Russell Wilson VS Every Single Rookie Starter of Past 20 Yrs

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • I have been reading this site the past few weeks and have been absolutely baffled at the level of criticism and hatred thrown Russell Wilson's way for what has been nothing but expected rookie qb play. I realize Seahawks fans are excited over our awesome defense and desperately want to win NOW. But I've read a lot of Russell Wilson hate on this site that I really do not understand. If one were to only read this site or listen to sports radio and not watch the games, you would think we were watching one of the worst rookie qb's of all time. That Ryan Leaf was reincarnated in the body of a midget.

    Russell Wilson is a rookie qb starting from week one. Here is a quick and simple recap of all qb's who have done the same over the past 20 years and started their team's first five games.

    Image

    http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawksbl ... _comp.html

    If you analyze these #'s closely, you'll note the crazy similarities between Wilson's #'s (pass attempts and yardage, especially) to that of Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco's. And guess what differentiates Ryan & Flacco from the rest of the qb's on the list? They played on playoff caliber teams with really good defenses that were able to carry their teams and allow their team to play conservative on offense. Sound familiar? But then again, hey, Wilson could be putting up passing #'s like Cam Newton, Sam Bradford, and Matt Stafford, whose teams sucked, were usually losing, and led to them thowing the ball an extra 75 times compared to Ryan, Flacco & their playoff teams. Yeah, Wilson could be doing that, right? Then he would be putting up the #'s fans are demanding, yes?

    I have read more than a few on this site talk of Wilson as if he has zero future and as if his play right now is 100% indicative of his ultimate future potential. Really? If so, was this the case for Peyton Manning, Drew Bledsoe, Matthew Stafford, Matt Ryan, & Joe Flacco? Did those guys never grow beyond their first 5 start #'s?

    One interesting thing to note is Wilson has the 6th best qb rating of the entire 20 year list (also interesting is that 2 of the 5 better ratings belong to Luck and RG3). Not to mention Wilson is tied for the most wins of anyone. Most here can agree that at least a couple of Wilson's int's this year were mostly on his receivers (McCoy, Baldwin, Lynch). Do away with just one or two of those, and his qb rating goes up drastically. Not to mention if Braylon Edwards catches a game winning TD in AZ. Yes, those things didn't happen. But even so, Wilson measures up fairly with just about every qb that has been in the same circmstances over the past two decades.

    And yet Seahawks fans demand more! Really? Would Atlanta, Baltimore, or Detroit be better off today had they benched their rookie qb's in favor of possibly more ready at the time, safer, but ultimately lower ceiling qbs? Would they be better off today in 2012 had they back in 2008 and 2009 felt it was all or nothing for their franchises and had to do whatever possible to win then, future be damned? I'm sure their fans wanted desperately to win right away. But I'll also venture to guess they as they are now, look back and are more than glad they took the route they did.

    The "only" differences I can see between Matt Ryan/Joe Flacco and Russell Wilson through 5 games is perception. Not play, stats, or winning by any means. They are all basically the exact same. Rookie qb's, whose teams asked very little of them, in effort to let their superior defense lead the way. No, the only difference I see is Ryan and Flacco were highly praised 1st rounders, and Ryan and Flacco were of prototypical height. Russell Wilson is neither. Yet he to this point is matching his taller, higher drafted counterparts to the letter. But fans thought more of Ryan and Flacco. Because they were 1st round draft picks with high expectations and didn't have every expert in the land saying they are physically incapable of every being anything more than they had shown in their first 5 games in the NFL.

    So that's it. The only difference between Russell Wilson's first five games and those of Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco is the people who continue to doubt and degrade this no good, 3rd round, midget who will never be any better than Mel Kiper or Hugh Millen say he will be. And this includes a good portion of Seahawks fans.

    It's a polarizing debate to say the least. But when you really study the #'s, it starts to paint a much more accurate picture as to how people are seeing what they want to see. Because I can say say with 1000% certainty, that if Russell Wilson had played these exact 5 games, but was 6'4" and drafted in the first round, that most Seahawks fans would be comparing his numbers to all the other rookie starters with great pride and esteem, and confidently proclaiming that he was only to get better.

