Article: Each team's most overrated and underrated player

[TwistedHusky]

I would flip those last 2.

 

[TatupuIsRRRR]

Overrate: don't care
Underrate: don't care
Big ass kicker: Kam break you in your heart
Big ass kicker: Bennett kill you in sleep and laugh HAHAHA
Big ass kicker: Avril very very bad man
Big ass kicker: Thomas cover everything everywhere
Big ass kicker: Wagner baddest ninja turtle
Big ass kicker: Wright make all the plays
Big ass kicker: Sherman got ball skills all day

 

[two dog]

"Overrated" is a term that is simply not quantifiable in any meaningful way.
It's based on subjective perception as well as bias and pre-judgment.
Which ratings influence your view of "over" or "under"?
Is it the opinion of friends, opinions expressed on this board or the opinions
of the football press? If so, which writers? Or is it the evidence of your own eyes
that leads you to the "overrated" or "underrated" labels?... Compared to what?

If we all had exactly the same input it would be a lot easier to figure.

However, Cliff Avril is indeed a VERY bad man and has been massively underrated for
a very long time. That is my ultra-subjective view. (Compared to everything).

 

[NINEster]

The scout is spot on regarding Clark. With Wilson, he just comes across as an old-school scout who is still burt-hurt that Wilson made his UDFA grade on him look stupid. There are valid criticisms of Wilson, but the critique whiffs on all of them in favor of nonsense like field position and system. Tom Brady has never won a SB without having a top shelf defense behind him. Does that mean he isn't elite either? Ridiculous reasoning. I honestly love it when a player proves me wrong, but it seems most NFL scouts, especially from the old-school ranks, cannot say the same.
/quote]

You can't equate any of the defenses Brady had to the one Wilson has/had.

Top scoring defense 4 years in a row? Don't think that's ever been done.

Nowhere near on the same level. The 2001 defense that beat the Rams was very good but it was Belichick scheme that won that game.

And don't forget that Brady wasn't considered "Brady" back then either. It took a few more years.

Wilson gets the "overrated" label because he's being discussed as top 5 these days when he hasn't earned it.

 

[mrt144]

The scout is spot on regarding Clark. With Wilson, he just comes across as an old-school scout who is still burt-hurt that Wilson made his UDFA grade on him look stupid. There are valid criticisms of Wilson, but the critique whiffs on all of them in favor of nonsense like field position and system. Tom Brady has never won a SB without having a top shelf defense behind him. Does that mean he isn't elite either? Ridiculous reasoning. I honestly love it when a player proves me wrong, but it seems most NFL scouts, especially from the old-school ranks, cannot say the same.
/quote]

You can't equate any of the defenses Brady had to the one Wilson has/had.

Top scoring defense 4 years in a row? Don't think that's ever been done.

Nowhere near on the same level. The 2001 defense that beat the Rams was very good but it was Belichick scheme that won that game.

And don't forget that Brady wasn't considered "Brady" back then either. It took a few more years.

Wilson gets the "overrated" label because he's being discussed as top 5 these days when he hasn't earned it.

Literally he'd have to be 3 deep in SBs to have earned it at this point - that'd be insane. Or be peak level Brady or PeyPey on the worst defensive team in the league and constantly be undermined by them in hilarious ways. losing 56-64 kinda stuff.

He's the best QB who will be in the league at the end of 5 years bar injury. Rodgers might play to 37 but I don't know if he'll be Rodgers at 35 or 36.

 

[Rob12]

Kam is overrated until he can show everyone that he has truly returned to his Enforcer status. He looked bad last year and was hurt for a lot of camp this year. When he got on the field, Ezekiel Eliot trucked him at least once, and possibly twice.

I hate to say it, but he doesn't look like the same player to me. Hoping like hell that he proves me wrong. But I think he's a lot more prone to making business decisions on the field now, which I really won't fault him for. But I'm not sure how much fear the opposition will have for him after watching his film from last season.

 

[NINEster]

The scout is spot on regarding Clark. With Wilson, he just comes across as an old-school scout who is still burt-hurt that Wilson made his UDFA grade on him look stupid. There are valid criticisms of Wilson, but the critique whiffs on all of them in favor of nonsense like field position and system. Tom Brady has never won a SB without having a top shelf defense behind him. Does that mean he isn't elite either? Ridiculous reasoning. I honestly love it when a player proves me wrong, but it seems most NFL scouts, especially from the old-school ranks, cannot say the same.
/quote]

You can't equate any of the defenses Brady had to the one Wilson has/had.

Top scoring defense 4 years in a row? Don't think that's ever been done.

Nowhere near on the same level. The 2001 defense that beat the Rams was very good but it was Belichick scheme that won that game.

And don't forget that Brady wasn't considered "Brady" back then either. It took a few more years.

Wilson gets the "overrated" label because he's being discussed as top 5 these days when he hasn't earned it.

Literally he'd have to be 3 deep in SBs to have earned it at this point - that'd be insane. Or be peak level Brady or PeyPey on the worst defensive team in the league and constantly be undermined by them in hilarious ways. losing 56-64 kinda stuff.

He's the best QB who will be in the league at the end of 5 years bar injury. Rodgers might play to 37 but I don't know if he'll be Rodgers at 35 or 36.

A lot of spoiled talk here.

You have to think about this very carefully.

Seahawk fans see their team as being treated as irrelevant, but in many ways that should be a good thing.

All of the "elite" QBs play for the very polarizing teams.....Packers, Saints, Steelers, Giants, PATRIOTS. To give credit to Brady as maybe being the best QB right now (or of all time) is an awfully hard thing for people to do given their instinct to begrudgingly give credit to teams/players they hate. And they do it anyways because of the results he turns in consistently year in and year out in the playoffs with a great D or not.

