Wilson's First 3 Years Are Arguably the Best in NFL History

[Tical21]

Ohhhh, so those weren't the right stats. But if we couple these stats with the other stats and maybe add these stats then run them through these stats, and check on these stats, it totally says Russell Wilson is elite on the second Friday at 4:23 AM every other August.

 

[Uncle Si]

I think Wilson is pretty good.

 

[JimmyG]

There are three stats, however, that show Russell Wilson to be well on his way to becoming an 'elite' QB.

Wilson's career QB rating of 98.6 is 2nd all-time in NFL history behind only Aaron Rodgers.

Wilson is also ranked 2nd all-time with a career TD to INT ratio of 2.77 behind only Rodgers.

And Wilson is ranked 3rd all-time with a career INT rate of only 2.1% behind only Rodgers and Brady.

It is a small sample size, but also an indication of great things to happen in the future.

I hate to keep beating this dead horse, but Wilson is playing in the most quarterback-friendly offensive era in football history. Even dating back 10 years ago, quarterback efficiency has risen dramatically. It is simply disingenuous to compare his numbers to career totals of others who played when it was harder to pass.

For example.... let's look at Colin Kaepernick, who also became a starter in 2012:
- Colin Kaepernick's career rating is 90.7, 12th-best in NFL history
- Colin Kaepernick's career TD to INT ratio is 2.38, 4th-best in NFL history, behind Rodgers/Wilson/Brady
- Colin Kaepernick's career INT rate is only 1.9%, 2nd-best in NFL history (Rodgers, better than Wilson)

Even RG3 (90.6 rating [13th-best in NFL history], 1.74 TD:INT [17th-best], 2.2 INT% [6th-best]) has, historically speaking, extremely strong numbers.

Generally, Kaepernick is regarded as extremely mediocre/bad, and RG3's stock has fallen so far that we're not even sure he'll start in 2015. Despite this, their career numbers are very, very good. Not as good as Wilson's, but there are unbelievably strong nonetheless. I'm just trying to drive home how different the game is today. Video game numbers are routine and common.

 

[Willyeye]

There are three stats, however, that show Russell Wilson to be well on his way to becoming an 'elite' QB.

Wilson's career QB rating of 98.6 is 2nd all-time in NFL history behind only Aaron Rodgers.

Wilson is also ranked 2nd all-time with a career TD to INT ratio of 2.77 behind only Rodgers.

And Wilson is ranked 3rd all-time with a career INT rate of only 2.1% behind only Rodgers and Brady.

It is a small sample size, but also an indication of great things to happen in the future.

I hate to keep beating this dead horse, but Wilson is playing in the most quarterback-friendly offensive era in football history. Even dating back 10 years ago, quarterback efficiency has risen dramatically. It is simply disingenuous to compare his numbers to career totals of others who played when it was harder to pass.

For example.... let's look at Colin Kaepernick, who also became a starter in 2012:
- Colin Kaepernick's career rating is 90.7, 12th-best in NFL history
- Colin Kaepernick's career TD to INT ratio is 2.38, 4th-best in NFL history, behind Rodgers/Wilson/Brady
- Colin Kaepernick's career INT rate is only 1.9%, 2nd-best in NFL history (Rodgers, better than Wilson)

Even RG3 (90.6 rating [13th-best in NFL history], 1.74 TD:INT [17th-best], 2.2 INT% [6th-best]) has, historically speaking, extremely strong numbers.

Generally, Kaepernick is regarded as extremely mediocre/bad, and RG3's stock has fallen so far that we're not even sure he'll start in 2015. Despite this, their career numbers are very, very good. Not as good as Wilson's, but there are unbelievably strong nonetheless. I'm just trying to drive home how different the game is today. Video game numbers are routine and common.