    You're an interesting pyschological study, Seahawks fans. At the very least, I can say that. Thanks for the case study.
    Last edited by Hawkadeus on Tue Oct 16, 2012 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Hawkadeus
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 201
    Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:50 pm


  • This^
    Seahox
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 7
    Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:34 pm


  • Great post. Great post.
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5211
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


  • Wow! This guy really has Seahawks fans figured out!! Where have you been all our lives?

    And how tall are you?
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • I've been pointing out the comparisons to Flacco for some time now. I was in Baltimore in 2008, and the similarities are eerily close. And not all us Seahawks fans are full of hyperbolic criticism.
    World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
    User avatar
    Seahawk Sailor
    * .NET Navy Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 18178
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
    Location: The beautiful PNW


  • I hope Wilson is more like Bledsoe, and less Mirer.

    I know preseason means nothing but Mirer and some of those other QB's on there never played as well as Wilson did in his preseason so that gives me a lot of hope and confidence he will be special.
    NFL, all your Owlz are belong to us!
    User avatar
    12th_Bob
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1745
    Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 7:56 pm


  • You guys are going to let this guy off the hook without providing his height?
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • bestfightstory wrote:You guys are going to let this guy off the hook without providing his height?


    It's amazing how no one mentions Wilson's height as a problem now. Suck it haters!
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5211
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


  • hawksfan515 wrote:
    bestfightstory wrote:You guys are going to let this guy off the hook without providing his height?


    It's amazing how no one mentions Wilson's height as a problem now. Suck it haters!



    You seem about 5' 8". And proportionate (if you know what I mean).
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • bestfightstory wrote:
    hawksfan515 wrote:
    bestfightstory wrote:You guys are going to let this guy off the hook without providing his height?


    It's amazing how no one mentions Wilson's height as a problem now. Suck it haters!



    You seem about 5' 8". And proportionate (if you know what I mean).


    Are you asking him out for a drink?
    President of the Perfect Parents Society - est. 2013
    User avatar
    JesterHawk
    * Smackmeister *
     
    Posts: 6979
    Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:56 pm


  • Hawkadeus wrote:I have been reading this site the past few weeks and have been absolutely baffled at the level of criticism and hatred thrown Russell Wilson's way for what has been nothing but expected rookie qb play. I realize Seahawks fans are excited over our awesome defense and desperately want to win NOW. But I've read a lot of Russell Wilson hate on this site that I really do not understand. If one were to only read this site or listen to sports radio and not watch the games, you would think we were watching one of the worst rookie qb's of all time. That Ryan Leaf was reincarnated in the body of a midget.

    Russell Wilson is a rookie qb starting from week one. Here is a quick and simple recap of all qb's who have done the same over the past 20 years and started their team's first five games.

    Image

    If you analyze these #'s closely, you'll note the crazy similarities between Wilson's #'s (pass attempts and yardage, especially) to that of Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco's. And guess what differentiates Ryan & Flacco from the rest of the qb's on the list? They played on playoff caliber teams with really good defenses that were able to carry their teams and allow their team to play conservative on offense. Sound familiar? But then again, hey, Wilson could be putting up passing #'s like Cam Newton, Sam Bradford, and Matt Stafford, whose teams sucked, were usually losing, and led to them thowing the ball an extra 75 times compared to Ryan, Flacco & their playoff teams. Yeah, Wilson could be doing that, right? Then he would be putting up the #'s fans are demanding, yes?

    I have read more than a few on this site talk of Wilson as if he has zero future and as if his play right now is 100% indicative of his ultimate future potential. Really? If so, was this the case for Peyton Manning, Drew Bledsoe, Matthew Stafford, Matt Ryan, & Joe Flacco? Did those guys never grow beyond their first 5 start #'s?

    One interesting thing to note is Wilson has the 6th best qb rating of the entire 20 year list (also interesting is that 2 of the 5 better ratings belong to Luck and RG3). Not to mention Wilson is tied for the most wins of anyone. Most here can agree that at least a couple of Wilson's int's this year were mostly on his receivers (McCoy, Baldwin, Lynch). Do away with just one or two of those, and his qb rating goes up drastically. Not to mention if Braylon Edwards catches a game winning TD in AZ. Yes, those things didn't happen. But even so, Wilson measures up fairly with just about every qb that has been in the same circmstances over the past two decades.

