HawkShack.com

According to Paul Gutierrez, San Francisco 49ers reporter: http://espn.go.com/blog/seattle-seahawk ... uarterback

How do the Niners view Wilson? Think Pedro Martinez when he was with the Boston Red Sox and he was talking about the New York Yankees. The Bronx Bombers, he said, were his daddy. Same thing here ...

Great pull quote there, Bob. What I thought was interesting is the rationalizing from the Cards' reporter:

But, as teams have proved against the Seahawks, if a defense can take away his run game, he’s not as effective.

Hasn't the "Keep him in the pocket and he can't beat you" meme died yet?

That said, his leading the league in passer rating is deceiving. He had the fourth-fewest passing attempts among the top 10 in passer rating

You know what 6th out of 10 is, Mr. Weinfuss? Middle of the pack, not especially high but not especially low.

Those extra passes could be the difference between Wilson proving himself as a truly elite passer or someone who just gets by with his feet.

LOL. This is a guy who just doesn't want to admit Wilson's performance to this point places him among the best. Weak.

Yeah, the "too small a sample size to be accurate" argument just doesn't pertain to a QB that has started every game of a season. One game, even a run of a couple or three games maybe, but over the course of the season the numbers simply are what they are, to assume that those 4.5 passes per game (that make up the difference between the Seahawks and Cardinals passing attempts) would have been more incompletions and interceptions than the other 32 passes he threw each game is a huge reach.

If Kaep and Aldon hadn't smoked themselves into oblivion, we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. Blame them for ruining what could of been the best competition for years to come.

Yeah, what killed me about Josh Wienfuss's stupid comments were, they didn't just show his bias, they were flat out factually incorrect.
His rationalization about how he didn't throw enough passes, so his rating was deceptive, was incredibly biased, as Cam Newton never received the same criticism, yet he threw exactly 15 more passes. Fifteen...
Had he thrown say, 60 more passes, (which would bring him above a league average), what would have happened? His int. ratio was absolutely minuscule, why would 60 more passes make that change???
His arguments were some of the most moronic I've read since the last time I read our trolls posts, before I blocked him.
He can't get by without running? His numbers IMPROVED when he stopped running as much. The more he threw from the pocket, (and the quicker he threw the ball, which is what allowed him to throw from the pocket more often), the better his numbers became.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2016/6/21/119 ... l-opinions

Nice job shredding that stupidity...

I'm not going to get my briefs in a wad over the opinion of a single sportswriter. Besides, the others that were quoted pretty much disagreed with his assessment.

The comment that made me laugh was the one where he said that if you took away Wilson's running threat, that he wasn't as effective. Yea, well so what other multi talented athlete isn't AS effective if you take away one part of his game? The part that you fail to take away can still kill you.

RiverDog wrote:I'm not going to get my briefs in a wad over the opinion of a single sportswriter. Besides, the others that were quoted pretty much disagreed with his assessment.

The comment that made me laugh was the one where he said that if you took away Wilson's running threat, that he wasn't as effective. Yea, well so what other multi talented athlete isn't AS effective if you take away one part of his game? The part that you fail to take away can still kill you.

Yeah, the exact same thing can be said of Aaron Rogers, if you take away his ability to run around and extend plays with his legs, he's less effective. Many great former QB's, such as Steve Young, Fran Tarkenton, Roger Staubach etc...relied heavily on their legs to extend plays. They're all in the Hall Of Fame, and deservedly so.
You take away a big part of ANYONE'S game and they're not as good.What a dumb argument.

So if you take his agility and right arm away......he will be a pocket quarterback with a minor handicap.

RiverDog wrote:I'm not going to get my briefs in a wad over the opinion of a single sportswriter.

Not so much my briefs in a wad- more dumbfounded that a guy paid to follow the NFL could be so far off-base in his assessment of a guy his team plays twice every year. It's like he read an ESPN comments section 3 years ago and hasn't read or watched a thing since.

burrrton wrote:Not so much my briefs in a wad- more dumbfounded that a guy paid to follow the NFL could be so far off-base in his assessment of a guy his team plays twice every year. It's like he read an ESPN comments section 3 years ago and hasn't read or watched a thing since.

I didn't mean to suggest that anyone in this thread got their briefs in a wad. I was simply saying that I wasn't that personally bothered by the comments. I didn't cuss, I laughed, particularly about the comment he made about Wilson being less effective when you take his running game away. It's kinda like saying that you have a better chance of winning if you score more points than your opponent.

River, Cbob, with the salary talk surrounding Andrew Luck, I started thinking, If you traded Luck for Wilson straight across, could he have won SB's with this team? No doubt Luck is the way better passer but I think Wilson is the better Qb.

obiken wrote: No doubt Luck is the way better passer.