Regarding QB comparisons over different eras...over the past 30 years, NFL defenses have gone from being run-focused to pass-focused. There has been a HUGE shift. 30 years ago, teams didn't worry anywhere near as much about passing as they do today. The Seahawks have built a pass-focused defense and it has led them to fielding what ends up being the #1 D. I hadn't really thought about it, but when taking a look back at historically great defenses, it seems to me most of them were famous for their front 4 run-style defenses. The Seahawks are the first defense in history in my mind to have such a famous secondary...the Legion of Boom. Many things have changed in recent years...the type of players selected in the draft and even the higher paid positions. WR's have replaced RB's as the most sought after draftees and started a trend that has become more evident each and every season. This evolution most likely influences the position that young players choose to play prior to college. Who wants to be a RB, when WR make so much more money? Who wants to be a DT when CB/s make the big bucks? But obviously this shift was pioneered on offense...and defenses have been trying to catch up ever since. It makes sense that QB's would have better stats today. Even as compared to just 10 years ago. Look at the Colts...they have a good QB and almost no running game to speak of. There were no such teams 20 years ago. My point is that it's all about perspectives. One could say that it was easier for QB's 20-30 years ago, because the passing defenses were nowhere near as good as they are today. I believe it is harder to pass in today's NFL, but QB's have evolved and they are simply better today than QB's were 30 years ago.

Here's a little tidbit I found very interesting...in his second year, Brady won the MVP for SB XXXVI. The line on Brady:

16 of 27 for 59.3%, 145 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, rating 86.2, yards per attempt 5.4

In Wilson's second year, he did not win the MVP for SB XLVIII...it was given to Malcolm Smith, who had a pick 6 and a fumble recovery (the pick came on an Avril-tipped pass, and the fumble came on a punchout by Maxwell; Smith was just in the right place at the right time) and an average performance the rest of the game. The line on Wilson:

18 of 25 for 72.0%, 206 yards, 2 TD, 0 INT, rating 123.1, yards per attempt 8.2

QB's did not garner the same expectations as they do today. Brady's SB36 performance would be considered mediocre by today's standards.

In the end, I'd have to say that, when giving consideration to Wilson's mediocre O-Line and receiver corps, Wilson's numbers are still pretty impressive

 

[JimmyG]

My point is that it's all about perspectives. One could say that it was easier for QB's 20-30 years ago, because the passing defenses were nowhere near as good as they are today. I believe it is harder to pass in today's NFL, but QB's have evolved and they are simply better today than QB's were 30 years ago.

No way. I completely disagree. The rules have changed, in some areas dramatically.

Look at the emphasis on player safety in today's game. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but it has changed the way the game is played. Quarterbacks are as coddled as they've ever been. Unnecessary roughness calls are common, often times for incidental or innocuous contact (e.g. a DE's finger inadvertently scraping a quarterback's facemask). This helps keep quarterbacks healthier and perform better. You regularly see defensive players slow down and wrap their arms around a quarterback to "catch" him to prevent him from falling over in borderline situations, in hopes of preventing a call.

Further, look at how frequently we're seeing "defenseless receiver" calls on intermediate passes over the middle of the field. Defensive backs are at a big disadvantage, they're forced to play more timid (yes, I know, Kam and Earl still lay people out, but the point stands). You practically can't make contact with a receiver when he's coming down with a catch anymore. You're basically forced to let him land and make the catch in the name of player safety (that's part hyperbole, but sadly there's a lot of truth to it).

After the 2003 season, we saw the league start to clamp down on illegal contact after Ty Law and the Patriots put on a clinic defensively (from 2003 to 2004, passer rating rose from 76.6 to 80.9 ... TD:INT creased from to 1.21 to 1.40.) Similarly, after our defense decimated Peyton Manning, we again saw the league clamp down and emphasize illegal contact. (Even from just 2013 to 2014... league passer rating rose from 84.1 to 87.1 ... TD:INT increased from 1.60 to 1.79 ... etc)

Dan Marino has a career rating of 86.4. Do you really doubt his ability to pass? Meanwhile, we have garbage like Colin Kaepernick running around looking like a chicken with his head chopped off with a career rating over 90. Your explanation is that QB's are "simply better than QB's were 30 years ago?" Give me a ****ing break.