    And yet Seahawks fans demand more! Really? Would Atlanta, Baltimore, or Detroit be better off today had they benched their rookie qb's in favor of possibly more ready at the time, safer, but ultimately lower ceiling qbs? Would they be better off today in 2012 had they back in 2008 and 2009 felt it was all or nothing for their franchises and had to do whatever possible to win then, future be damned? I'm sure their fans wanted desperately to win right away. But I'll also venture to guess they as they are now, look back and are more than glad they took the route they did.

    The "only" differences I can see between Matt Ryan/Joe Flacco and Russell Wilson through 5 games is perception. Not play, stats, or winning by any means. They are all basically the exact same. Rookie qb's, whose teams asked very little of them, in effort to let their superior defense lead the way. No, the only difference I see is Ryan and Flacco were highly praised 1st rounders, and Ryan and Flacco were of prototypical height. Russell Wilson is neither. Yet he to this point is matching his taller, higher drafted counterparts to the letter. But fans thought more of Ryan and Flacco. Because they were 1st round draft picks with high expectations and didn't have every expert in the land saying they are physically incapable of every being anything more than they had shown in their first 5 games in the NFL.

    So that's it. The only difference between Russell Wilson's first five games and those of Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco is the people who continue to doubt and degrade this no good, 3rd round, midget who will never be any better than Mel Kiper or Hugh Millen say he will be. And this includes a good portion of Seahawks fans.

    It's a polarizing debate to say the least. But when you really study the #'s, it starts to paint a much more accurate picture as to how people are seeing what they want to see. Because I can say say with 1000% certainty, that if Russell Wilson had played these exact 5 games, but was 6'4" and drafted in the first round, that most Seahawks fans would be comparing his numbers to all the other rookie starters with great pride and esteem, and confidently proclaiming that he was only to get better.

    You're an interesting pyschological study, Seahawks fans. At the very least, I can say that. Thanks for the case study.

    Great post, the Millenites are going to hate it though.
    Last edited by Sports Hernia on Sat Oct 13, 2012 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    42-13, 29-3, and 23-17 and a Lombardi trophy from THIS millennium.....deal with it niner trolls

    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!
    User avatar
    Sports Hernia
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10820
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: Lombardi Land


  • Sad that the boa guy feels the need to turn every thread into a joke. Sorry for bothering bringing facts and figures to the table. One would think it would stoke more conversation. Maybe I should focus more on developing schtick. Seems to be what plays on this site as Mr bestfightstory is proving.
    Hawkadeus
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 201
    Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:50 pm


  • Hawkadeus wrote:Sad that the boa guy feels the need to turn every thread into a joke. Sorry for bothering bringing facts and figures to the table. One would think it would stoke more conversation. Maybe I should focus more on developing schtick. Seems to be what plays on this site as Mr bestfightstory is proving.


    Don't worry about the trolls. Thank you for the thoughtful post. Keep it up.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18499
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • Thanks Hawkadeus for these remarkable statistics. Let's hope that Russell can play well against the Pats.
    Bigpumpkin
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4764
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


  • This Wilson-Flynn debate reminds me so much of Hasselbeck-Dilfer. So many at Husky Stadium were chanting "Dilfer" with every Hasselbeck incompletion. And if those fans had their way, pretty damn good chance we don't make the Super Bowl in 2005. By all means, we must win NOW!! Screw building, and screw the future! I want a 1st round playoff loss, dammit!
    Hawkadeus
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 201
    Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:50 pm


  • Great read thanks.
    Digsbone
    Alaskas Biggest Seahawks fan.
    User avatar
    Digsbone
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 250
    Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
    Location: Anchorage, Alaska


  • Hawkadeus wrote:This Wilson-Flynn debate reminds me so much of Hasselbeck-Dilfer. So many at Husky Stadium were chanting "Dilfer" with every Hasselbeck incompletion. And if those fans had their way, pretty damn good chance we don't make the Super Bowl in 2005. By all means, we must win NOW!! Screw building, and screw the future! I want a 1st round playoff loss, dammit!


    I still think we can have our first round playoff loss with the rookie QB, honestly. He doesn't need to put up huge numbers, just manage the game, which he's been doing.
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 18832
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Thanks for the post. I enjoyed looking at the numbers and comparing them.