Wait...what?
Says who??? I have a doubt, a really BIG doubt! Wilson is MUCH more accurate, much smarter about his throws, and therefore, the MUCH better passer. If you're talking arm strength (?) then I have to say, big woopdeedoo.
Maybe you didn't see Andrew Luck play last year? He was flat out bad, BEFORE he got hurt. He was bad, because he was inaccurate with his throws. Because he was inaccurate with his throws, he threw a LOT of picks, (and he always has actually).
An inaccurate passer, who throws way too many int's. can hardly be considered a "way better passer" when compared to the leagues leader in passer rating.

obiken wrote:River, Cbob, with the salary talk surrounding Andrew Luck, I started thinking, If you traded Luck for Wilson straight across, could he have won SB's with this team? No doubt Luck is the way better passer but I think Wilson is the better Qb.

Sorry, obi, as much as I like you, I have to go with the Primate on this one.

I do not accept your premise that Luck is a "way better passer" than Wilson. I believe in the exact opposite.

No doubt Luck is the way better passer

There is *absolutely nothing* to support this except the Futureite Eye Test™ with literally mountains of evidence against now.

Sorry, obi- that attitude is very much in doubt if there's even anyone left that believes it at all anymore.

obiken wrote:River, Cbob, with the salary talk surrounding Andrew Luck, I started thinking, If you traded Luck for Wilson straight across, could he have won SB's with this team? No doubt Luck is the way better passer but I think Wilson is the better Qb.

I would point you towards statistics, all of which point to Wilson not Luck being the better passer , every single one minus raw yardage ( of course that stat is based entirely on number of passes, not actual efficiencies while doing so).

Not sure how anyone at this point can still come to that conclusion anymore.

http://www.nfl.com/player/russellwilson ... areerstats

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/25 ... areerstats

Look at them one after another, stifle the chuckle and get back to us.

Even the eye test is tilted in Russell's favor. IMO one of the most important attributes of a good quarterback is their taking care of the ball, and Russell has far fewer turnovers than Luck.

But I'm not going to jump on the "Luck's a bum" bandwagon. He did take a step back last year, no doubt about it. We have to keep in mind that there's more pressure on him than there is on Russell as he doesn't play with as good of a defense and doesn't have the running attack Russell has, so his team is more dependent on his performance than we are on Russell's. I don't think Luck going to crash and burn like Kaepernick did. I think he'll return to play at a Pro Bowl level. He'll be a top 10 QB and a fantasy football sleeper.

But I'm not going to jump on the "Luck's a bum" bandwagon.

To be clear, I'm not, either. Quite the opposite, in fact- I'll be surprised if he *doesn't* end up being a consistent pro-bowl caliber QB.

When you talk about a better passer vs a better QB I think of the old QB Challenge Hass won back in the day. I honestly think it'd be a pick'em between Luck and Wilson, but I sure would crack open a beer and sit down and watch!

On the field though, I wouldn't give the comparison a second of my time.

burrrton wrote:To be clear, I'm not, either. Quite the opposite, in fact- I'll be surprised if he *doesn't* end up being a consistent pro-bowl caliber QB.

Agreed, I was as shocked as anyone to see Luck play so poorly last season. I expect him to be a consistent pro bowl QB.
Sadly for him, his contract is now due, and, unlike the Seahawks, the Colts made poor use of the time they had him under contract, cheap (relatively anyway).
While Seattle went and put together the most talented roster in the NFL around their superstar QB, the Colts made poor draft choices, and did little to help Luck.
I said that to say, all those idiots who said that paying Wilson would lead to the Seahawks downfall, were completely wrong, and, they were pointing to the wrong team/QB situation.
It looks like Luck will forever be doomed to be a very good QB, on a lousy team. Once the Colts pay him the mega bucks he's due, that will be the end of the party, and they can just forget about being a serious contender anytime soon.
What that means is simple, Wilson will likely always win more games/playoff games, and Super Bowls, and as a result, the Luck comparison to Wilson will be lost over time as people will grudgingly be forced to admit that, Wilson is in fact, the CLEAR CUT BEST of those young QB's everyone was propping up. RG3? Done. Kaepernick? LOL! Done. Luck? Stuck with a big contract on a bad team, and likely always will be. Newton? One decent season (rookie year) and one great season, (last year) then a bunch of bad years between...not sure why anyone is even making this comparison. Wilson is HANDS DOWN statistically better than Newton, and it's not even close.
Point is, Wilson really has no competition, among the younger QB's. The CORRECT comparisons the media and fans need to start making, are between Wilson and Aaron Rogers, and Tom Brady, and Ben Roethlisberger. The truly ELITE QB's, like Wilson!

