HawkShack.com

by **Anthony** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 3:56 pm

We settle the debate: Who are the 10 best QBs in the NFL?

interesting

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/we- ... ss-AAcECC8

Seems everyone has a list nowadays and the one thing we know is they cannot agree.

Appears Fox sports agrees

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/photos/bes ... 0715#img_7

by **NorthHawk** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:15 pm

It seems to be the same article as the comment is word for word.

by **c_hawkbob** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:17 pm

The only problem I got with that list is putting Luck ahead of Brady.

by **burrrton** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 7:08 pm

Yeah, I can't get worked up about bait-click articles, but Luck ahead of Brady is nonsense, and Luck ahead of Wilson is even highly, *highly* questionable unless they're using The Futureite Eye Test© wherein you rely on your ability to know what they *could* do independently from they've actually *done*.

RW is better from the pocket than Luck. I *love* AL, but RW has been the better QB.

by **RiverDog** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 12:52 am

Agreed about Luck. He's way over rated. Rivers might ba a little under rated, Romo over rated, but neither isn't as much of an outrage as Luck's ranking.

by **Hawktawk** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 10:14 am

Luck is a considerably less talented Brett Favre. He thinks he can throw it any time any where but he is a turnover machine in crunch time, hence the lack of productivity in the postseason.I really dont get why he is lauded so much higher than Wilson.

by **NorthHawk** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 10:49 am

The scribes touted him as the next great QB - the best of his generation.
They now have to keep to the script otherwise they will have proven themselves wrong.
I think he's rated too high, but he is a top QB with a lot of potential.

by **Anthony** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 12:12 pm

I agree on Luck I mean first he plays in the AFC and sees top 10 defense maybe twice a year compared to Wilson 8 times a year. HIs Wr corps was ranked #5 by ESPN while Wilson was never ranked higher than 20th. HIs oline was ranked top 10 in pass blocking while Wilsons was never ranked higher than 24th. Yet all anyone wants to do is say how much help Wilson has becasue3 of the defense and Lynch and luck does it all by himself. Really a top 10 oline and wr corps and he does it al by himself. That is complete crap. But it is what they need to do so they can say Luck is better than Wilson so they can save face

by **RiverDog** » Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:41 am

Hawktawk wrote:Luck is a considerably less talented Brett Favre. He thinks he can throw it any time any where but he is a turnover machine in crunch time, hence the lack of productivity in the postseason.I really dont get why he is lauded so much higher than Wilson.

There's several factors: First, he was a #1 overall, and lauded as the best QB prospect to come out of college since Peyton Manning. Sometimes your eyes see what they want or expect to see.

Secondly, he is undoubtedly one of if not the most talented quarterbacks in the league, but sometimes people get talent and potential mixed up with productivity and results. Luck has played well and I can understand the arguments for him, but he hasn't taken that next step that the Rodgers, Brady's, and Mannings of the world have taken.

by **obiken** » Sun Jul 12, 2015 4:51 pm

Sorry, if you put the Hawks Defense in Indy they would have won a title in a NY minute.

by **NorthHawk** » Sun Jul 12, 2015 5:59 pm

Him winning the SB wouldn't mean he's a better QB.
He still makes too many mistakes - and he know it as his stated goal this year is to have less turn overs.

by **Anthony** » Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:45 pm

obiken wrote:Sorry, if you put the Hawks Defense in Indy they would have won a title in a NY minute.

Maybe maybe not. I mean do you really think our defense could make up for his horrific playoff play and QB rating of 69 and complt % of 56 in the playoffs? OR his 12 ints to only 9 tds in the playoffs. Just so you know the difference Wilson is a Playoff career 98 Qb rating, compt% of 61, with 13 tds to 6 ints. You could argue give Wilson the Indy oline and WR and we would have won 3 by now too and Wilson would be a perennial 4k Qb. So sorry the hawks D in Indy does not guarantee a title at all. Not with the way Luck plays

by **RiverDog** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 5:18 am

obiken wrote:Sorry, if you put the Hawks Defense in Indy they would have won a title in a NY minute.

