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

[HansGruber]

If someone can't differentiate between the proper uses of than and then, that really speaks to the quality of their degree.

ITT

 

[LymonHawk]

If someone can't differentiate between the proper uses of than and then, that really speaks to the quality of their degree.

ITT

Sheesh! It was more of a typo than anything else. I'm sorry if my use of 'then' instead of 'than' was confusing to you or made you miss the point of my post.

...And what do they call the graduate with the lowest grades in med. school?

Your court.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I for one applaud Lymon's efforts at derailing this thread into true absurdity.

 

[LymonHawk]

I for one applaud Lymon's efforts at derailing this thread into true absurdity.

Thanks, Red...it's nice to be appreciated. :mrgreen:

 

[RichNhansom]

Some good points. If I tell you my brother is going to beat you up and he is 6'8" you might pause, at least until you found out he weighs 90lbs.

Stats are most useless when cherry picked.

 

[Scottemojo]

No stats for this question.

If you got to pick from all the NFL QBs to start your own franchise, who do you take over Wilson? I don't care about Elite, or Good or comparing stats, but if trying to build an NFL franchise with longevity, who do you take over Wilson? For me it is maybe two guys. I don't take Roethlisberger, Brees, Eli, Peyton, or Tom. Too old. I don't take Dalton or Matty Ryan, they have proven to just a bit not so clutch for the talent around them. Flacco can be great sometimes, but he isn't the guy for me either. Stafford? he is like Flacco, mercurial. You may take issue with some of my assessments, but do you take any of those guys ahead of Wilson?

To me, the issue of what Wilson gets paid isn't about his ranking among the above names. The fact that if you were starting a franchise you might take Rodgers or Luck ahead of Wilson speaks volumes about what he should and will get paid. Definitely he is a unique player who dramatically affects how effective his WR talent looks, some of his tendencies cause offensive problems, contributing to the boom or bust nature of our offense and to sacks, but he scares the shit out of defensive coordinators, and he does that with a pretty pedestrian group of pass catchers.

 

[JimmyG]

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.

If it's hyperbole, it's not far off from the conventional wisdom of this board. (Not saying everyone here feels that way, but generally what I read is very romanticized and over the top... which is par for the course with team-specific message boards.)

 

[Uncle Si]

No stats for this question.

If you got to pick from all the NFL QBs to start your own franchise, who do you take over Wilson? I don't care about Elite, or Good or comparing stats, but if trying to build an NFL franchise with longevity, who do you take over Wilson? For me it is maybe two guys. I don't take Roethlisberger, Brees, Eli, Peyton, or Tom. Too old. I don't take Dalton or Matty Ryan, they have proven to just a bit not so clutch for the talent around them. Flacco can be great sometimes, but he isn't the guy for me either. Stafford? he is like Flacco, mercurial. You may take issue with some of my assessments, but do you take any of those guys ahead of Wilson?

To me, the issue of what Wilson gets paid isn't about his ranking among the above names. The fact that if you were starting a franchise you might take Rodgers or Luck ahead of Wilson speaks volumes about what he should and will get paid. Definitely he is a unique player who dramatically affects how effective his WR talent looks, some of his tendencies cause offensive problems, contributing to the boom or bust nature of our offense and to sacks, but he scares the shit out of defensive coordinators, and he does that with a pretty pedestrian group of pass catchers.

+1 (can that be a thing here?)

and wanted to keep this moving before its gets enveloped by more of Anthony and Ticals end of the spectrum back and forths. Some very good points, and I agree on the only two QBs I'd take over Wilson. In this exercise, you are absolutely correct in both securing his value and worth to the NFL.

 

[Tical21]

You do also have to take into consideration that almost every single time a quarterback that isn't one of those top 3 or 4 has gotten paid, it has been an absolute disaster. Just because Joe Flacco can get 20 mil per season doesn't make it a good idea. At some point, somebody is going to try to go the route of not paying their QB and spending all that money on 3 good players instead. I would, at the least, be interested in how that experiment turns out.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

You do also have to take into consideration that almost every single time a quarterback that isn't one of those top 3 or 4 has gotten paid, it has been an absolute disaster. Just because Joe Flacco can get 20 mil per season doesn't make it a good idea. At some point, somebody is going to try to go the route of not paying their QB and spending all that money on 3 good players instead. I would, at the least, be interested in how that experiment turns out.