Wilson is unquestionably the star of the 2012 draft and comparisons with Luck are increasingly pointless.

Luck had Reggie Wayne for his first season and a half.I think Wayne caught over a hundred balls Lucks rookie year. He had his college teammate Fleener at TE till this offseason who Drew Breez says is "always open"
He still has TY Hilton. His line is almost certainly as good or better than Seattle. He has a great coaching staff. But its going on year 5 and wheres the beef?.
Like Chuck Pagano said last year before the injury when Luck was handing the ball over like candy on Halloween.
"it isn't trigonometry".
Hass came in there cold as a cucumber and put that team in position to do something with all the same guys Luck was getting beat with. Hass won a game vomiting and fresh out of the hospital while Luck stood on the sidelines like a little cheerleader jumping up and down and clapping his hands.

Enough of the excuses. Ill play devils advocate as I often do. I don't see Luck ever being any more than he is now. Wilson has gotten better every year. Luck has gotten worse.He is a poor mans Brett Favre, The big athletic frame,all the brash gunslinger personna, all the turnovers but not much hardware.
Hes a serviceable starting QB but overrated as any player in the history of the league right now.

That being said he will probably be league MVP LOL

c_hawkbob wrote:When you talk about a better passer vs a better QB I think of the old QB Challenge Hass won back in the day. I honestly think it'd be a pick'em between Luck and Wilson, but I sure would crack open a beer and sit down and watch!

On the field though, I wouldn't give the comparison a second of my time.

All righty then guys, maybe that was a false premise. If so trust me, it wasn't intentional. I was going off most "experts" I wouldn't trade Luck for Wilson, especially with our OL this year. Behind our line he would be hamburger!!

obiken wrote:All righty then guys, maybe that was a false premise. If so trust me, it wasn't intentional. I was going off most "experts" I wouldn't trade Luck for Wilson, especially with our OL this year. Behind our line he would be hamburger!!

The "experts" are beginning to come around, obi. Yes, the consensus (outside the PNW, that is) used to be that Luck was the better quarterback. But that perception has changed. In this article, Russell is ranked 2nd, behind Tom Brady, and Luck checks in at #8 Actually the premise is phrased "best quarterback situations", but I think the point is still the same when you consider that Luck and Wilson come from the same QB class:

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/quar ... ers-021116

In this one, with the premise phrased the same, Russell is ranked #1, Luck #4 (you can see last year's rankings):

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/6 ... tions-2016

Here's one that has Russell ranked #2, Luck #3:

http://www.nj.com/sports/index.ssf/2016 ... son.html#3

And don't think that I cherry picked just the ones that had Russell ranked ahead of Luck. I couldn't find any current rankings with Luck rated ahead of Wilson.

River hes our guy I wouldn't trade him for anybody!! Would Tom Brady in his prime, have won behind this years OL??

obiken wrote:River hes our guy I wouldn't trade him for anybody!! Would Tom Brady in his prime, have won behind this years OL??

Oh, I realize that you're as big of a Russell Wilson fan as any of the rest of us. I just wanted to use your observation to make a point, ie that the rest of the football world is beginning to come around to what we've known for the past several years, ie that Russell Wilson is a legitimate Top 5, if not top 2 or 3, quarterback.

And the nice thing about it is that he's a first class guy, the type of guy I love having on my team and that I like rooting for. If Cam Newton were our QB, you guys would really hate me because I'd be calling him out like I did with Percy Harvin.

And to answer your question, no, I do not think Tom Brady, or any current starting QB, could thrive behind our OL.

Ok great point River. Newton is a different Kettle of fish, He is mobile with a great arm. However, Newton-Wilson, will replace Manning-Brady as THE QB rivalry IMHO.

I agree, Obi. Totally. I still think RW had the better year last year and should have been MVP, but I where blue and green goggles and won't brush my teeth with a toothbrush that isn't in the seahawkian color scheme (ok, just kidding on the last point). The rivalry between Cam and RW feels more relevant than the one between RG3, Luck, Wilson (and Tannehill to a lesser degree)....and since Kaep seems MIA, the rivalry between these two as being "the one" is even more true.

I also couldn't agree more with this piece about RW from River's second link.