Not sure about that, Obi. Our offense compliments our defense as it's a run heavy, control the clock, and minimize turnovers squad. As we saw last season with Philly and New Orleans, an offense can put one helluva lot of pressure on their defense if it misfires. One of the reasons our defense is so good is that the offense rarely puts them in bad positions.

by **Hawktawk** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:05 am

[quote="RiverDog"

Not sure about that, Obi. Our offense compliments our defense as it's a run heavy, control the clock, and minimize turnovers squad. As we saw last season with Philly and New Orleans, an offense can put one helluva lot of pressure on their defense if it misfires. One of the reasons our defense is so good is that the offense rarely puts them in bad positions.[/quote]

Absolutely RD. Wilson's uncharacteristic miscues in the NFC title game aside he doesn't generally turn it over, nor does Lynch. Both of them make unconventional plays to extend drives that would otherwise stall as well. It helps a D no question although this isn't just a good D, its a great D. But its a great QB and RB as well. Its a great team built for January.

by **Anthony** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 12:17 pm

Hawktawk wrote:[quote="RiverDog"

Not sure about that, Obi. Our offense compliments our defense as it's a run heavy, control the clock, and minimize turnovers squad. As we saw last season with Philly and New Orleans, an offense can put one helluva lot of pressure on their defense if it misfires. One of the reasons our defense is so good is that the offense rarely puts them in bad positions.

Absolutely RD. Wilson's uncharacteristic miscues in the NFC title game aside he doesn't generally turn it over, nor does Lynch. Both of them make unconventional plays to extend drives that would otherwise stall as well. It helps a D no question although this isn't just a good D, its a great D. But its a great QB and RB as well. Its a great team built for January.[/quote]

Agreed and lets remember 2-3 of those int in the NFCCG were on Kearse, they bounced right off his hands.

by **Hawktawk** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:34 pm

Agreed and lets remember 2-3 of those int in the NFCCG were on Kearse, they bounced right off his hands.[/quote]

I just finished up watching the Carolina playoff game. I watched the NFC Title game yesterday so the subjects are fresh on my mind. In the Green Bay game I put somewhere between 1.5 and 2 of the picks on Kearse. The first was the 1/2 ball too hot and far out in front. Could have been caught but not a great throw. 2 and 3 are all Wilson, poor throws to a well covered reciever. 4 is 100% on Kearse.
It was unquestionably one of the poorest days Wilson ever had throwing the ball but we all know what happened in crunch time.I'm pretty sure he dropped two perfect dimes back to back in OT with a concussion.What an amazing game....

The Carolina game was one of Wilson's finest performances of his career. The stats dont tell the story. Lynch was stuffed. Wilson was harassed and hit all day. His only explosive weapon Richardson got carted off. And yet it seemed like every ball he completed was 20+ yards when it mattered. The guy throws the best deep ball in the NFL. If only he had a couple of guys to take the top off for him he could obliterate Lucks yardage and TD totals with 1/3rd less throws.He also dove into a pile to recover a Lynch fumble in what was a very close game for 3 quarters. Hes as good as anyone in the league including Rodgers Luck,Brady whoever Oh yeah and one other observation. We have the baddest safeties in the world but Cam Bam is the best player on a filthy defense IMO.

Gonna watch the Super Bowl now, glutton for punishment.

by **Anthony** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 4:02 pm

Hawktawk wrote:Agreed and lets remember 2-3 of those int in the NFCCG were on Kearse, they bounced right off his hands.

I just finished up watching the Carolina playoff game. I watched the NFC Title game yesterday so the subjects are fresh on my mind. In the Green Bay game I put somewhere between 1.5 and 2 of the picks on Kearse. The first was the 1/2 ball too hot and far out in front. Could have been caught but not a great throw. 2 and 3 are all Wilson, poor throws to a well covered reciever. 4 is 100% on Kearse.
It was unquestionably one of the poorest days Wilson ever had throwing the ball but we all know what happened in crunch time.I'm pretty sure he dropped two perfect dimes back to back in OT with a concussion.What an amazing game....