    I am a Seahawk fan who happens to think that Russell Wilson starting is best for the team. We get to figure out if he can do the job or if we need to pick somebody else next year. I am also not against Matt Flynn. If he stays ready, he'll probably get a chance due to injury.

    BTW - I am over 6 foot...
    User avatar
    Starrman44
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 814
    Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm
    Location: Canby, OR


  • Starrman44 wrote:
    BTW - I am over 6 foot...



    Don't you take issue with the OP repeatedly referring to RW as a midget? I don't think that was called for.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • bestfightstory wrote:
    Starrman44 wrote:
    BTW - I am over 6 foot...



    Don't you take issue with the OP repeatedly referring to RW as a midget? I don't think that was called for.



    Honestly though, this is a great post by the OP. Let's not derail this thread, remember how the asparagus thing started? Maybe on stupid threads like that. But not this one.
    User avatar
    hawksfan515
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5211
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:52 pm
    Location: Battle Ground, Washington


  • hawksfan515 wrote:
    bestfightstory wrote:
    Starrman44 wrote:
    BTW - I am over 6 foot...



    Don't you take issue with the OP repeatedly referring to RW as a midget? I don't think that was called for.



    Honestly though, this is a great post by the OP. Let's not derail this thread, remember how the asparagus thing started? Maybe on stupid threads like that. But not this one.


    Respect. Fair enough. I never did follow the asparagus thing, though. That shtick was simply beneath me. Even I have standards. I will bow out of this thread and let you guys have at it, but the OP certainly does take some pretty lame generalizing swipes at a whole group of Seahawks fans along the way to creating an overall good case for his view of the QB situation. But whatever. This is definitely not my fight.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


  • Matt Ryan is currently the best of that bunch and had the most similar stats to Russell through 5 games.
    Image

    "We all we got, we all we need"
    User avatar
    lukerguy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1412
    Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:00 pm


  • Hawkadeus wrote:Sad that the boa guy feels the need to turn every thread into a joke. Sorry for bothering bringing facts and figures to the table. One would think it would stoke more conversation. Maybe I should focus more on developing schtick. Seems to be what plays on this site as Mr bestfightstory is proving.

    Hey great post. BTW dont worry about BFS. If it is not his post all he ever does is throw crap to mock what you have to say.
    Member of 38 Plus club. Seahawks + PC/JS + Russell Wilson = Superbowl XLVIII +
    User avatar
    rainger
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1606
    Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:32 am
    Location: Victoria BC


  • Interesting stuff. I wonder what it'll look like at 8 games through the season.

    Also, don't sweat some posters around here that troll threads and do little else, some people mistakenly think it's a high-IQ version of wit.
    Rams bet status: honored. Bradford still sucks.
    RedAlice is right.
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24229
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • bestfightstory wrote:............But whatever. This is definitely not my fight.

    Of course it's not your fight. Facts have been presented to support RW and his developement as a starter and that doesn't fit in with your agenda of playing Flynn and endless bashing of RW.

    BTW, I'm 6' 6 1/2" and I think Wilson's gonna be really, really good.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10770
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • Image not found? Can the statistics be re-posted and linked, I'd love to read them.

    Thanks!
    debevemos
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 104
    Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:45 am


  • debevemos wrote:Image not found? Can the statistics be re-posted and linked, I'd love to read them.

    Thanks!


    Ditto...
    User avatar
    BocciHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 869
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:12 pm


  • Hawkadeus wrote:Sad that the boa guy feels the need to turn every thread into a joke. Sorry for bothering bringing facts and figures to the table. One would think it would stoke more conversation. Maybe I should focus more on developing schtick. Seems to be what plays on this site as Mr bestfightstory is proving.


    Well played, sir.

    And thanks for bringing reasoned debate to the forum. Some of us appreciated your post.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7926
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    Hawkadeus wrote:Sad that the boa guy feels the need to turn every thread into a joke. Sorry for bothering bringing facts and figures to the table. One would think it would stoke more conversation. Maybe I should focus more on developing schtick. Seems to be what plays on this site as Mr bestfightstory is proving.


    Well played, sir.

    And thanks for bringing reasoned debate to the forum. Some of us appreciated your post.


