People Outside Seattle Just Do Not Understand Russell Wilson

[HawKnPeppa]

I understand being annoyed with how much media coverage he gets, but people on here WAY overstate Andrew Luck's turnover "problems". He has a 2.7 INT %, which isn't amazing, but it's hardly terrible either. It's identical to Peyton Manning's and better than Philip Rivers'. Any QB who had the Colts pathetic running game would be forced to throw the ball a lot more, which is going to lead to more INTs.

I too disagree with those who think Luck is better than Wilson, but saying that Luck isn't a great QB is just as ridiculous (if not moreso). Both teams are extremely fortunate to have the guy they have.

I agree. If placed in the same situation Luck and Wilson are with their OL (most pressures per drop back), I'd guess the majority of the STARTING QB's in the league would stink it up royally. RW and Andreeeeeew are a couple of savvy dudes.

 

[Anthony!]

I understand being annoyed with how much media coverage he gets, but people on here WAY overstate Andrew Luck's turnover "problems". He has a 2.7 INT %, which isn't amazing, but it's hardly terrible either. It's identical to Peyton Manning's and better than Philip Rivers'. Any QB who had the Colts pathetic running game would be forced to throw the ball a lot more, which is going to lead to more INTs.

I too disagree with those who think Luck is better than Wilson, but saying that Luck isn't a great QB is just as ridiculous (if not moreso). Both teams are extremely fortunate to have the guy they have.

Problem is Turnover and INT are not the same thing. Turnover include lost fumbles of which Luck has 6, so his TO % is much higher not the least of which includes the highest % of pick 6s in the NFL. In fact Luck leads the league in TOs. Also to put more on it, despite a better oline and better WRs Luck has a total to date of 22 turnovers, Wilson to date 6. That means 1.8 td/to ratio for Luck. Wilson has a 4.3 td/to ratio. So yeah its a big deal

 

[pehawk]

I think Luck is Marino, and in my opinion that's a dig, but if you look up the Top 5 fumblers all time, you'd see an impressive list.

 

[netskier]

I wonder if fantasy football is a social psych experiment pitting narcissism against tribalism. I wonder which will win. Probably depends on the winnings and schedule of reinforcement.

 

[VivaEfrenHerrera]

I think Luck is Marino, and in my opinion that's a dig, but if you look up the Top 5 fumblers all time, you'd see an impressive list.

Hehe, wow. If calling a QB a "Marino" is an insult, I'd sure hate to see you when you're angry!

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

I think Luck is Marino, and in my opinion that's a dig, but if you look up the Top 5 fumblers all time, you'd see an impressive list.

Hehe, wow. If calling a QB a "Marino" is an insult, I'd sure hate to see you when you're angry!

Does this include his work in Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, or not?

 

[Sports Hernia]

It may take the Hawks winning 3 Lombardis in a short period of time for some of the national a$$clowns to realize how good Russ really is.

 

[-The Glove-]

Ask any player that's played across from RW and any coach/DC what they think about RW. He gives them fits and thats all that matters

 

[Scottemojo]

I think Luck is Marino, and in my opinion that's a dig, but if you look up the Top 5 fumblers all time, you'd see an impressive list.

Hehe, wow. If calling a QB a "Marino" is an insult, I'd sure hate to see you when you're angry!

Does this include his work in Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, or not?

Sailor, let me ass you a question.

I just wonder how northwesterners, specifically the ones inside Seattle city limits, are gifted with an understanding of Russell that others lack? Seeing as team headquarters are outside Seattle, if they moved west a few miles would Russell post Aaron Rodgers type numbers?

I kid.

I play FF, but I have a detachment from it. I set lineups on Thursday, pretty much avoid it until Tuesday. Over the years I have built ties to a few leagues, and I might have the same guy in one league my opponent has in another, so being interested in who gets yards and points is kind of pointless.

But I can see how a more casual fan would lack understanding.

But Russell Wilson not being voted to the pro bowl? Who cares? It is fan voting, and fans are tribal idiots. Jacksonville won't have pro bowlers unless they are really damn good, and Dallas will have a long snapper at starting center every year. The process is stupid, the game is stupid.

Have the players list the top 3 in each conference and be done with it. And Russ still might not get voted in.

 

[kearly]

Old man by the Sea.

This is one of those things where I know there is no chance I change your mind. So I'll just express my experience.