The Carolina game was one of Wilson's finest performances of his career. The stats dont tell the story. Lynch was stuffed. Wilson was harassed and hit all day. His only explosive weapon Richardson got carted off. And yet it seemed like every ball he completed was 20+ yards when it mattered. The guy throws the best deep ball in the NFL. If only he had a couple of guys to take the top off for him he could obliterate Lucks yardage and TD totals with 1/3rd less throws.He also dove into a pile to recover a Lynch fumble in what was a very close game for 3 quarters. Hes as good as anyone in the league including Rodgers Luck,Brady whoever Oh yeah and one other observation. We have the baddest safeties in the world but Cam Bam is the best player on a filthy defense IMO.

Gonna watch the Super Bowl now, glutton for punishment.[/quote]

So relooking at the INTs

First one hit Kearse right in hit hands so on Kearse
2nd throw was bad short all on Wilson, did think Kearse gave no effort to knock it down though, but int all on Wilson
3rd int all on Wilson bad throw however again no fight form kearse
4th int all Kearse

so I got 2 out of 4 all kearse and to be honest on the other 2 would have been nice to see a little more fight out of Kearse but the throws were not great

by **RiverDog** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 5:05 pm

Anthony wrote:Gonna watch the Super Bowl now, glutton for punishment.

Let me know if you change your mind about Wilson being completely blameless for that pick.

by **Futureite** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:56 pm

Luck makes more mistakes because he is asked to do more. In fact, he's asked to do everything. He had no run game, mediocore D - if not a flat out horrendous D in many occassions. He's never had the luxury of literally completing no passes for almost an entire half as Wilson did V GB in the fail mary game and STILL winning, or throwing for 100 yds as Wilson has numerous times with stalled out drive after drive and STILL beating a team like N.O. in the playoffs.

Throughout history, you can find the nost talented pocket passers throwing a lot of picks early in their careers. For example, through their first 3 yrs Peyton Manning threw 58 ints and Marino threw 43. Pretty sure those guys are once in a generation HOF pure pocket talents, as is Andrew Luck, who's also thrown 43 ints in 3 yrs.

Wilson does not have Luck's footwork, his arm, or his ability to laser balls standing in the pocket with a Dlineman bearing down on him. That's not Wilson's game, and it's ridiculous to assert he plays that way. Within 2 pass plays you can see that he moves a LOT more even inside the pocket than mosr QBs (yes, that is an eye test). He is more akin to Jeff Garcia, who had a similar build and was decent from the pocket. But he is not Andrew Luck.

I keep posting that you have to practice something to get great at it. Luck throws ints airing the ball out? Well that's also why he threw 40 TDs this yr and will be an alltime great, just like Peyton and Marino. You don't become great at something by shutting it down, calling handoffs or read options when the QB struggles. Sure, he'll throw far less ints. But his learning curve will be considerably more flat than a QB like Luck who's allowed to fail over and over again. THIS IS LIFE. It's true in any pursuit.

Wilson has his own style, and it works. Though I don't agree, you can make a logical argument that he IS better than Luck. But not as a centerpiece, pure pocket passer. He's not that. At least not at this stage in his career.

by **Hawktawk** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:02 pm

Let me know if you change your mind about Wilson being completely blameless for that pick.[/quote]

I'm not sure how that posted that way but Im the one who was watching the playoff games from last year.
And IMO Wilson was most responsible for the pick at the end of the game. As the QB he has to see that Butler is jumping the route and the play has disaster written all over it. His comments captured live afterwards showed that he did not know where Butler came from.Also the kid Butler has to have his due. He was a man possessed and made many huge plays any one of which would probably have won Seattle the game had he missed. He was New Englands MVP , not the overrated ultimate system robot who has been blessed with far and away the best coach of all time.I cant really believe a pussy like that has that much hardware, hes a bigger flopper than Manning.