This I agree with. It's why quarterback negotiation is a serious high stakes game. Basically IF you have that elite level/or franchise type quarterback it's fine to invest 15% of your total cap and just bordering on slight risk if you go to 20%. But you also have to factor in the reality that within 2-3 years maximum even a contract like Joe Flacco's is far more often then not going to be a bargain. Especially in light that the cap will be going up in large increments for years down the road because of the new televison money that's coming in.

What you are describing is what is known in baseball as the one Mercedes + eight Honda Civics rule. It rarely, if ever works there and it never works in the NFL, especially when concerning quarterbacks. Now moreso than ever because of the rule changes.

 

[WilsonMVP]

You do also have to take into consideration that almost every single time a quarterback that isn't one of those top 3 or 4 has gotten paid, it has been an absolute disaster. Just because Joe Flacco can get 20 mil per season doesn't make it a good idea. At some point, somebody is going to try to go the route of not paying their QB and spending all that money on 3 good players instead. I would, at the least, be interested in how that experiment turns out.

It would prob fail miserably

 

[Anthony!]

You do also have to take into consideration that almost every single time a quarterback that isn't one of those top 3 or 4 has gotten paid, it has been an absolute disaster. Just because Joe Flacco can get 20 mil per season doesn't make it a good idea. At some point, somebody is going to try to go the route of not paying their QB and spending all that money on 3 good players instead. I would, at the least, be interested in how that experiment turns out.

This I agree with. It's why quarterback negotiation is a serious high stakes game. Basically IF you have that elite level/or franchise type quarterback it's fine to invest 15% of your total cap and just bordering on slight risk if you go to 20%. But you also have to factor in the reality that within 2-3 years maximum even a contract like Joe Flacco's is far more often then not going to be a bargain. Especially in light that the cap will be going up in large increments for years down the road because of the new televison money that's coming in.

The biggest difference here is we know what Wilson can do with little offensive talent around him. Flacco has had a lot of talent around him always. So the idea fi we pay Wilson we cannot keep others is kind of silly. Our oline is ranked 24ht in pass blocking, our WR crew before Graham was ranked in the bottom 3rd of the league and most are undrafted. Other than Wagner all the guys on Defense that are core are signed, so who would we loose that cannot be replaced? No one.

 

[Uncle Si]

You do also have to take into consideration that almost every single time a quarterback that isn't one of those top 3 or 4 has gotten paid, it has been an absolute disaster. Just because Joe Flacco can get 20 mil per season doesn't make it a good idea. At some point, somebody is going to try to go the route of not paying their QB and spending all that money on 3 good players instead. I would, at the least, be interested in how that experiment turns out.

"Every Single time?"

Which 3 or 4 were good investments?
Which weren't?

Rodgers? (Super Bowl win)
Big Ben? (Super Bowl win)
Matt Ryan? (NFC Championship game)
Joe Flacco? (Super Bowl win)
Drew Brees? (Super Bowl win)
Peyton Manning (Super Bowl win, so many records)
Kaep (three straight NFC Championships.. only 11% guaranteed)
Jay Cutler (bust)
Tony Romo (great regular season QB)
Matt Stafford (mix of Cutler/Romo)

So here are your top 10 highest paid. One could say all but one (Cutler) was worth the money paid. There is no detail as to when they were paid or what the record was after.

My suggestion is these QBs earned their raises on the merit of their achievements as much as investment for the future. In Wilson, the Seahawks can hope for both.

 

[Tical21]

You do also have to take into consideration that almost every single time a quarterback that isn't one of those top 3 or 4 has gotten paid, it has been an absolute disaster. Just because Joe Flacco can get 20 mil per season doesn't make it a good idea. At some point, somebody is going to try to go the route of not paying their QB and spending all that money on 3 good players instead. I would, at the least, be interested in how that experiment turns out.

