Russell Wilson is Elite | I'm Putting the Nail in the Coffin

[Fade]

I'll just leave this here... Weird... those other guys on these lists must really suck. Go Russ! Go Seahawks! ALL IN.


[tweet]https://twitter.com/Pat_Thorman/status/1068159414702669828[/tweet]

Adding on to that Wilson is the the highest rated passer in the 4th qtr all-time.

The other names All-Time are Rodgers, Romo, Young, & Brady. Elite.

And yet we all agree that passer rating is a flawed stat, and the detractors will point out that we wouldn't need 4th-quarter heroics if we had more production in the first three.

This stuff just goes all around in circles.

For example: Wilson hits a wide-open Lockett to get to the 10 at the end of the Carolina game. Fantastic. Sets up the game-winning field goal. However, no one can say that it wasn't under-thrown, because it was, and that if thrown properly it was a sure touchdown. Passer rating doesn't care it was under-thrown - it was a long completion.

The people who think Wilson is elite care about the completion and the following victory. The people who don't think he's elite will focus on the under-throw and the missed opportunity - even if that opportunity would have given Cam Newton a minute plus change to have another go at our defense and potentially send the game into OT.

This wasn't even the first time in that game that an open receiver was under-thrown (and completed!), and in fact it's a regular aspect of Wilson's game this year. It'll be interesting to see if a smarter corner like Richard Sherman clues into it and anticipates an under-throw on deep passes. That could then be exploited if Wilson can throw it longer, but I digress.

So yes, Wilson has flaws, and one side will use that to prove non-elite, while the other will use the results to prove elite. Which side is right depends on the side you already lean to, and this thread nor any other will change that.

All QBs are flawed when you put them under the microscope. The people that say Russ isn't elite haven't done their homework on the other guys.

At the end of the day Wilson's production is tier 1, right along side them. Elite.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SNFonNBC/status/1068181861401325569[/tweet]
That's a body.

 

[Palmegranite]

I'm not satisfied with the #2 spot. C'mon Russell, step up your game! I'm serious...

 

[Seymour]

That kiwi post is pathetic IMO.

Passer rating doesn't care if it's underthrown?? Well duh, it also doesn't care if an int bounces off the receivers hands!! :roll:

If you are throwing a game changing ball to an open receiver, you lean toward the underthrown ball because an overthrown ball is incomplete 100 out of 100 times, an underthrown ball gives the receiver his best shot (2nd to relying on 100% perfect thrown ball). This type of value reduction to our QB by "so called fans" is ridiculous.

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]

That kiwi post is pathetic IMO.

Passer rating doesn't care if it's underthrown?? Well duh, it also doesn't care if an int bounces off the receivers hands!! :roll:

If you are throwing a game changing ball to an open receiver, you lean toward the underthrown ball because an overthrown ball is incomplete 100 out of 100 times, an underthrown ball gives the receiver his best shot (2nd to relying on 100% perfect thrown ball). This type of value reduction to our QB by "so called fans" is ridiculous.

Or it could be that he put the ball in the one spot the defender didn't have ANY play they could make on it.

 

[KiwiHawk]

All QBs are flawed when you put them under the microscope. The people that say Russ isn't elite haven't done their homework on the other guys.

At the end of the day Wilson's production is tier 1, right along side them. Elite.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SNFonNBC/status/1068181861401325569[/tweet]
That's a body.

But once again you are using the QB rating stat which is pretty much universally considered to be a poor stat because it artificially rewards longer pass attempts, doesn't consider sacks, fails to account for QB rushing yards, and blah blah blah etc. ad infinitem. Again as an example the pass to Lockett which was a long pass that helps out the averages-over-12.5-yards-per-pass aspect of the rating while ignoring the under-throw.

Our offense is built around a running game that brings in the safeties and creates opportunities over the top of the defense. That lends itself amazingly well to QB rating, because the average pass is longer than the NFL's average pass, particularly among dink-and-dunk style offenses.

Pete Carroll is vehement about turnover ratio, so Wilson is schooled to avoid interceptions, which is often the cause of throwing late, which in turn can mean throwing short. However, it's fantastic for the TD/INT ratio, so it QB rating loves it.

Waiting until a receiver is wide open also assists with completion percentage. Again, QB rating loves it.

So we have a unique situation that is practically tailor-made for success in QB rating. Big surprise that Wilson excels there.

However, waiting for a receiver to be wide open can lead to unnecessary sacks, throwaways, intentional grounding, desperate rushing that nets a yard, etc. All things that can kill drives, but which QB rating doesn't care about provided your completion rate is above 77% (for a perfect QB rating score).

Let me be clear - I am not adopting a horse in this race. I am merely saying that thumping QB rating again isn't going to convince anyone because it's not really a very good stat.

 

[Fade]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/FTFonFS1/status/1068111100225429504[/tweet]

Finding his way into the MVP discussion.