Wilson played an amazing game, I watched it in its entirety.Really the story of the game for me is that Seattle's defense was reduced to a shell of itself by injuries, especially our safeties who had been out of their minds in the postseason.
Brady is a lucky man, along with Edelman, Amendola, Lafell, and even Gronk because they would have gotten killed running all that dink and dunk underneath stuff(see SB 48 as exhibit A) I really dont understand why Bevell took the ball out of Wilson's hands at all after the first quarter though. 80 yards in 29 seconds? Put to rest the thought that Wilson couldn't carry the team.

Its going to be a different offense this year with Graham, Mathews, and a healthy Richardson. PAY THE MAN

by **burrrton** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:15 pm

But not as a centerpiece, pure pocket passer. He's not that. At least not at this stage in his career.

Hey, Eye Test- who's better from the pocket? Luck or Wilson?

Let us know if you need the stats. Again.

[edit- here you go- I'll save you the humiliation of having to ask for them. Again.]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... ll-wilson/

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... drew-luck/

by **Anthony** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:44 pm

Futureite wrote:Luck makes more mistakes because he is asked to do more. In fact, he's asked to do everything. He had no run game, mediocore D - if not a flat out horrendous D in many occassions. He's never had the luxury of literally completing no passes for almost an entire half as Wilson did V GB in the fail mary game and STILL winning, or throwing for 100 yds as Wilson has numerous times with stalled out drive after drive and STILL beating a team like N.O. in the playoffs.

Throughout history, you can find the nost talented pocket passers throwing a lot of picks early in their careers. For example, through their first 3 yrs Peyton Manning threw 58 ints and Marino threw 43. Pretty sure those guys are once in a generation HOF pure pocket talents, as is Andrew Luck, who's also thrown 43 ints in 3 yrs.

Wilson does not have Luck's footwork, his arm, or his ability to laser balls standing in the pocket with a Dlineman bearing down on him. That's not Wilson's game, and it's ridiculous to assert he plays that way. Within 2 pass plays you can see that he moves a LOT more even inside the pocket than mosr QBs (yes, that is an eye test). He is more akin to Jeff Garcia, who had a similar build and was decent from the pocket. But he is not Andrew Luck.

I keep posting that you have to practice something to get great at it. Luck throws ints airing the ball out? Well that's also why he threw 40 TDs this yr and will be an alltime great, just like Peyton and Marino. You don't become great at something by shutting it down, calling handoffs or read options when the QB struggles. Sure, he'll throw far less ints. But his learning curve will be considerably more flat than a QB like Luck who's allowed to fail over and over again. THIS IS LIFE. It's true in any pursuit.

Wilson has his own style, and it works. Though I don't agree, you can make a logical argument that he IS better than Luck. But not as a centerpiece, pure pocket passer. He's not that. At least not at this stage in his career.

Hmm lets se Luck has the better oline, the better Wr corps, plays less top 10 defenses every year, Least year Indys defense was ranked 11th by yards per game, 19th by points so far far from horrendous.

Now as to pocket passing lets see
Lets see PFT rated WIlson a 12.2 in the pocket, Luck a 6.6 HMM

Wilson has a career 66.1% compl in the pocket Luck 60.3 HMM

Yet another myth put to rest. The bigger question is how would luck do if the had to face 8+ top 10 defense every year, with out WR and oline.

Let me help you

Russell Wilson Versus common opponents.

Completions: 126
Attempts: 216
Yards: 1577.00
Completion Rate: 58.33%
TD: 13
INT:5
Passer Rating: 91.53

Andrew Luck versus common opponents.

Completions: 180
Attempts: 324
Yards: 2097.00
Completion Rate: 55.55%
TD: 10
INT: 7
Passer Rating: 79.2

Yeah not so good for luck again.

Luck is good very good, but Wilson has been better with less.

by **Anthony** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:46 pm

burrrton wrote:
Hey, Eye Test- who's better from the pocket? Luck or Wilson?

Let us know if you need the stats. Again.

