine.

 

[SonnyCID]

Hardly, The two games I pointed out were the two games the Seahawks needed Wilson to put them on his back and he couldn't. Tell me I'm wrong all you want and that Wilson is an elite QB that makes all the right decisions.... and feel free to continue to deflect by saying Romo turns over the ball all the time.

Never said he was elite.

And you're the one that said that Romo was better, so its not deflecting to prove that wrong.

And yes, he fell short a couple times, it happens. But those were also games that he made to keep them in until late. There are plenty of examples of games like that that end differently for him.

 

[bigdaddytorr]

Tell you what, we'll pick this up after this season is done. Now with a couple of seasons experience and a better WR corp, I think the Seahawks are going to start leaning more on Wilson, and he's going to shine.

That's fine... nothing changes the fact that he's not elite right now though. They're going to have to lean on him because their is no way they have one of the best defenses of all time forever.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

So many people hung up on passing yards and attempts. Why?


Here's the thing, compare Tom Brady (easily considered elite), Andrew Luck (some say he's the next king), and Russell Wilson last year:


Tom Brady had 4361 total yards (272.5 yards per game)
Andrew Luck had 4199 total yards (262.4 yards per game)
Russell Wilson had 3896 total yards (243.5 yards per game)


So Comparing Wilson, we're talking about a difference of 29 yards per game more for Brady, and a difference of 19 yards more per game for Luck. That's it. When looking at only passing yards the difference between the three is immense, but using total yards (and why wouldn't you, they all count) Wilson closes the gap pretty nicely.


I think the original question was "elite QB" not "elite passing QB". Wilson just uses his feet more than some others so why should that be held against him?

 

[HaroldSeattle]

That's fine... nothing changes the fact that he's not elite right now though. They're going to have to lean on him because their is no way they have one of the best defenses of all time forever.

Most Seahawks fans do not claim he's elite. Nobody is elite after two seasons, if there a few that get carried away...big deal. Folks like you like to exaggerate and claim Seahawks fans claim he's elite, when in fact most say he's been great and looks to be elite soon.

 

[bigdaddytorr]

Most Seahawks fans do not claim he's elite. Nobody is elite after two seasons, if there a few that get carried away...big deal. Folks like you like to exaggerate and claim Seahawks fans claim he's elite, when in fact most say he's been great and looks to be elite soon.

This thread is about whether or not Wilson is elite. People including myself in this thread have stated he is not elite because of this, this, and that.... Then Seahawks fans get defensive and try to refute that. I never said he wasn't a good player... not once... merely that he is not an elite player. I digress.

 

[MileHigh64]

It's simple for me.

Russell Wilson is not elite.....yet, but he's a hell of a lot more than a game managing quarterback. If he continues to develop at the pace he's set in his first few years, he can solidify his position as a great QB in the NFL.

The whole thread is silly IMO, as no expert or fan has ever really been able to define "elite" quarterbacks with any kind of consensus. If my team needed a quarterback and Russell Wilson was available, you can bet your bottom dollar that I would want him.

Jesus, I can't wait to have some real game play to read about on the Hoop. So excited to see things kick off with that Seahawks v. Packers game in TWO DAYS!

 

[HaroldSeattle]

This thread is about whether or not Wilson is elite. People including myself in this thread have stated he is not elite because of this, this, and that.... Then Seahawks fans get defensive and try to refute that. I never said he wasn't a good player... not once... merely that he is not an elite player. I digress.

Actually this thread is about this article here.

Monday Musings: Preseason shows Russell Wilson ready for higher level - CBSSports.com

Which is saying much the same as most of us Seahawks fans and that is that Russell Wilson looks ready to make the next step to being elite. Even the OP who may be a bit over enthusiast say that Wilson is top 10 ( which isn't elite in anyones book) and I might point out he's not a Seahawks fan by the way, he's a Packer fan who admires Russell Wilson.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

The question is why haven't you seen him throw 30+. The problem we fans have seen over and over (at least the last couple of years) is times where none of the receivers get any separation and many many plays where Wilson can't drop back and set before the line is fully collapsed. They had a lot of injuries on the line last year and it was a line that when fully healthy was only so-so at best in pass protection. Of course it was geared for the run.

So when actually asked to pass he had to try to find a receiver that wasn't covered while running for his life... and did that better than anyone else. His stats working under blown plays is sick.

The original point of this article was is he ready to take the step you all think he needs to? Harvin back and fully healthy (for now anyway) and a revamped line.

I won't presume to know the future and injuries are always a story on every team. I will say I like our chances of that offense stays relatively healthy and Wilson now has open targets to throw to and more than 1.5 seconds in the pocket to do so.

1st point in bold....to be honest...I'd rather have an OFC like SEA if you have a likekind DEF...but take ATL for instance since I see them a lot...the after Michael Turner version of this team has been Matt Ryan and the passing game or bust...2 yrs ago they had it going well...LY the OL was probably the worst in football yet Ryan still put up good numbers just a weak DEF and running game...I'm not sure how RW would fare if put into an OFC like that.

To your second point...I think he will take the next step...he's not going to be a 5000 yd passer. That's Not SEA football...next step...I'm sure you guys want a passing game that can bring you back from 2 scores down in the 4th Qtr if you need it...get that key 3rd and long when the DEF knows you need to pass...that sort of thing. I think he will.

 

[bigdaddytorr]

Actually this thread is about this article here.

Monday Musings: Preseason shows Russell Wilson ready for higher level - CBSSports.com

Which is saying much the same as most of us Seahawks fans and that is that Russell Wilson looks ready to make the next step to being elite. Even the OP who may be a bit over enthusiast say that Wilson is top 10 ( which isn't elite in anyones book) and I might point out he's not a Seahawks fan by the way, he's a Packer fan who admires Russell Wilson.

Well the title is pretty black and white to me... and that guy is a Badgers fan.