Is Russel Wilson an ELITE QB?

[CarlSr]

Russell Wilson's Career 4th quarter comebacks and game-winning drives | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Wilson has 10 game winning drives and 8 4th Q come backs in a 2 year span. Not only is that elite but it's better than any of the other elite QB's. The team puts the game on his shoulders many times by playing conservative ball on offense instead of stat padding and running up the score.

You sure you want to make that the criteria for being elite? You might not like a guy or two you can lump up there with him based on your criteria.

That's not to slam Wilson, that's just to say that's simply one part of the equation.

 

[Wazmankg]

Another "too early" here. I like him a lot. I thought he was undervalued coming out of Wisconsin. But 2 years is too soon especially considering his circumstances with the Hawks and the fact he hasn't really carried them on his back. But I hate this "elite" crap. Wtf is elite ? Top 3 (no) ? Top 5 (no) ? Top 10 (ok ) ? Define your terms. To me elite is top 3-5 ... depending. But it's usually the sure bets for Canton. Wilson isn't that yet... not even close.

 

[Great Dayne]

He is very good. That said, I don't consider QBs "elite" after just two seasons in the league. He could very well be elite at some point, just not yet. Give it another year or two.

People said that in Rodgers in year 3 but I'll say the same thing I said then about Rodgers it's just delaying what we already know. If he's elite now why would we need more time to see him perform as an elite QB? It appears the only way people would believe Wilson is elite on here is for unfounded belief that one needs 4-5 years to prove they're elite or need to chuck the rock 5-600 times a season. Nobody has taken into account his rushing stats and the fact that on average he extends the play longer than any other QB.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

Luck led a 2-16 ? team before he got there to a playoff spot with late game wins.

He brought his team back from 28 against the Chiefs.

The notion that Luck inherited some awful team and Wilson didn't is a misnomer.

The fact is in the years before Luck took over the Colts they went 14-2, 10-6, and 2-14. Which to me suggests that they had a pretty good team but it depended on having a very good QB. When Manning went down so did the team. Luck is definitely far above average and that's all that team needed to be a winning team again.

In contrast Wilson took over a team that went 5-11, 7-9, and 7-9. So its not like he was taking over some juggernaut that was already winning. He took over a losing team more so than Luck did.

 

[LPinSLC]

The real question is why can't a player be elite? Just because they haven't done it for 6+ years doesn't mean they're not currently elite when their performance, and stats state otherwise. I made the same case for Rodgers 3 years ago just before he won his first SB in his third year starting.

So then, Nick Foles and Matthew Stafford in 2011, both elite. People too often say "elite" when they mean very good. Time is relevant. Bo Jackson might be the GoAT, problem is he didn't have the time in.

 

[LPinSLC]

The notion that Luck inherited some awful team and Wilson didn't is a misnomer.

The fact is in the years before Luck took over the Colts they went 14-2, 10-6, and 2-14. Which to me suggests that they had a pretty good team but it depended on having a very good QB. When Manning went down so did the team. Luck is definitely far above average and that's all that team needed to be a winning team again.

In contrast Wilson took over a team that went 5-11, 7-9, and 7-9. So its not like he was taking over some juggernaut that was already winning. He took over a losing team more so than Luck did.

I think the mantra was "suck for Luck"

 

[Great Dayne]

You sure you want to make that the criteria for being elite? You might not like a guy or two you can lump up there with him based on your criteria.

That's not to slam Wilson, that's just to say that's simply one part of the equation.

QBR, rushing, efficiency, O-line and WR corps ranking, come from behind wins

That's basically everything and everything indicates elite play with inferior supporting cast in comparison to the other so called elite.

 

[Dolemite censored]

The notion that Luck inherited some awful team and Wilson didn't is a misnomer.

The fact is in the years before Luck took over the Colts they went 14-2, 10-6, and 2-14. Which to me suggests that they had a pretty good team but it depended on having a very good QB. When Manning went down so did the team. Luck is definitely far above average and that's all that team needed to be a winning team again.

In contrast Wilson took over a team that went 5-11, 7-9, and 7-9. So its not like he was taking over some juggernaut that was already winning. He took over a losing team more so than Luck did.

I am not dissing Wilson.

All I'm saying is that Luck deserved to be a #1, and was the critical element in turning a 2-14 (not 2-16, my error) team into a contender.

 

[CarlSr]

QBR, rushing, efficiency, O-line and WR corps ranking, come from behind wins

That's basically everything and everything indicates elite play with inferior supporting cast in comparison to the other so called elite.

Rushing? Man, I don't think you need that in there at all.

 

[wazzu31]

The notion that Luck inherited some awful team and Wilson didn't is a misnomer.

The fact is in the years before Luck took over the Colts they went 14-2, 10-6, and 2-14. Which to me suggests that they had a pretty good team but it depended on having a very good QB. When Manning went down so did the team. Luck is definitely far above average and that's all that team needed to be a winning team again.

In contrast Wilson took over a team that went 5-11, 7-9, and 7-9. So its not like he was taking over some juggernaut that was already winning. He took over a losing team more so than Luck did.