[edit- here you go- I'll save you the humiliation of having to ask for them. Again.]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... ll-wilson/

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... drew-luck/

LOL I am confused how can a QB with a top 10 wr corps, and top 10 pass blocking oline who only faces 3 top 10 defenses a season be worse from the pocket than a guy with the 24th ranked pass blocking oline, 25 ranked wr corps and who sees 6+ top ten defenses every season. HMm

by **burrrton** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 9:23 pm

Anthony wrote:LOL I am confused how can a QB with a top 10 wr corps, and top 10 pass blocking oline who only faces 3 top 10 defenses a season be worse from the pocket than a guy with the 24th ranked pass blocking oline, 25 ranked wr corps and who sees 6+ top ten defenses every season. HMm

Maybe his stats just need the Eye Test Fudge Factor™ built into them...

by **kalibane** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 5:24 am

As always Future, in your zeal to run down the Seahawks or one of their players you just step out on the ledge too far and lose your balance. There are perfectly good arguments to consider Luck better than Wilson... footwork and definitely arm strength are not part of those arguments.

I think that's what annoys me the most about you. You just throw stuff out there that you think sounds good instead of actually putting together a cogent well informed argument. It's an insult to people's intelligence for you to assume that they pay as little attention to the game as you seemingly do. Just once I'd like to see you come with an argument that isn't a clichéd made up narrative plucked from the cesspool of ProFootball Talk comment sections.

When you make comments like that about Wilson's arm strength compared to Luck's it shows me right then and there that you either haven't actually taken the time to compare them or you're intentionally fabricating stuff. When you're willing to start from an obvious fallacy and try to pass it off as a matter of fact statement there is no reason to even consider taking the rest of your argument seriously.

P.S. Have you ever taken a minute and thought about how many of the arguments that you come up with to knock the Seahawks or their players are based on "what if" scenarios? In other words there is no actual hard data to back up what you're saying because it's all based on an assumption that because, as you put it, player X isn't "asked" to do something it means they can't do it even when the data that does exist seems to suggest that they can. Forming a conclusion based on the absence of data is one of the most intellectually bereft places you can start an argument and yet you go back to that well over and over again.

You're right in that group of people who claimed Tom Brady was overrated before 2007 and Kobe Bryant was overrated before Shaq left.

by **RiverDog** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 9:32 am

kalibane wrote:As always Future, in your zeal to run down the Seahawks or one of their players you just step out on the ledge too far and lose your balance. There are perfectly good arguments to consider Luck better than Wilson... footwork and definitely arm strength are not part of those arguments.

I think that's what annoys me the most about you. You just throw stuff out there that you think sounds good instead of actually putting together a cogent well informed argument. It's an insult to people's intelligence for you to assume that they pay as little attention to the game as you seemingly do. Just once I'd like to see you come with an argument that isn't a clichéd made up narrative plucked from the cesspool of ProFootball Talk comment sections.

When you make comments like that about Wilson's arm strength compared to Luck's it shows me right then and there that you either haven't actually taken the time to compare them or you're intentionally fabricating stuff. When you're willing to start from an obvious fallacy and try to pass it off as a matter of fact statement there is no reason to even consider taking the rest of your argument seriously.

P.S. Have you ever taken a minute and thought about how many of the arguments that you come up with to knock the Seahawks or their players are based on "what if" scenarios? In other words there is no actual hard data to back up what you're saying because it's all based on an assumption that because, as you put it, player X isn't "asked" to do something it means they can't do it even when the data that does exist seems to suggest that they can. Forming a conclusion based on the absence of data is one of the most intellectually bereft places you can start an argument and yet you go back to that well over and over again.

You're right in that group of people who claimed Tom Brady was overrated before 2007 and Kobe Bryant was overrated before Shaq left.

The one and only rap on Luck coming out of college was that he couldn't throw the deep ball as well as some of the others, which I would imagine would imply a little bit of a weakness in arm strength. I'm not saying that Wilson is superior in that regard, but I don't know if there is any evidence to either prove or disprove which one has the better arm. It's a no never mind anyway as arm strength doesn't generally rank real high in the tool chest compared to other attributes like accuracy and a quick release.