League average passer rating is quickly approaching 90. (I remember the days when 90 was sacred territory, now a quarterback that doesn't have a rating of 90 is basically garbage!) The evidence is clear as day and it's right in front of our nose: numbers are inflated. We need to temper our enthusiasm and acknowledge this when looking at Wilson's numbers. Sadly, far too many people just ignore this completely and pretend the difference doesn't exist. Brushing it under the rug doesn't change the reality of it.

 

[JimmyG]

In the end, I'd have to say that, when giving consideration to Wilson's mediocre O-Line and receiver corps, Wilson's numbers are still pretty impressive

Nowhere have I ever tried to say that Wilson's numbers aren't good or impressive. However, there's a huge difference between "good quarterback" and the romanticized "indisputably elite quarterback with an unprecedented start to his career, on pace to be a Hall of Famer, oh my god we'd be hopeless without him" notion that I hear so casually tossed around.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Yeah I wouldn't discount that the eras of football are different, we have to take those into consideration, but at the same time Wilson's on a run first team, and happened to be drafted into the best defense. He has no say in the matter and I feel like alot of people don't give him much credit, he's that guy that knows he's living behind the shadow of the defense and Lynch and he will always give them props, because like he says in the end it's not about stats but about trying to go to the big dance.

His mobile ability is off the charts and you know what, I will take that. That's a huge advantage for our defense and offense. Imagining being a defensive linemen and trying to chase Russell all over the place. How many times can you run around chasing someone until you yourself gets tired, that goes for the other teams CB and safeties. 3-4 seconds is too long to cover any receiver, that's why Baldwin is our most dangerous guy on those scramble plays. Now on the next play Lynch comes in, and your thinking to yourself "crap now I gotta try and tackle him", he might not even have enough energy left to try and put full effort into tackling him. This is the most underrated thing about Wilson, but everyone wants him to be a pure pocket passer.

I'll take him the way he is, of course everyone will talk about injuries blah blah blah, well he's been doing it for 3 years and he's smart about it. The times when he does get hit really hard was staying in the pocket, and getting hit by Clay Matthews. Ask Sam Bradford and all the other QBs for Arizona how dangerous staying in the pocket can be.

 

[Anthony!]

In the end, I'd have to say that, when giving consideration to Wilson's mediocre O-Line and receiver corps, Wilson's numbers are still pretty impressive

Nowhere have I ever tried to say that Wilson's numbers aren't good or impressive. However, there's a huge difference between "good quarterback" and the romanticized "indisputably elite quarterback with an unprecedented start to his career, on pace to be a Hall of Famer, oh my god we'd be hopeless without him" notion that I hear so casually tossed around.

When you do things that have never been done before and you do so continually you are Ellite. I never hear any put done any records Manning, Brady, Rodgers because of the pass happy era they are in. All the number clearly show when taken in context that as of now he is Elite. I know you and a few others do not want him to be Elite for whatever reason you have, but the facts, stats, and eye test shows he is, and not just based on one or even 2 good or bad plays like some here try to use to prove their point, but based on the whole within the context of the performance.

 

[rideaducati]

Ohhhh, so those weren't the right stats. But if we couple these stats with the other stats and maybe add these stats then run them through these stats, and check on these stats, it totally says Russell Wilson is elite on the second Friday at 4:23 AM every other August.

It takes JUST AS MANY stats to be able to say a QB is NOT elite too, you just choose to cherry pick stats more than the "Russell is elite" crowd. Our side of the fence has stats that tell us Russell IS elite and your cherry picked stats only include scrub QBs that lucked into similar numbers while totally ignoring the truly elite that are on YOUR stats list.

Please point out the stat or stats that make Russell look bad not that he is joined by bad company who happened to luck into said statistical category. Then, let us compare those stats with other supposed "elite" QBs. I can tell you that the ONLY stats I can find that makes Russell seem ho-hum are yards and attempts, other than those his stats look really good.

The stats you seem to be pulling out of thin air tell us that Russell isn't elite on the first third down of the second series of every game that was kicked off by the opponent to open the game but only in games where the opponent won the toss. See, I can cherry pick too.