Russell Wilson was the No. 75 overall pick of the 2012 draft. Four years later, he’s made 74 straight starts, and is coming off a stratospheric 2015 that cemented his standing amongst the elite of the elite. You could certainly argue that Wilson still isn’t as good as Aaron Rodgers, but you can’t argue his age — five years younger. That’s not to say youth alone is Wilson’s claim to the top spot. Whereas Rodgers struggled with a bad supporting cast last season, Wilson has consistently thrived with them. He’s also been held back by a run-first scheme that finally gave way to his unique gifts in 2015. Marshawn Lynch slept through his victory lap, so Wilson took the reins of the offense and put it on his back. Wilson has no missing pieces. He’s durable bordering on unbreakable, has made 10 postseason starts — including two Super Bowls — and gotten better each year. He is the envy of the league at its most important position. He is the most irreplaceable player in football, and the No. 1 reason the Seahawks will be challenging for Super Bowls for years to come.

I always hear Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the league. Why? He is unquestionably one of the premier mobile accurate QBs. He has the stats and one ring.
But he isn't as good as Wilson IMO. Rodgers has that pouty whiny personality when things go south. He has no problem tossing teammates under the bus and I almost never have heard him take responsibility for his mistakes.

Russ is always upbeat, positive, and confident. One only need listen and watch him bouncing down the sidelines in the 2014 NFC title game shouting, "were only down 16"!!!!!

I have never hear him blame a teammate or coach for anything even though his protection has been below average his entire career. As for physical tools Wilson has as big an arm as anyone. Antonio Brown worked out with him and commented he has "a cannon". We know about the accuracy and otherworldly athleticism, the repetition, the training regimen. Honey Badger said he is his least favorite QB to play because he has "magic tricks".

Wilson is on a trajectory to be one of the very best QBs ever to play the game. As a Hawks fan from day one the current state of this franchise is stupendously awesome....

I'm not going to say Wilson is better than Rogers, but I will say that the needle is pointed that way for Wilson.
I actually expect (unlike virtually EVERYONE else) for the Packers to have a much worse season than anyone predicts. I know, I know, Jordy is back, and everything is wonderful again*. But the elephant in the room that the media won't talk about, is the fact that Rogers and McCarthy are having issues, and have been having issues for over two years now.
Which leads me to, Bold prediction time. The Packers will once again finish second in the NFC North, behind the MUCH more talented Vikings, and the Packers will miss the playoffs. The resulting fallout will cause the Packers to fire McCarthy, as the rift between him and Rogers FINALLY gets traction in the media.

* Remember last year after Jordy got hurt, and IMMEDIATELY there were like a hundred articles on "Why losing Jordy won't hurt the Packers at all." Now everyone is saying, "Well losing Jordy really hurt us"
After Jordy got hurt, I came here and wrote something about how the media was dead wrong about it not hurting them, that it would hurt them a lot...Just had to toot my horn a bit.
Full disclosure: I picked the Packers before the regular season, to miss the playoffs entirely. I was wrong, but that just shows how good Rogers really is, because the rest of that team is OVERRATED!!! IMO the Packers are the NFL's most overrated team by a mile.

Rodgers had an uncharacteristic off year last season, and I have no problem with someone ranking him as the top QB in the league, and I don't have a problem with him being ranked behind Brady, either. Those guys have proven themselves over a much longer period of time than has Russell.

What I have a problem with is his standing compared to the other, next generation quarterbacks, ie Luck, Newton, Tannehill, Kapernick.

"Russell Wilson has the edge over Luck through first four seasons."

http://espn.go.com/blog/seattle-seahawk ... ur-seasons

Just an "edge"?

burrrton wrote:"Russell Wilson has the edge over Luck through first four seasons."

http://espn.go.com/blog/seattle-seahawk ... ur-seasons

Just an "edge"?

You think? My goodness and for him to do this being hit or sacked 36% of the plays as well, MOST IN THE LEAGUE and ten percent more than Luck!!!!l.

Lets dont forget Wilson can gash a defense with his 4.5 speed and ankle breaking jukes on any play. Hes got an edge on pretty much everyone as the all around package. Hes the best in the league.He and Luck is just a non starter at this point, a ridiculous comparison.

The Colts must disagree with the assessment of Luck on this board. Luck signed a massive deal based on what they think he will become. I wonder if Wilson will be content with his deal knowing he's already outperformed Luck and likely will next season.

Id be shocked if Wilson held out or complained. Remember hes only under contract for 3 more years after this season. Russell Wilson will be the most coveted FA in the history of the game if Seattle lets it get that far. I doubt they will.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:The Colts must disagree with the assessment of Luck on this board. Luck signed a massive deal based on what they think he will become. I wonder if Wilson will be content with his deal knowing he's already outperformed Luck and likely will next season.

Ken Arthur covered this on FieldGulls today:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2016/6/29/120 ... d-overpaid

I really enjoyed this piece... It's nice to see people finally coming to the realisation that the best QB ( hands down to date) was the guy drafted in the third round that year, and its not even close. More and more are finally acknowledging it.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/ ... ur-seasons