A lot of people hate Roethlisberger for his off field activities, Steeler hatred.....yet as of late he's proven to be a great QB. Even the SB against AZ he was really good -- and people around the league acknowledged he sucked in SB 40.

The Seahawks prior to Carroll were rather irrelevant on the polarizing eye....maybe limited to the NFC/AFC West at best.

To "DENY" Russell Wilson his "proper due" means people are looking at it rather objectively, without an incentive to hate the Seahawks. I talk to a lot of NFL fans.....the Wilson hatred is rather limited to the NFC West, maybe the 49ers the most. There are fans of course throughout the league that hate him too but not a whole lot.

If Wilson was on a stacked Steelers or Ravens team with their D being prominent? Forget about it, he would be seen as Trent Dilfer 2.0.

I also bet if Wilson played on the stacked Harbaugh Niner team, he would be viewed as worse than he is with the Hawks.

 

[Ozzy]

The scout is spot on regarding Clark. With Wilson, he just comes across as an old-school scout who is still burt-hurt that Wilson made his UDFA grade on him look stupid. There are valid criticisms of Wilson, but the critique whiffs on all of them in favor of nonsense like field position and system. Tom Brady has never won a SB without having a top shelf defense behind him. Does that mean he isn't elite either? Ridiculous reasoning. I honestly love it when a player proves me wrong, but it seems most NFL scouts, especially from the old-school ranks, cannot say the same.
/quote]

You can't equate any of the defenses Brady had to the one Wilson has/had.

Top scoring defense 4 years in a row? Don't think that's ever been done.

Nowhere near on the same level. The 2001 defense that beat the Rams was very good but it was Belichick scheme that won that game.

And don't forget that Brady wasn't considered "Brady" back then either. It took a few more years.

Wilson gets the "overrated" label because he's being discussed as top 5 these days when he hasn't earned it.

How has Wilson not earned a top 5 ranking? Actually nevermind, I'm not changing your mind as a Niner fan and not looking for a long debate where you ignore every statistical argument that gets brought up. I've been here before. I consider myself pretty objective when it comes to evaluating Seahawks because it really doesn't matter to me but you're wrong here.

 

[Laloosh]

How has Wilson not earned a top 5 ranking? Actually nevermind, I'm not changing your mind as a Niner fan and not looking for a long debate where you ignore every statistical argument that gets brought up. I've been here before. I consider myself pretty objective when it comes to evaluating Seahawks because it really doesn't matter to me but you're wrong here.

:3-1:

 

[Seymour]

Overrated: Simon (thanks Sherm)
Underrated: Lockett

 

[dogorama]

The scout is spot on regarding Clark. With Wilson, he just comes across as an old-school scout who is still burt-hurt that Wilson made his UDFA grade on him look stupid. There are valid criticisms of Wilson, but the critique whiffs on all of them in favor of nonsense like field position and system. Tom Brady has never won a SB without having a top shelf defense behind him. Does that mean he isn't elite either? Ridiculous reasoning. I honestly love it when a player proves me wrong, but it seems most NFL scouts, especially from the old-school ranks, cannot say the same.
/quote]

You can't equate any of the defenses Brady had to the one Wilson has/had.

Top scoring defense 4 years in a row? Don't think that's ever been done.

Nowhere near on the same level. The 2001 defense that beat the Rams was very good but it was Belichick scheme that won that game.

And don't forget that Brady wasn't considered "Brady" back then either. It took a few more years.

Wilson gets the "overrated" label because he's being discussed as top 5 these days when he hasn't earned it.

Literally he'd have to be 3 deep in SBs to have earned it at this point - that'd be insane. Or be peak level Brady or PeyPey on the worst defensive team in the league and constantly be undermined by them in hilarious ways. losing 56-64 kinda stuff.

He's the best QB who will be in the league at the end of 5 years bar injury. Rodgers might play to 37 but I don't know if he'll be Rodgers at 35 or 36.

A lot of spoiled talk here.

You have to think about this very carefully.

Seahawk fans see their team as being treated as irrelevant, but in many ways that should be a good thing.

All of the "elite" QBs play for the very polarizing teams.....Packers, Saints, Steelers, Giants, PATRIOTS. To give credit to Brady as maybe being the best QB right now (or of all time) is an awfully hard thing for people to do given their instinct to begrudgingly give credit to teams/players they hate. And they do it anyways because of the results he turns in consistently year in and year out in the playoffs with a great D or not.

A lot of people hate Roethlisberger for his off field activities, Steeler hatred.....yet as of late he's proven to be a great QB. Even the SB against AZ he was really good -- and people around the league acknowledged he sucked in SB 40.

The Seahawks prior to Carroll were rather irrelevant on the polarizing eye....maybe limited to the NFC/AFC West at best.

To "DENY" Russell Wilson his "proper due" means people are looking at it rather objectively, without an incentive to hate the Seahawks. I talk to a lot of NFL fans.....the Wilson hatred is rather limited to the NFC West, maybe the 49ers the most. There are fans of course throughout the league that hate him too but not a whole lot.

If Wilson was on a stacked Steelers or Ravens team with their D being prominent? Forget about it, he would be seen as Trent Dilfer 2.0.

I also bet if Wilson played on the stacked Harbaugh Niner team, he would be viewed as worse than he is with the Hawks.

Dilfer 2.0? Niner fan + objectivity = fallacy, the two are mutually exclusive terms. Just because a team has become irrelevant and no longer has a horse in the race, doesn't necessarily lend itself to impartiality and in fact in this case, just the opposite.