 

[LymonHawk]

In the end, I'd have to say that, when giving consideration to Wilson's mediocre O-Line and receiver corps, Wilson's numbers are still pretty impressive

Nowhere have I ever tried to say that Wilson's numbers aren't good or impressive. However, there's a huge difference between "good quarterback" and the romanticized "indisputably elite quarterback with an unprecedented start to his career, on pace to be a Hall of Famer, oh my god we'd be hopeless without him" notion that I hear so casually tossed around.

When you do things that have never been done before and you do so continually you are Ellite. I never hear any put done any records Manning, Brady, Rodgers because of the pass happy era they are in. All the number clearly show when taken in context that as of now he is Elite. I know you and a few others do not want him to be Elite for whatever reason you have, but the facts, stats, and eye test shows he is, and not just based on one or even 2 good or bad plays like some here try to use to prove their point, but based on the whole within the context of the performance.

Suffer from paranoia much?

 

[LymonHawk]

Ohhhh, so those weren't the right stats. But if we couple these stats with the other stats and maybe add these stats then run them through these stats, and check on these stats, it totally says Russell Wilson is elite on the second Friday at 4:23 AM every other August.

It takes JUST AS MANY stats to be able to say a QB is NOT elite too, you just choose to cherry pick stats more than the "Russell is elite" crowd. Our side of the fence has stats that tell us Russell IS elite and your cherry picked stats only include scrub QBs that lucked into similar numbers while totally ignoring the truly elite that are on YOUR stats list.

Please point out the stat or stats that make Russell look bad not that he is joined by bad company who happened to luck into said statistical category. Then, let us compare those stats with other supposed "elite" QBs. I can tell you that the ONLY stats I can find that makes Russell seem ho-hum are yards and attempts, other than those his stats look really good.

The stats you seem to be pulling out of thin air tell us that Russell isn't elite on the first third down of the second series of every game that was kicked off by the opponent to open the game but only in games where the opponent won the toss. See, I can cherry pick too.

Here's another 'stat'. In the only Super Bowl he won, the defense and special teams scored more points then other team.

Stats, stats, stats.

 

[Anthony!]

Ohhhh, so those weren't the right stats. But if we couple these stats with the other stats and maybe add these stats then run them through these stats, and check on these stats, it totally says Russell Wilson is elite on the second Friday at 4:23 AM every other August.

It takes JUST AS MANY stats to be able to say a QB is NOT elite too, you just choose to cherry pick stats more than the "Russell is elite" crowd. Our side of the fence has stats that tell us Russell IS elite and your cherry picked stats only include scrub QBs that lucked into similar numbers while totally ignoring the truly elite that are on YOUR stats list.

Please point out the stat or stats that make Russell look bad not that he is joined by bad company who happened to luck into said statistical category. Then, let us compare those stats with other supposed "elite" QBs. I can tell you that the ONLY stats I can find that makes Russell seem ho-hum are yards and attempts, other than those his stats look really good.

The stats you seem to be pulling out of thin air tell us that Russell isn't elite on the first third down of the second series of every game that was kicked off by the opponent to open the game but only in games where the opponent won the toss. See, I can cherry pick too.

Here's another 'stat'. In the only Super Bowl he won, the defense and special teams scored more points then other team.

Stats, stats, stats.

Here is one also the Offense held the ball almost 12 minutes in the 1st qtr.
Another one the game winning score was by the offense.

 

[rideaducati]

Ohhhh, so those weren't the right stats. But if we couple these stats with the other stats and maybe add these stats then run them through these stats, and check on these stats, it totally says Russell Wilson is elite on the second Friday at 4:23 AM every other August.

It takes JUST AS MANY stats to be able to say a QB is NOT elite too, you just choose to cherry pick stats more than the "Russell is elite" crowd. Our side of the fence has stats that tell us Russell IS elite and your cherry picked stats only include scrub QBs that lucked into similar numbers while totally ignoring the truly elite that are on YOUR stats list.