I think Brees will end up winning.

Things might get interesting if Mahomes has an off night, and Wilson lights it up in Week 16, but the Saints need to some how fall off incredibly for Wilson to get the MVP.

but cool to see Wilson entering the discussion none the less.

 

[Fade]

All QBs are flawed when you put them under the microscope. The people that say Russ isn't elite haven't done their homework on the other guys.

At the end of the day Wilson's production is tier 1, right along side them. Elite.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SNFonNBC/status/1068181861401325569[/tweet]
That's a body.

But once again you are using the QB rating stat which is pretty much universally considered to be a poor stat because it artificially rewards longer pass attempts, doesn't consider sacks, fails to account for QB rushing yards, and blah blah blah etc. ad infinitem. Again as an example the pass to Lockett which was a long pass that helps out the averages-over-12.5-yards-per-pass aspect of the rating while ignoring the under-throw.

Our offense is built around a running game that brings in the safeties and creates opportunities over the top of the defense. That lends itself amazingly well to QB rating, because the average pass is longer than the NFL's average pass, particularly among dink-and-dunk style offenses.

Pete Carroll is vehement about turnover ratio, so Wilson is schooled to avoid interceptions, which is often the cause of throwing late, which in turn can mean throwing short. However, it's fantastic for the TD/INT ratio, so it QB rating loves it.

Waiting until a receiver is wide open also assists with completion percentage. Again, QB rating loves it.

So we have a unique situation that is practically tailor-made for success in QB rating. Big surprise that Wilson excels there.

However, waiting for a receiver to be wide open can lead to unnecessary sacks, throwaways, intentional grounding, desperate rushing that nets a yard, etc. All things that can kill drives, but which QB rating doesn't care about provided your completion rate is above 77% (for a perfect QB rating score).

Let me be clear - I am not adopting a horse in this race. I am merely saying that thumping QB rating again isn't going to convince anyone because it's not really a very good stat.

What about total production, efficiency, and consistency while being stuck behind Cable O-Lines, w/ a guy calling plays that is now out of the league? I am thumping the whole picture. Read the thread.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

 

[Fade]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

2015-2018 Wilson produces with the best in the sport. Behind Tom Cable O-Lines, with a higher degree of difficulty. Read the thread again.

 

[Scorpion05]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

Except no one thinks Cousins and Romo are great...precisely because they put up pretty stats but don’t deliver results

 

[mrt144]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

Even so, we can make comparison between peers in a similar draft year range and not even touch the difference in eras while we're at it.

To me, the rule changes have done two things: Increased the ceiling on QB performance in absolute and obvious terms and increased the floor of QBs marginally in subtle terms. There are still QBs of varying level sprinkled across the NFL and it's the delta of performance relative to peers that we could look at to slot our perceptions of various QB skill level.

It also can help us think about when its fair to compare QBs to one another if at all. I said it earlier in this thread but is it really a fair standard to compare any QB with X amount of years to a QB with X+10 amount of years where 97% of all QBs would falter in comparison to QB X+10? It's a great goal to strive for no doubt, but it doesn't seem useful to say that a QB falling short of six sigmaing the performance of one of the GOATs is indicative of their value as a QB. Simply says that no, they weren't the unlikely one to usurp the greatness of their predecessors.

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

Or it could be that sports evolve and people get better, QBs are playing longer careers, they have better technology to protect them and better film study equipment. Sports medicine etc. It's the same reason you see Olympic Records beat every 4 years.

 

[mrt144]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

Or it could be that sports evolve and people get better, QBs are playing longer careers, they have better technology to protect them and film study. It's the same reason you see Olympic Records beat every 4 years.

Right? It's not just rule changes, it's everything advancing at some pace simultaneously - players practicing actual downfield passing earlier in their lives, training regimens that would make most 1960s football players vomit quickly, athletic ability inherently increasing due to a combo of genetics, nutrition and training, etc etc. Rule changes affect the stats and what people are willing to attempt but they don't change the physical abilities of the players who can now attempt some of these formerly higher risk things based on athletics alone.

 

[KiwiHawk]

What about total production, efficiency, and consistency while being stuck behind Cable O-Lines, w/ a guy calling plays that is now out of the league? I am thumping the whole picture. Read the thread.

I have read the thread. What I am saying is that from a neutral point of view, you haven't made your case because you haven't successfully addressed the points of the detractors, and continuing to tout QB rating isn't helping because it's a deeply flawed statistic.

One observation: Wilson has frequently under-thrown receivers on long routes this season, allowing the cornerback/safety to close with the receiver and contest the catch. Fortunately for us, this has often led to a completion or pass interference penalty, but unfortunately it limits the YAC to practically zero. What is your reply to that criticism? It's relevant because taking the top off the defense is a fundamental part of our game plan.

Please note you are talking about "elite". Not "better than average", not "really good", but also not necessarily "GOAT".