My experience has been very different. I started listening to FF podcasts this year not because I cared about FF, but because it was infinitely more intellectually stimulating than ESPN / Fox Sports talk radio. There is a lot of talent evaluation and discussion about up and coming players. It also covers the whole league, whereas talk radio is generally limited to the local team and is dominated by anti-intellectuals who live by a belief system, cliches, and convenient truths.

My brother used to play FF in the old days too, he doesn't miss it though. Back then, very few people knew what they were doing and half-knowledgeable players like him dominated. Now he's just happy if he makes the playoffs. They have made it easier in recent years, but that's good, because it makes the leagues more competitive.

I definitely know some FF fans that fit your stereotype. But I also know quite a many who are highly intellectual. Considering how rare intellectualism and critical thinking are in sports, the fact that FF attracts these kinds of thinkers is one of the things I like the most about it. That has been my experience.

As far as fans are concerned, we've seen the Seahawks fanbase explode the last few years. Is the fickle bandwagon fan really any better than the guy who was drawn in by a mini-game? I feel uncomfortable playing the good fans vs. bad fans card. We all had our reasons for being fans. Mine were football based, but I don't see the point in judging others who arrived at fandom differently. As long as they show up to the game and cheer their asses off, it's all the same to me. Let's not over-romanticize fandom.

I am shocked to see some very smart posters in this thread (and Sherman) scapegoating FF. I think it should be incredibly obvious that the explosion in offense the last few years is directly related to rules that give the appearance of protecting players from injuries and concussions.

And regarding Wilson's pro-bowl snub, if it was based on fantasy numbers he'd be the #3 QB selected. I think a more meaningful reason for the snub might be that a solid majority of NFL coaches think Wilson is an average QB (a study proving this was posted on the main forum earlier this year). But of course, it's not voted on by the coaches either, it's voted on by fans, most of whom do not know as much about the Seahawks as they think they do. The quote you link to in the OP is the classic example of this. An idiot fan who thinks he's a genius, someone who thinks he knows more about Wilson than others, not less.

I think Scotte's commentary on 'tribalist idiots' nails it. They are the ones who are not giving Wilson his due. It has nothing to due with fantasy football, and everything to do with most fans being idiots. Wilson is exactly the kind of new-era QB that laggards hate.

I agree with Sarlacc, the "FF is ruining the game" scapegoat feels lazy to me. It is looking for something to blame for those who personally do not like FF. Disliking something naturally makes specious connections easy to make.

Also, it's really hard for me to buy into the "ruining the game" part when the NFL has never been a better product than it's been the last five years. All in spite of Goodell's gross incompetence and dishonesty.

Don't get me wrong, it's okay if people hate FF. I hate country music and anchovies. We all have things we don't like. I'm not here to tell anyone that FF is for everyone or good for the game. But having read through this thread, let me just say that there are posters I will bend over backwards to agree with, and yet I find little of the anti-FF cause-and-effect to hold water.

 

[kearly]

Problem is Turnover and INT are not the same thing. Turnover include lost fumbles of which Luck has 6, so his TO % is much higher not the least of which includes the highest % of pick 6s in the NFL. In fact Luck leads the league in TOs. Also to put more on it, despite a better oline and better WRs Luck has a total to date of 22 turnovers, Wilson to date 6. That means 1.8 td/to ratio for Luck. Wilson has a 4.3 td/to ratio. So yeah its a big deal

To be fair, Wilson has fumbled 9 times, basically the same rate as his first two seasons. He's just had INSANE fumble luck this year (zero fumbles lost). Fumble luck is totally random.

That said, I agree that Wilson generally protects the football as well as anyone. The fact that Wilson has not led the NFL in fumbles despite all the rushing attempts is an impressive achievement.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

Regarding other fans and their lack of Seahawks understanding, I find it funny when they think we all just blindly worship the players and coaches, etc., as if our attitudes and ideas were never informed by a process of evaluation.

If Pete is the devil in the midwest, imagine what he was in Seattle where his Trojans kicked the crap out of the Huskies year after year. Talk about an uphill battle to win over the local fans! And we've had plenty of threads about how and when Russell Wilson won us over and convinced us he was the guy.