As far as footwork goes, Future needs to articulate. I have not seen or heard anyone complain about Russell's footwork, to the contrary, most commentators have been very complimentary about Russell's form.

by **RiverDog** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 9:42 am

Hawktawk wrote:I'm not sure how that posted that way but Im the one who was watching the playoff games from last year.
And IMO Wilson was most responsible for the pick at the end of the game. As the QB he has to see that Butler is jumping the route and the play has disaster written all over it. His comments captured live afterwards showed that he did not know where Butler came from.Also the kid Butler has to have his due. He was a man possessed and made many huge plays any one of which would probably have won Seattle the game had he missed. He was New Englands MVP , not the overrated ultimate system robot who has been blessed with far and away the best coach of all time.I cant really believe a pussy like that has that much hardware, hes a bigger flopper than Manning.

Wilson played an amazing game, I watched it in its entirety.Really the story of the game for me is that Seattle's defense was reduced to a shell of itself by injuries, especially our safeties who had been out of their minds in the postseason.
Brady is a lucky man, along with Edelman, Amendola, Lafell, and even Gronk because they would have gotten killed running all that dink and dunk underneath stuff(see SB 48 as exhibit A) I really dont understand why Bevell took the ball out of Wilson's hands at all after the first quarter though. 80 yards in 29 seconds? Put to rest the thought that Wilson couldn't carry the team.

Its going to be a different offense this year with Graham, Mathews, and a healthy Richardson. PAY THE MAN

You don't remember the impassioned defense of Russell that Anthony mounted, that Russell was not in any way, shape or form responsible for that interception?

I'm not sure that I'd go as far as you did in laying the majority of the blame on Russell as there was a lot of blame to be spread around, but he damn sure has to be assigned a major portion.

by **Anthony** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:57 am

RiverDog wrote:
You don't remember the impassioned defense of Russell that Anthony mounted, that Russell was not in any way, shape or form responsible for that interception?

I'm not sure that I'd go as far as you did in laying the majority of the blame on Russell as there was a lot of blame to be spread around, but he damn sure has to be assigned a major portion.

Actually I never said no blame only he was low on the list of blame. To me that list goes

Bevel 50%
PC 20%
Kearse 15%
Lockette10%
Wilson 5%

The reason Wilson is low is it was a timing pattern, and he had no audible option given to him. The only thin he could have done there was throw it at Lockete instead of leading him. However Throwing it at him given it is Lockete runs the risk of it bouncing of him. I would be curious what he would have done if he had seen Butler. I am guessing throw it away or at someones feet.

by **kalibane** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:00 am

RiverDog wrote: I'm not saying that Wilson is superior in that regard, but I don't know if there is any evidence to either prove or disprove which one has the better arm. It's a no never mind anyway as arm strength doesn't generally rank real high in the tool chest compared to other attributes like accuracy and a quick release.

As far as footwork goes, Future needs to articulate. I have not seen or heard anyone complain about Russell's footwork, to the contrary, most commentators have been very complimentary about Russell's form.

And that's my point. Neither of them have a Stafford or Kaepernick level gun. Whatever difference there is between their respective arm strengths it is not enough to count as measurable advantage for one over the other. So effectively saying Luck is a better QB because has a better arm is just throwing out some buzzword football jargon that has no basis in fact.

by **Anthony** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:29 am

kalibane wrote:
And that's my point. Neither of them have a Stafford or Kaepernick level gun. Whatever difference there is between their respective arm strengths it is not enough to count as measurable advantage for one over the other. So effectively saying Luck is a better QB because has a better arm is just throwing out some buzzword football jargon that has no basis in fact.

I think this link settles the deep ball issue

http://regressing.deadspin.com/charts-w ... 1469917039

if you go to the 2nd chart is shows deep ball accuracy and guess who is #1
3rd chart is yards per attempt by QB on 20+ yard targets guess who is #2

In both cases Luck is way down the list, and while it doe snot really speak to the arm strength issue it does speak to a more important issue success in throwing long which is were arm strength matters most.

by **burrrton** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:38 am

I read that Deadspin article the other night- it's amazing how many bits of "conventional wisdom" it lays to rest.

by **NorthHawk** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:39 am

Arm strength is overrated as almost all QBs that are asked to start can make all the throws.
Look how well P. Manning does with a diminished arm.
It's all about timing, touch, and accuracy.
Many a QB with a gun haven't been successful, yet there have been others with lesser arms that have been pretty good.
It all rests between the QB's ears and not on arm strength.

by **c_hawkbob** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 12:06 pm

Drew Brees takes over the top spot (yards per attempt), thanks in no small part to the absurd downfield dominance of Jimmy Graham.