    I think it's probably more than some.
    Championships are forever.
    User avatar
    Happy
    * NET Lead Admin *
     
    Posts: 8555
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am


  • For those requesting the image in the OP's analysis... I believe he's taken a screen grab from an article by Danny O'Neil at the Seattle Times. You can find a chart listing the comparison over the last 20 years here: http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawksbl ... _comp.html

    In judging Wilson, the proper context is not to evaluate him to what other teams are doing around the league, it's to evaluate him in comparison to other rookies. And while other rookies are throwing for more yards, other rookies aren't winning more, and that's not just true this year, it's true if you look at the 20 rookies who started the first five games of the season for their team at quarterback. Take a look and see if it changes your impressions of Wilson's performance


    FWIW - Flacco had one touchdown and seven interceptions after five games as a rookie, and about 30 extra yards. Matt Ryan also had about 30-40 more yards than Wilson and only a 4/3 touchdown/interception ratio. The stats are eerily similar, as are Drew Bledsoe's stats. It's worth noting that other guys like Mark Sanchez and David Carr also had similar numbers, but then Peyton Manning had 12 interceptions, four touchdowns but a lot more yardage.

    But the most interesting fact is none of the QBs listed had more than three wins after 5 games. None. So although the numbers aren't great, Wilson's performance is certainly comparable to that of Flacco and Ryan and as the OP argues, nobody looks back at their slow starts anymore. So the Seahawks can be forgiven for making a similar decision and then sticking by that decision if they truly believe it's in the best interest of long term success.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7926
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • OP is one the smart ones. At least a few of us are rational. Great post
    "If I were Tarvaris Jackson and Matt Flynn, I'd be leery of this kid because if you give him a chance, if you give him a chance and look past his 5 foot 11 or 5-10 and a half or whatever it is, if you give this kid a legitimate chance to win the job, he'll win it" - John Gruden
    User avatar
    mjwhitay
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 217
    Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:22 am


  • Interesting comparisons and definitely puts things in perspective. However, of all the QB's on that list, only one (Peyton Manning) has won a superbowl.
    IndianFan
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 47
    Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2011 3:59 pm


  • IndianFan wrote:Interesting comparisons and definitely puts things in perspective. However, of all the QB's on that list, only one (Peyton Manning) has won a superbowl.


    Great point. That is the only stat that really matters, isn't it?
    "Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not." - Yoda
    WarHawks
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 71
    Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 4:35 pm


  • This much was obvious and to those who see the big picture they know that QBs take years to create and no one is a hall of famer in week 5 of year 1.

    There wouldn't be so much discussion if there weren't Flynn around though I never understood discussing Flynn because it is not as if he is some grizzled vet with previous success - there is basically no evidence that he would perform any better than Wilson.

    People cling to this line of reasoning for whatever irrational bias or lack of perspective that leads them to look past the good things and not appreciate the successes of our rookie QB.
    Driver of the PC/JS Super Bowl wagon since 2010
    Image
    Sherman looks like a ballet master in grand jeté –
    a trash-talking, dreadlocked Baryshnikov suspended
    impossibly above the turf – pro football's paean to
    wanton human destruction slips into the sublime.
    User avatar
    TDOTSEAHAWK
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2931
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:16 pm
    Location: Hamilton


  • IndianFan wrote:Interesting comparisons and definitely puts things in perspective. However, of all the QB's on that list, only one (Peyton Manning) has won a superbowl.


    It's a useless comparison tbh as none of them have any context.

    2012 Brandon Weeden (Browns) - 30th overall
    2012 Andrew Luck (Colts) - 1st overall
    2012 Ryan Tannehill (Dolphins) - 8th overall
    2012 Robert Griffin III (Washington) - 2nd overall (washington originally had 6th pick)
    2012 Russell Wilson (Seahawks) - 3rd round
    2011 Cam Newton (Panthers) - 1st overall
    2011 Andy Dalton (Bengals) - 2nd round
    2010 Sam Bradford (Rams) - 1st overall
    2009 Matthew Stafford (Lions) - 1st overall
    2009 Mark Sanchez (Jets) - 6th overall (Jets traded up heavily to select this high)
    2008 Joe Flacco (Ravens) - 18th overall
    2008 Matt Ryan (Falcons) - 3rd overall
    2005 Kyle Orton (Bears) - 4th round (started because Grossman got injured in preseason)
    2003 Kyle Boller (Ravens) - 19th overall
    2002 David Carr (Texans) - 1st overall
    2001 Chris Weinke (Panthers) 4th round, but went 1-15 (team had gone 7-9 and 8-8 in previous seasons then released Beuerlein in offseason before the draft)
    1998 Peyton Manning (Colts) 1st overall
    1998 Ryan Leaf (Chargers) 2nd overall
    1993 Drew Bledsoe (Patriots) 1st overall
    1993 Rick Mirer (Seahawks) 2nd overall