This sentiment has been mentioned in this thread, but bears repeating: for every one person interested in critical thinking and challenging conventional thought, there are a hundred sheeple waiting to be barked at by a herding dog.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Fantasy Football is like min/maxing in a tabletop roleplaying game. It's a minigame unto itself that doesn't actually relate to the parent game except in peripheral ways that attract mostly entirely different subsets of fans. In ways it's good because it does expand the fanbase in a easy and shallow way but in ways it's bad because it concentrates on things that have absolutely no value in the real game.

In a roleplaying game it's awesome that you can put out the most damage per round but in doing so it's pointless because the game isn't a white room theoretical scenerio instead it's a communal team effort of playing a character in a living breathing world so all you've done is limit yourself to being a one trick pony for a trick that will rarely present itself.

Fantasy Football is very similar it's all about the numbers without any context by that I mean it's great Andrew Luck has 38 touchdowns or whatever but it ignores the fact that Indianapolis can't run the ball or has a bad defense. It never gives you the why behind those numbers so there is no context or meaning to it in the end.

 

[Popeyejones]

People Outside Seattle Just Do Not Understand Russell Wilson

By "people" I guess you mean "Scott from Minnesota", who John Clayton responded to by telling Scott from Minnesota that he's an idiot?

:lol: victim complex.

 

[Popeyejones]

To be fair, Wilson has fumbled 9 times, basically the same rate as his first two seasons. He's just had INSANE fumble luck this year (zero fumbles lost). Fumble luck is totally random.

That said, I agree that Wilson generally protects the football as well as anyone. The fact that Wilson has not led the NFL in fumbles despite all the rushing attempts is an impressive achievement.

Agreed on both of these points. On the second one though (which I still think is valid), this is predicated on Wilson's fumbles coming past the LOS, which I don't think has happened at all.

The way to look at it is QB fumbles behind the LOS divided by dropbacks that didn't pass the LOS. Given how few dropbacks Wilson has (least in the NFL per plays played, IIRC), the stats I would guess point to him having a fumbling "probem." I put problem in scare quotes though because we all know what is going on: Wilson runs around behind the LOS more than anybody, it's a HUGE part of a his game and his success, and as a result he fumbles more. If we could somehow get the stats for fumbles divided by seconds spent in passing plays behind the LOS, I doubt he'd stand out at all. This is also probably non-linear (i.e. after second 1 (snap exchange) and before second 3 fumbles/second are probably really, really low, and then increase from there. The basic point being to all of this that "solving" Wilson's fumble "problem" is entirely missing the point of what makes him so successful to begin with.

 

[The Outfield]

Funny thing is, Wilson has actually been a stud in fantasy football this year. He currently ranks 3rd among QBs, and he actually has an outside shot at #1 if Luck and Rodgers fall flat again in week 17.

Wilson also put up 36+ points in week 16 which is the championship round for most leagues. To put that in perspective, 20 points is considered to be a good outing, like 100 yards for a RB/WR or 300 yards for a passer. In the game that matters the most for fantasy football, he had nearly double that amount.

Wilson is currently better in fantasy football than the consensus #1 drafted QB in August, Peyton Manning.

The antipathy for Wilson definitely isn't coming from fantasy football people. It comes from incurable laggards, who almost 100% of the time also happen to be huge morons in general. It also comes from ESPN analysts who are stuck in the 90's and oughts, and think that a QB is measured by how many 300 yard games he puts up, but not by how much he produces per snap.

Also, there are some others who know damn well that's he's good, but come up with fake reasons to hate him. This is true for 'cheat Carroll' and 'Dick Sherman' as well.

Kearly, you are so informative. I have practically zero knowledge of Fantasy Football, so I like how you put things into perspective. I think it would be easy to assume most people here know those things.

 

[Anthony!]

Old man by the Sea.

This is one of those things where I know there is no chance I change your mind. So I'll just express my experience.

My experience has been very different. I started listening to FF podcasts this year not because I cared about FF, but because it was infinitely more intellectually stimulating than ESPN / Fox Sports talk radio. There is a lot of talent evaluation and discussion about up and coming players. It also covers the whole league, whereas talk radio is generally limited to the local team and is dominated by anti-intellectuals who live by a belief system, cliches, and convenient truths.

My brother used to play FF in the old days too, he doesn't miss it though. Back then, very few people knew what they were doing and half-knowledgeable players like him dominated. Now he's just happy if he makes the playoffs. They have made it easier in recent years, but that's good, because it makes the leagues more competitive.