 

[Seymour]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

Or it could be that sports evolve and people get better, QBs are playing longer careers, they have better technology to protect them and better film study equipment. Sports medicine etc. It's the same reason you see Olympic Records beat every 4 years.

Some people don't observe that. It doesn't fit their vision of childhood heros.

 

[rcaido]

What about total production, efficiency, and consistency while being stuck behind Cable O-Lines, w/ a guy calling plays that is now out of the league? I am thumping the whole picture. Read the thread.

I have read the thread. What I am saying is that from a neutral point of view, you haven't made your case because you haven't successfully addressed the points of the detractors, and continuing to tout QB rating isn't helping because it's a deeply flawed statistic.

One observation: Wilson has frequently under-thrown receivers on long routes this season, allowing the cornerback/safety to close with the receiver and contest the catch. Fortunately for us, this has often led to a completion or pass interference penalty, but unfortunately it limits the YAC to practically zero. What is your reply to that criticism? It's relevant because taking the top off the defense is a fundamental part of our game plan.

Please note you are talking about "elite". Not "better than average", not "really good", but also not necessarily "GOAT".

People already address it but you are not reading it or not registering...

Wilson has the 2nd best TD to INT ratio of all time.

 

[Fade]

What about total production, efficiency, and consistency while being stuck behind Cable O-Lines, w/ a guy calling plays that is now out of the league? I am thumping the whole picture. Read the thread.

I have read the thread. What I am saying is that from a neutral point of view, you haven't made your case because you haven't successfully addressed the points of the detractors, and continuing to tout QB rating isn't helping because it's a deeply flawed statistic.

One observation: Wilson has frequently under-thrown receivers on long routes this season, allowing the cornerback/safety to close with the receiver and contest the catch. Fortunately for us, this has often led to a completion or pass interference penalty, but unfortunately it limits the YAC to practically zero. What is your reply to that criticism? It's relevant because taking the top off the defense is a fundamental part of our game plan.

Please note you are talking about "elite". Not "better than average", not "really good", but also not necessarily "GOAT".

How do you know if this is true when compared to other elite QBs? Have you broken down the other guys?

Wilson is asked to make consistently harder throws than the other elite QBs.

[tweet][tweet]https://twitter.com/NextGenStats/status/1063203954643718144[/tweet][/tweet]

[tweet][tweet]https://twitter.com/benbbaldwin/status/1067089862598291458[/tweet][/tweet]

 

[Seymour]

What about total production, efficiency, and consistency while being stuck behind Cable O-Lines, w/ a guy calling plays that is now out of the league? I am thumping the whole picture. Read the thread.

I have read the thread. What I am saying is that from a neutral point of view, you haven't made your case because you haven't successfully addressed the points of the detractors, and continuing to tout QB rating isn't helping because it's a deeply flawed statistic.

One observation: Wilson has frequently under-thrown receivers on long routes this season, allowing the cornerback/safety to close with the receiver and contest the catch. Fortunately for us, this has often led to a completion or pass interference penalty, but unfortunately it limits the YAC to practically zero. What is your reply to that criticism? It's relevant because taking the top off the defense is a fundamental part of our game plan.

Please note you are talking about "elite". Not "better than average", not "really good", but also not necessarily "GOAT".

Now tell us what an overthrown ball leads to and explain which produces better results?? :roll:

More Wilson nitpicking BS!! Do you think he is the ONLY QB making several underthrown completions so the stats are wrong or tilted his way? This is so flawed and ridiculous, it can only be posted from a haters point of view. :177692:

 

[Mad Dog]

Weird how all of the best QBs in history, according to QBR, are all modern QBs.

Some of the greatest QBs in the history of the NFL (by QBR) are even guys like Romo or Cousins. Odd how that works.

Almost as if the game was much easier for modern QBs than back when QBs did not have all the rules slanted in their favor.

Or it could just be an incredible coincidence that those lists are chock full of modern QBs vs some of the historical greats.

So now the argument has come to this.
Wilson is top 3 in this TDs for first 6 yrs. Well so are these QB's and they aren't great.
Wilson is top 3 in this QB Rating all time. Well so are these QB's and they aren't great.
Wilson has fewest INT's in first 6 years. Well so did these QB's and they aren't that great.
Wilson has most wins and playoff wins in first 6 years, Well actually there aren't any crappy QBs like that.
Wilson.

You can find good QB's with a great stat here and there. It's hard to find QB's that are great at almost all the important QB stats that correlate with winning.

Unfortunately too many people correlate volume stats with greatness. Most yards passing. Most yards rushing. Really the only volume stat that matters is TD's since its tough throwing in those smaller windows near the endzone. It's a fantasy football world and if you aren't putting out yards and TDs, you must suck.

These kinds of arguments remind me of American car commercials stating X Car was better in reliability than B Car and better in performance than A Car. That's all well and good if A is a BMW and B is a Toyota but more often it was the other way around.

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]