Tical21":3236roa6 said:
Semantics aside, however you want to spin it, history show you can't pay your QB huge money and expect to win Super Bowls, quite clearly. Maybe that will change. Maybe Russell is the guy and we're the team to make that change. I personally don't think he's an all-world QB, but I'm admittedly old school, I like the guys that think quickly and get rid of it quickly. His inability at times to have any kind of plan for man-1, especially with a blitz, just drives me bonkers. But he's proved everybody wrong before, maybe he'll hit another level.
If you pay the wrong QB this type of money, you're done. Done. You're probably instantly in cap-hell anyways the second he is signed, and it is going to be his show. I wish he had shown more of a propensity for putting up points and carrying the offense without Marshawn's help, but I realize it isn't his fault that he hasn't. It just makes me really nervous. I've got a bad feeling about this. I can see Marshawn leaving and our offense becoming absolutely inept. How can we look so awful against cover-1? That's what I keep coming back to. That should be ALL DAY. Bevell's calling the same routes that I would. Everybody wants us to run exotic route trees, but you don't run that crap against cover-1. There is no need to. Complete a hitch. Complete a cross. Not that difficult.
No, history really does not show that. Kearly debunked that claim when he pointed out that it's only been the last 5 years QBs have been getting contracts up in the 15% range and above. So the historical argument based on those cap numbers is much weaker, and very misleading (perhaps deliberately in the case of that article) for not having included that piece of information in the first place.
Peyton Manning was in the Superbowl vs. us. Green Bay was a whisker away from being in the Superbowl this year. Either of those two win it and there's your high-cap Superbowl winner. So a high-cap SB winner probability is clearly nonzero, in fact it looks like as always the Superbowl will continue to be jockeyed back and forth between elite QBs with an outlier once every 10 years or so just about the time everyone declares defense and running the ball to be dead.
I think if we leave behind the now-very-dubious claim that the science is settled about QB cap% and SB titles, we have an argument that Wilson is the wrong guy. That is a defensible position. Not a position I agree with, but in this case it's true there still remains the question of what will happen when Wilson has to pass more. I think Pete will evolve with Wilson with a big, safe target like JG. I mean if I'm Pete and it's pre-JG and I have Baldwin, Kearse, Prich, etc. with zero separation and Bevell routes drawn in crayon, I don't throw the ball either. Except on the goal line to Lockette because...I...we...had to waste a down?