I definitely know some FF fans that fit your stereotype. But I also know quite a many who are highly intellectual. Considering how rare intellectualism and critical thinking are in sports, the fact that FF attracts these kinds of thinkers is one of the things I like the most about it. That has been my experience.

As far as fans are concerned, we've seen the Seahawks fanbase explode the last few years. Is the fickle bandwagon fan really any better than the guy who was drawn in by a mini-game? I feel uncomfortable playing the good fans vs. bad fans card. We all had our reasons for being fans. Mine were football based, but I don't see the point in judging others who arrived at fandom differently. As long as they show up to the game and cheer their asses off, it's all the same to me. Let's not over-romanticize fandom.

I am shocked to see some very smart posters in this thread (and Sherman) scapegoating FF. I think it should be incredibly obvious that the explosion in offense the last few years is directly related to rules that give the appearance of protecting players from injuries and concussions.

And regarding Wilson's pro-bowl snub, if it was based on fantasy numbers he'd be the #3 QB selected. I think a more meaningful reason for the snub might be that a solid majority of NFL coaches think Wilson is an average QB (a study proving this was posted on the main forum earlier this year). But of course, it's not voted on by the coaches either, it's voted on by fans, most of whom do not know as much about the Seahawks as they think they do. The quote you link to in the OP is the classic example of this. An idiot fan who thinks he's a genius, someone who thinks he knows more about Wilson than others, not less.

I think Scotte's commentary on 'tribalist idiots' nails it. They are the ones who are not giving Wilson his due. It has nothing to due with fantasy football, and everything to do with most fans being idiots. Wilson is exactly the kind of new-era QB that laggards hate.

I agree with Sarlacc, the "FF is ruining the game" scapegoat feels lazy to me. It is looking for something to blame for those who personally do not like FF. Disliking something naturally makes specious connections easy to make.

Also, it's really hard for me to buy into the "ruining the game" part when the NFL has never been a better product than it's been the last five years. All in spite of Goodell's gross incompetence and dishonesty.

Don't get me wrong, it's okay if people hate FF. I hate country music and anchovies. We all have things we don't like. I'm not here to tell anyone that FF is for everyone or good for the game. But having read through this thread, let me just say that there are posters I will bend over backwards to agree with, and yet I find little of the anti-FF cause-and-effect to hold water.

True but another study after that showed most coaches and GMS said Wilson was a #1 draft pick now. So that thought process of Wilson being Avg has changed as well. However if it took almost 2 years for the coaches and GM to change you know fans will take longer.

 

[Anthony!]

To be fair, Wilson has fumbled 9 times, basically the same rate as his first two seasons. He's just had INSANE fumble luck this year (zero fumbles lost). Fumble luck is totally random.

That said, I agree that Wilson generally protects the football as well as anyone. The fact that Wilson has not led the NFL in fumbles despite all the rushing attempts is an impressive achievement.

Agreed on both of these points. On the second one though (which I still think is valid), this is predicated on Wilson's fumbles coming past the LOS, which I don't think has happened at all.

The way to look at it is QB fumbles behind the LOS divided by dropbacks that didn't pass the LOS. Given how few dropbacks Wilson has (least in the NFL per plays played, IIRC), the stats I would guess point to him having a fumbling "probem." I put problem in scare quotes though because we all know what is going on: Wilson runs around behind the LOS more than anybody, it's a HUGE part of a his game and his success, and as a result he fumbles more. If we could somehow get the stats for fumbles divided by seconds spent in passing plays behind the LOS, I doubt he'd stand out at all. This is also probably non-linear (i.e. after second 1 (snap exchange) and before second 3 fumbles/second are probably really, really low, and then increase from there. The basic point being to all of this that "solving" Wilson's fumble "problem" is entirely missing the point of what makes him so successful to begin with.

Fumble Luck or not, Luck has way more turnovers than Wilson or for that matter any QB.

 

[DohBoy]

...of the PNW and Alaska just do not understand Russell Wilson.

I mean, ~75% of the fanbase doesn't actually live in Seattle-proper.

Additionally, who gives a rat's ass what the rest of NFL fans think of Wilson? These are the same sort of people that think PPG and ERA are paramount metrics. The longer they prefer "great man theory" over team completeness, the longer we have an advantage...

 

[hgwellz12]

Great thread! Both teams played hard!