And now #2 on the list gets to benefit from that absurd downfield dominance ...

by **Hawktawk** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 12:43 pm

Anthony wrote:Actually I never said no blame only he was low on the list of blame. To me that list goes

Bevel 50%
PC 20%
Kearse 15%
Lockette10%
Wilson 5%

The reason Wilson is low is it was a timing pattern, and he had no audible option given to him. The only thin he could have done there was throw it at Lockete instead of leading him. However Throwing it at him given it is Lockete runs the risk of it bouncing of him. I would be curious what he would have done if he had seen Butler. I am guessing throw it away or at someones feet.

You hit the nail on the head when you said throw it at Lockett instead of leading him. It would have almost certainly have been pass interference.(the call could have been made anyway). Matter of fact Anthony you swerved into what I think Wilson's greatest weakness as a passer is at times and that is missing high and in front on slant routes. It led to a couple of picks vs GB. It can also get receivers killed if the safety is lurking. Bottom line you parse the last play a bit too much. Wilson has shouldered the blame for the throw as he should. Bevell did not call a very good game in general but watching it I saw lynch stopped on a hand off on 3rd and 1 at the NE 10 leading to a FG. I saw him stopped on 3rd and 2 on the first possession of the game with good field position. I'm sick to death of hearing all this "worst call ever". It was a very poorly executed play against a perfectly executed defense and it was still about 6 inches from a Superbowl win. It was a great effort by a badly wounded Seahawks team and I am even more proud than ever of this team after watching how they battled last season. I am so stoked for 2015. And yes I am convinced Wilson is one of if not the absolute best QB in the game today and should be payed accordingly.

by **kalibane** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 1:18 pm

Anthony,

The chart is nice but it doesn't really settle an arm strength argument. Arm strength is only partially reflected in what we tend to think of as deep balls, but as noted by someone else, timing, touch and accuracy are more important. We all know Russell has one of the best deep balls in the NFL.

I agree arm strength can be very much overrated, Akili Smith had one of the strongest arms I've seen in person and we see how well that went. But arm strength is really important for certain patterns, most notably deep outs and comebacks. If you don't have the arm to drive the ball on those patterns then there is a very good chance that the DB can recover in time to step in front, pick off the ball and house it.

At any rate Russell has plenty of arm strength to make any throw on the field even if he doesn't throw quite as hard as the Joe Flacco's of the world.

by **Anthony** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 1:23 pm

Hawktawk wrote:
You hit the nail on the head when you said throw it at Lockett instead of leading him. It would have almost certainly have been pass interference.(the call could have been made anyway). Matter of fact Anthony you swerved into what I think Wilson's greatest weakness as a passer is at times and that is missing high and in front on slant routes. It led to a couple of picks vs GB. It can also get receivers killed if the safety is lurking. Bottom line you parse the last play a bit too much. Wilson has shouldered the blame for the throw as he should. Bevell did not call a very good game in general but watching it I saw lynch stopped on a hand off on 3rd and 1 at the NE 10 leading to a FG. I saw him stopped on 3rd and 2 on the first possession of the game with good field position. I'm sick to death of hearing all this "worst call ever". It was a very poorly executed play against a perfectly executed defense and it was still about 6 inches from a Superbowl win. It was a great effort by a badly wounded Seahawks team and I am even more proud than ever of this team after watching how they battled last season. I am so stoked for 2015. And yes I am convinced Wilson is one of if not the absolute best QB in the game today and should be payed accordingly.