Please point out the stat or stats that make Russell look bad not that he is joined by bad company who happened to luck into said statistical category. Then, let us compare those stats with other supposed "elite" QBs. I can tell you that the ONLY stats I can find that makes Russell seem ho-hum are yards and attempts, other than those his stats look really good.

The stats you seem to be pulling out of thin air tell us that Russell isn't elite on the first third down of the second series of every game that was kicked off by the opponent to open the game but only in games where the opponent won the toss. See, I can cherry pick too.

Here's another 'stat'. In the only Super Bowl he won, the defense and special teams scored more points then other team.

Stats, stats, stats.

Than. More points THAN. Ugh.

 

[LymonHawk]

^^^^^

Drats! Now RO has acolytes!

 

[rideaducati]

^^^^^

Drats! Now RO has acolytes!

It's really quite simple. Then deals with the order in which things are done. You wake up and then get out of bed...unless you are sleepwalking. You then do whatever it is you do to start your day.

You use than when comparing things. More points scored than the other team gets your team the win. If you use more, less, better, worse, rather or other in a sentence, more often than not you will follow that with than unless again, you are denoting an order in which things are done.

This post has been brought to you by the letters A and E.

If you're still having problems, this may help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRWsZRtNuGg

 

[LymonHawk]

^^^^^

Drats! Now RO has acolytes!

It's really quite simple. Then deals with the order in which things are done. You wake up and then get out of bed...unless you are sleepwalking. You then do whatever it is you do to start your day.

You use than when comparing things. More points scored than the other team gets your team the win. If you use more, less, better, worse, rather or other in a sentence, more often than not you will follow that with than unless again, you are denoting an order in which things are done.

This post has been brought to you by the letters A and E.

If you're still having problems, this may help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRWsZRtNuGg

Wow! How in the world did I graduate college without you're help?

 

[rideaducati]

^^^^^

Drats! Now RO has acolytes!

It's really quite simple. Then deals with the order in which things are done. You wake up and then get out of bed...unless you are sleepwalking. You then do whatever it is you do to start your day.

You use than when comparing things. More points scored than the other team gets your team the win. If you use more, less, better, worse, rather or other in a sentence, more often than not you will follow that with than unless again, you are denoting an order in which things are done.

This post has been brought to you by the letters A and E.

If you're still having problems, this may help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRWsZRtNuGg

Wow! How in the world did I graduate college without you're help?

I guess you need a lesson on when to use your and you're too. I really have no idea how you made it through college.

This should help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjAJswDB14s

 

[KiwiHawk]

Nowhere have I ever tried to say that Wilson's numbers aren't good or impressive. However, there's a huge difference between "good quarterback" and the romanticized "indisputably elite quarterback with an unprecedented start to his career, on pace to be a Hall of Famer, oh my god we'd be hopeless without him" notion that I made up as a total strawman because no one here actually said it.

Fix'd.

 

[LymonHawk]

^^^^^

Drats! Now RO has acolytes!

It's really quite simple. Then deals with the order in which things are done. You wake up and then get out of bed...unless you are sleepwalking. You then do whatever it is you do to start your day.

You use than when comparing things. More points scored than the other team gets your team the win. If you use more, less, better, worse, rather or other in a sentence, more often than not you will follow that with than unless again, you are denoting an order in which things are done.

This post has been brought to you by the letters A and E.

If you're still having problems, this may help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRWsZRtNuGg

Wow! How in the world did I graduate college without you're help?

I guess you need a lesson on when to use your and you're too. I really have no idea how you made it through college.

This should help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjAJswDB14s

You are partially correct; you have no idea. (Yes, Dr. Cooper, it is sarcasm.)

 

[rideaducati]

Wow! How in the world did I graduate college without you're help?

I guess you need a lesson on when to use your and you're too. I really have no idea how you made it through college.

This should help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjAJswDB14s

You are partially correct; you have no idea. (Yes, Dr. Cooper, it is sarcasm.)

I was hoping you were being sarcastic, but you never know with what some of these colleges are putting out these days.