"Every Single time?"

Which 3 or 4 were good investments?
Which weren't?

Rodgers? (Super Bowl win)
Big Ben? (Super Bowl win)
Matt Ryan? (NFC Championship game)
Joe Flacco? (Super Bowl win)
Drew Brees? (Super Bowl win)
Peyton Manning (Super Bowl win, so many records)
Kaep (three straight NFC Championships.. only 11% guaranteed)
Jay Cutler (bust)
Tony Romo (great regular season QB)
Matt Stafford (mix of Cutler/Romo)

So here are your top 10 highest paid. One could say all but one (Cutler) was worth the money paid. There is no detail as to when they were paid or what the record was after.

My suggestion is these QBs earned their raises on the merit of their achievements as much as investment for the future. In Wilson, the Seahawks can hope for both.

Rodgers I don't believe has gone back since he got paid. Ben hasn't gone back since his huge payday. The Falcons have gone down the crapper since Ryan got paid. Flacco I will say is a work in progress, we'll see, but I don't think he can get them back, and the contract will be regrettable. What was Brees making when he won the Super Bowl? These quarterbacks aren't helping their teams get back, if anything their contract is having the exact opposite effect.

The Mannings are the exception. Brady has worked out, I think I would still pay Brees. But looking back, not sure I would pay anybody else on that list that kind of money.

The rest of the contracts have prevented their teams from going to the promised land. The winning formula seems to be that you have to take advantage of having your QB on his first or smaller contracts. Once they get paid, the odds of you fielding a good enough team to win a Super Bowl go down quite dramatically.

 

[Uncle Si]

But you are paying them for they have done as much as what they may do.

No athlete gets paid on promise anymore Tical. These teams that employed these QBs reaped huge successes while their Qbs were on light contracts (for the most part). They took their teams to relative heights and were paid accordingly.

I don't disagree with the premise, but I think it's more the idea that successful Qbs are overpaid in retrospect to the team's overall budget versus whether or not they truly deserve the raise.

I also think that "getting them back" cannot be the ear mark for depicting whether or not these players have earned their contracts. The NFL is a business, and even though Flacco, Rodgers, Ben may not have returned to the Super Bowl, it does not mean their value to the team has not been a significant one.

 

[Ramfan128]

Most Seahawk fans think Wilson is elite. Most non Seahawk fans throw the phrase "game manager" out there. The reality is, he's probably somewhere in the middle.

He's your guy. He quarterbacked you to a superbowl win. I know how great that can feel, and most fans have a vested interest in seeing his name spoken with the "elite" QBs.

But rational fans of other teams would likely have a better grasp on his place among NFL QBs. I hate the Seahawks. But I respect them as one of the NFLs best teams.

I would take Wagoner over every MLB in the NFL right now. I'd take Lynch over every RB except Bell and Peterson (when healthy). I'd take ET over every S, Chancellor is the hardest hitting player in the NFL IMO, and Sherman I'd take over everyone but Revis.

But here are the guys I would take over Wilson for one full season:

Rodgers
Brees
Brady
Manning
Roethilsberger
Luck
Rivers
Ryan
Romo

That puts him at 10th. But I put him in the same category as Flacco, Tannehil, E. Manning, Newton - and honestly, I would take these guys over Wilson as well, but I realize that won't be a popular opinion.

The reality is, he's not elite. Should he be paid like an elite QB? No. Will he? Yes. But when that happens, the talent around him will slowly deteriorate...

There are too many variables when assessing a QB - the talent around him, scheme, etc. Seems like most Hawk fans belittle the offensive talent, but having arguably the most potent running game in the NFL is a QBs dream.

I think every fan answered the question of whether he is elite if you got upset that they put the ball in his hands in the superbowl - even with Marshawn Lynch, if Manning/Brady/Luck/Brees threw an INT to lose the superbowl, the entire world would put that squarely on their shoulders. Somehow Wilson is absolved of any responsibility. I think it's because everyone knows deep down that he's not the guy to win you a superbowl - he's the guy that leads a great team to win a superbowl.