It was the worst play ever. First you did not run it because they were stacking the box for a run. That means everyone inside the tackles with in 3 yards of the Line of scrimmage. So instead you run a timing pattern into that same stacked box, with a guy who has 15 targets all season. Now if that play had been run to the outside and let Rw roll out yes that make sense. But running it into the teeth of the defense was stupid. As to the placement of the throw it is a timing route he is suppose to throw to a spot and the Wr is suppose to be there, He was not. Even if the throw was a little lower it would not have mattered as Lockette walked through the route and went fetal at the first feeling of contact. And of course Kearses half hearted attempt at the pick which he also went into half speed. If it was any other QB I would not blame him at all, but Rw is such an athletic specimen I suspect he could have adjusted which is why I gave him 5%. Also you have a defense give up a 10 point lead with 9 minutes to go. There is blame a plenty, a drop by Baldwin, drop by Kearse etc. Way to conservative in the first half etc.

by **kalibane** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 1:27 pm

Hawk, it was one of the worst calls ever. And it really only has a little to do with not running the ball, which they absolutely should have done if for no other reason to take time off the clock.

If they were going to pass they should have called a play that gave Wilson an option to run or throw it away instead of a one read quick throw to our worst receiver.

by **Anthony** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 1:47 pm

kalibane wrote:Hawk, it was one of the worst calls ever. And it really only has a little to do with not running the ball, which they absolutely should have done if for no other reason to take time off the clock.

If they were going to pass they should have called a play that gave Wilson an option to run or throw it away instead of a one read quick throw to our worst receiver.

Exactly and worse he was not allowed to audible out of it. You took the most dangeruss QB in the league and relegated him to a timing patter to our worst Wr into the teeth of the defense. What would have been wrong with running the play the other way to the outside or running read option and also having the TE on that side leak out into the flat to give RW another option. Horrible call because of Wr involved and direction of the play.

by **RiverDog** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 2:30 pm

kalibane wrote:And that's my point. Neither of them have a Stafford or Kaepernick level gun. Whatever difference there is between their respective arm strengths it is not enough to count as measurable advantage for one over the other. So effectively saying Luck is a better QB because has a better arm is just throwing out some buzzword football jargon that has no basis in fact.

Agreed. Jay Cutler has perhaps the best arm strength of any active player yet he's not even in the discussion when it comes to a top 10 ranking of active quarterbacks. As a matter of fact, one might make an argument that off the charts arm strength is a negative as it could give a quarterback a false sense of security that he can throw the ball anywhere and complete it by virtue of his elephant gun arm. I often times thought that Bret Favre's arm strength did him more harm than it did good.

Outside of being a rival fan, I can't understand what it is that Future has against Wilson's ability. Even the most unbiased analysts will tell you that outside of his height, RW has one of the best sets of quarterbacking skills in the game. I can understand not ranking him within the top 5 by using the argument that he hasn't proven the ability to 'carry' a team in the same manner as a Rodgers or Manning has, but I don't see where he's coming from when he raps his basic quarterbacking skills.

by **RiverDog** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 2:41 pm

Anthony wrote:Actually I never said no blame only he was low on the list of blame. To me that list goes

Bevel 50%
PC 20%
Kearse 15%
Lockette10%
Wilson 5%

The reason Wilson is low is it was a timing pattern, and he had no audible option given to him. The only thin he could have done there was throw it at Lockete instead of leading him. However Throwing it at him given it is Lockete runs the risk of it bouncing of him. I would be curious what he would have done if he had seen Butler. I am guessing throw it away or at someones feet.

Actually I'm certain that you did. It was zero, nothing, nada. I remember the debate very well.

But if all you are going to do is assign 5% of the blame to him, you might as well say that he was completely blameless as I'm not sure if there was ever a pass thrown that I'd assign that low of a percentage to the quarterback. It's either a lot, none, or shared a lot more equally than how you've broken it down.

If I remember right, Lynch had flared to the right and was uncovered, would have made a great check down had Russell decided not to throw it. He also could have pulled it down and scrambled, thrown it away if he got into trouble, and he had a timeout in his pocket if he or someone else was tackled in bounds. Especially being a quarterback with his ability to create a masterpiece out of a busted play, he could have made something happen.

HawkShack.com

Who is online