Oh cut that crap out. Andrew Luck is the only quarterback in the league that the Seahawks would take over Wilson.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

I am not dissing Wilson.

All I'm saying is that Luck deserved to be a #1, and was the critical element in turning a 2-14 (not 2-16, my error) team into a contender.

I absolutely agree with you on that point. Luck was pivotal in the Colts going back to the playoffs. So was Wilson. Its annoying when people suggest that Luck had less to work with because the Colts were 2-14 and they disregard that they were 10-6 before Manning went down. Wilson also took over a bad team, probably worse than Indy, but he doesn't seem to get the same benefit of the doubt as Luck because Luck throws about 20 times more per game, as if that matters. Both are exceptional, but only Luck is given a pass by the general media for his misgivings.

 

[SonnyCID]

People said that in Rodgers in year 3 but I'll say the same thing I said then about Rodgers it's just delaying what we already know. If he's elite now why would we need more time to see him perform as an elite QB? It appears the only way people would believe Wilson is elite on here is for unfounded belief that one needs 4-5 years to prove they're elite or need to chuck the rock 5-600 times a season. Nobody has taken into account his rushing stats and the fact that on average he extends the play longer than any other QB.

This is exactly how I feel about Wilson.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

Oh cut that crap out. Andrew Luck is the only quarterback in the league that the Seahawks would take over Wilson.

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.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Oh cut that crap out. Andrew Luck is the only quarterback in the league that the Seahawks would take over Wilson.

I think not. Wilson has been every thing they hoped for. I don't see the Seahawks trading him for anybody.

 

[Dolemite censored]

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.

In 2012, any GM in the league would take Luck over Wilson.

In 2014, probably the reverse.

Seahawks, count your luck. (pun intended)

 

[bigdaddytorr]

Here are the top 4 QB's in QBR over the last 2 seasons

1. Peyton Manning (110.45 average)

2. Aaron Rodgers (106.45 average)

3. Drew Brees (100.5 average)

4. Russell Wilson (100.6 average)

He's done this with a far inferior O-line than the QB's above him. According to football focus here's the the O-line rankings of those teams during this 2 year period.

1. Peyton Manning (Broncos): #2 overall in 2012, #1 overall in 2013

2. Aaron Rodgers (Packers): #31 overall in 2012, #26 overall in 2013

3. Drew Brees (Saints): #7 overall in 2012, #4 overall in 2013

4. Russell Wilson (Seahawks): #20 overall in 2012, #32 overall in 2013



Meanwhile the WR corps rankings by cover32.com

1. Denver Broncos

2. Indianapolis Colts

3. Green Bay Packers

4. San Franciso 49ers

5. Washington Redskins

6. New Orleans Saints

26. Hawks

So, RW has put up similar numbers to the "ELITE" QB's in his first two seasons with a team that places him in difficult third and longs, and has inferior pass blocking and WR corps in comparison to these other QB's respective teams. You have to be drunk to believe Wilson isn't elite.

Most ridiculous thing I've ever seen... you post QBR ranks and then post the WRs recieving yard ranks... dumb

Post the passing yard ranks and the receiving yard ranks and see how they correlate.

 

[Wazmankg]

I think not. Wilson has been every thing they hoped for. I don't see the Seahawks trading him for anybody.

Of course. You have a great thing going there. Why mess with it ? They're both very good QBs. I'd take Luck over Wilson though and either over Stafford.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Of course. You have a great thing going there. Why mess with it ? They're both very good QBs. I'd take Luck over Wilson though and either over Stafford.

Truthfully you couldn't go wrong with either. Keep a eye on Wilson this year, I think he's going to impress.

 

[psaboy]

This is the worse question I've seen on SportsHoopla in a long time.

So the answer is NO

 

[VikingsAD28]

Well the thing is that too many people think like you and only look at passing stats when determining "elite". Wilson may only have 6500 passing yards, but his rushing yards count too, his rushing TD's count too. The top two "elite" considered QBs right now are Brady and Manning. In two seasons Wilson has rushed for 1048 yards. It's taken Manning 16 seasons to rush for 697 yards, and its taken Brady 13 seasons to get to 766 yards rushing. Brady has 14 rushing TDs in 13 years, Manning has 18 in 16 years. Wilson has 5 in two years. Every TD counts, not just the ones through the air. You need to consider everything that a QB does, and is capable of ,in order to rank them properly. If you only use one metric, like passing, you aren't getting the whole picture. Wilson is never going to threaten Brady or Manning's passing numbers but he's already surpassed their rushing numbers by a mile.

Peyton's first two seasons = 8009 total yards (rush and pass) and 54 TDs. (rush and pass)
Brady's first two seasons = 6760 total yards (rush and pass) and 47 TDs (rush and pass)
Wilson's first two seasons = 7503 total yards (rush and pass) and 57 TDs (rush and pass)

Please tell me how Wilson doesn't compare with the two consensus picks for most elite QBs playing right now at the same point in their careers.

...and Brady and Manning weren't elite either after their first 2 years.