 

[Uncle Si]

"
Rodgers
Brees
Brady
Manning
Roethilsberger
Luck
Rivers
Ryan
Romo"


You would take Rivers, Ben, Matt Ryan and todays Drew Brees over either Russel Wilson or even Cam Newton, Matt Stafford? Sure...

The issue with your analogy at the end is that any fan of any team would be questioning why you throw the ball from one yard out IF it gets intercepted. Doesn't matter the QB. Wilson doesnt win you a Superbowl, just gets you within 1 yard of winning?

Carry on though. +1 for some trolling.

 

[Anthony!]

Most Seahawk fans think Wilson is elite. Most non Seahawk fans throw the phrase "game manager" out there. The reality is, he's probably somewhere in the middle.

He's your guy. He quarterbacked you to a superbowl win. I know how great that can feel, and most fans have a vested interest in seeing his name spoken with the "elite" QBs.

But rational fans of other teams would likely have a better grasp on his place among NFL QBs. I hate the Seahawks. But I respect them as one of the NFLs best teams.

I would take Wagoner over every MLB in the NFL right now. I'd take Lynch over every RB except Bell and Peterson (when healthy). I'd take ET over every S, Chancellor is the hardest hitting player in the NFL IMO, and Sherman I'd take over everyone but Revis.

But here are the guys I would take over Wilson for one full season:

Rodgers
Brees
Brady
Manning
Roethilsberger
Luck
Rivers
Ryan
Romo

That puts him at 10th. But I put him in the same category as Flacco, Tannehil, E. Manning, Newton - and honestly, I would take these guys over Wilson as well, but I realize that won't be a popular opinion.

The reality is, he's not elite. Should he be paid like an elite QB? No. Will he? Yes. But when that happens, the talent around him will slowly deteriorate...

There are too many variables when assessing a QB - the talent around him, scheme, etc. Seems like most Hawk fans belittle the offensive talent, but having arguably the most potent running game in the NFL is a QBs dream.

I think every fan answered the question of whether he is elite if you got upset that they put the ball in his hands in the superbowl - even with Marshawn Lynch, if Manning/Brady/Luck/Brees threw an INT to lose the superbowl, the entire world would put that squarely on their shoulders. Somehow Wilson is absolved of any responsibility. I think it's because everyone knows deep down that he's not the guy to win you a superbowl - he's the guy that leads a great team to win a superbowl.

Lets see

Rodgers- I would agree
Brees- yeah not anymore and we will see how he does without Graham
Brady-yeah we saw how he was without Grank. He has 3 receiving threats that were better than anything Wilson has had
Manning-same as Brady all those top weapons
Roethilsberger-has always had great Wr
Luck- top 10 pass blocking oline top 10 wr corps
Rivers-gates enough said
Ryan-really one of the best Wr corps in the NFL
Romo-Dez enough said.

Look I can go on the problem is you are saying you would take all those players, based on what they are doing or have done for getting they have all had much more offensive talent around them, so you whole premise is flawed. Of them only 2 have done great with talent like what Wilson has had that is Brady and Rodgers. The rest have all had way more talent. As to your whole crunch time premise yes but leading the league in 4th qtr/ot comeback winning drives over the last years more than over comes one mistake. Also to remind you this is the second year in a row Wilson had the ball in his hands with going to the SB on the line and he came through. So basically the fact that you are a self professed Seahawks hater you are biased and your opinion has just been torn apart and made irrelevant and wrong. The rality is you put any of them except Rodgers on this team with their 24th ranked pass blocking oline and bottom 3rd of the league wr corps, in this offense and they would fail presuming they even survived.

 

[rideaducati]

Most Seahawk fans think Wilson is elite. Most non Seahawk fans throw the phrase "game manager" out there. The reality is, he's probably somewhere in the middle.

He's your guy. He quarterbacked you to a superbowl win. I know how great that can feel, and most fans have a vested interest in seeing his name spoken with the "elite" QBs.

But rational fans of other teams would likely have a better grasp on his place among NFL QBs. I hate the Seahawks. But I respect them as one of the NFLs best teams.

I would take Wagoner over every MLB in the NFL right now. I'd take Lynch over every RB except Bell and Peterson (when healthy). I'd take ET over every S, Chancellor is the hardest hitting player in the NFL IMO, and Sherman I'd take over everyone but Revis.

But here are the guys I would take over Wilson for one full season:

Rodgers
Brees
Brady
Manning
Roethilsberger
Luck
Rivers
Ryan
Romo

That puts him at 10th. But I put him in the same category as Flacco, Tannehil, E. Manning, Newton - and honestly, I would take these guys over Wilson as well, but I realize that won't be a popular opinion.

The reality is, he's not elite. Should he be paid like an elite QB? No. Will he? Yes. But when that happens, the talent around him will slowly deteriorate...

There are too many variables when assessing a QB - the talent around him, scheme, etc. Seems like most Hawk fans belittle the offensive talent, but having arguably the most potent running game in the NFL is a QBs dream.

I think every fan answered the question of whether he is elite if you got upset that they put the ball in his hands in the superbowl - even with Marshawn Lynch, if Manning/Brady/Luck/Brees threw an INT to lose the superbowl, the entire world would put that squarely on their shoulders. Somehow Wilson is absolved of any responsibility. I think it's because everyone knows deep down that he's not the guy to win you a superbowl - he's the guy that leads a great team to win a superbowl.

Lets see

Rodgers- I would agree
Brees- yeah not anymore and we will see how he does without Graham
Brady-yeah we saw how he was without Grank. He has 3 receiving threats that were better than anything Wilson has had
Manning-same as Brady all those top weapons
Roethilsberger-has always had great Wr
Luck- top 10 pass blocking oline top 10 wr corps
Rivers-gates enough said
Ryan-really one of the best Wr corps in the NFL
Romo-Dez enough said.

Look I can go on the problem is you are saying you would take all those players, based on what they are doing or have done for getting they have all had much more offensive talent around them, so you whole premise is flawed. Of them only 2 have done great with talent like what Wilson has had that is Brady and Rodgers. The rest have all had way more talent. As to your whole crunch time premise yes but leading the league in 4th qtr/ot comeback winning drives over the last years more than over comes one mistake. Also to remind you this is the second year in a row Wilson had the ball in his hands with going to the SB on the line and he came through. So basically the fact that you are a self professed Seahawks hater you are biased and your opinion has just been torn apart and made irrelevant and wrong. The rality is you put any of them except Rodgers on this team with their 24th ranked pass blocking oline and bottom 3rd of the league wr corps, in this offense and they would fail presuming they even survived.

After having Bradford and every other stiff the Rams have thrown out to the wolves over the past decade, it's easy to see why Rams fans like all of those other QBs. They have seen most of them for many years and have a hatred for their division foe. I take what they say about Russell in that context and KNOW that if they had Russell on their team, they would be the frontrunner for the division EVERY YEAR. They know this too, but like a true division foe, they can't admit it to themselves.

 

[Scottemojo]

You do also have to take into consideration that almost every single time a quarterback that isn't one of those top 3 or 4 has gotten paid, it has been an absolute disaster. Just because Joe Flacco can get 20 mil per season doesn't make it a good idea. At some point, somebody is going to try to go the route of not paying their QB and spending all that money on 3 good players instead. I would, at the least, be interested in how that experiment turns out.

There is no doubt Flacco hurt them. But they also wasted several years of good D with a QB named Kyle Boller. YOu think Baltimore wants to go back to that? If not for some deceptive issues with the Patriots who the hell is eligible, we might be taking about Flacco as the opposing QB in the SB we just played. So if that is what overpaying a QB causes, bring it on.

Wilson is going to get overpaid. It will cause problems with depth and keeping some core guys, of that I have no doubt. But I also have no doubt letting him go would be stupid.