    The general pattern being that nearly all of the QBs who started as rookies were high draft picks for poor teams in need of a franchise QB. The exceptions to those are Wilson, Weeden, Orton, Weinke, Dalton and arguably Flacco and Boller.
    The ones who have been most successful are Sanchez,
    Manning, Flacco and Ryan, with the exception of Manning, these QBs joined good teams who had either had one poor season (Falcons first season without Vick, had let Schaub go just before the dog-fighting investigation began, Ravens had an uncharacteristically poor season), or had traded up to get a QB (Jets, who had finished 9-7 the previous year).

    Wilson is one of those players joining a good team that had a poor season (in reality, a building team that is only just now coming together), and so is walking into a great position for a rookie QB, where he won't be needed to go out and win games like Peyton Manning was, and so won't be asked to (even though he already has with his final drive against GB)
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2342
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Before I say anything and get labeled with the "unintelligent Wilson hater" label, let's try to keep this civil and have a good debate.

    First I am going to state the obvious, stats can be manipulated to mean anything. How many of those rookie QBs had a top 3 rushing offense and top 3 defense? Some of them may have had one or the other or both but every situation is different. How many of them played lesser competition to boost their stats? Played superior competition to lower their stats? Stats are important and do tell a part of the story but it's just a part. Wilson has 1 TD and 5 INTS over the last two games. That is a stat. I know the instant argument is almost all of those picks are not his fault but that simply proves that stats taken by themselves can tell an entirely different story.

    The second part, look closely at that list. 16 of those 20 were first round picks. 11 of the 16 are top 5 picks. If a team is picking in the top 5, they either a)are a bad team (most of the time) b)traded the farm to get in the top 5 (happens, but less often). Football is a team sport. A QB with a bad team around him will likely suffer stat wise.

    I've said this many times before but often when a rookie QB is starting it is because the team has no other viable option. The "Wilson haters" struggle with this because they don't believe without a doubt that Flynn is not a viable option. Flynn has shown promise in Green Bay. Before the usual crowd chimes in and says "well if Flynn is so good, why did no-one want him in free agency?" I will counter that with if Wilson is so good, why did no-one want him in the draft before the 3rd round?

    Which brings me to my final point. How many of the QBs on the list are 5'10"? Wilson has yet to prove he can consistently step up in the pocket and beat the blitz with his arm, not his legs. Brees can do this, that is why he is so good. Wilson's height is a disadvantage for him and we can see it occasionally. I sure hope he can overcome it and be good this year but Wilson has a very different story than every one of those QBs on that list.
    User avatar
    amill87
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1331
    Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:35 pm


  • TDOTSEAHAWK wrote:This much was obvious and to those who see the big picture they know that QBs take years to create and no one is a hall of famer in week 5 of year 1.

    There wouldn't be so much discussion if there weren't Flynn around though I never understood discussing Flynn because it is not as if he is some grizzled vet with previous success - there is basically no evidence that he would perform any better than Wilson.

    People cling to this line of reasoning for whatever irrational bias or lack of perspective that leads them to look past the good things and not appreciate the successes of our rookie QB.


    There is evidence, no matter how small a sample size. Flynn has more TDs in one game than Wilson does in his career. Before the usual "Green Bay has godlike receivers and the Lions suck" crowd rushes in with their pitch forks, think long and hard about this:

    If that is the reason that Flynn did so well, how come Rodgers has yet to break that record? Does he not play with the exact same receivers and play against the same team twice a year?

    People cling to the line of reasoning that there is no way Flynn could do better and that leads to an irrational bias and lack of perspective to look past the flaws of our current QB to settle for mediocrity.
    User avatar
    amill87
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1331
    Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:35 pm


  • amill87 wrote:
    TDOTSEAHAWK wrote:This much was obvious and to those who see the big picture they know that QBs take years to create and no one is a hall of famer in week 5 of year 1.

    There wouldn't be so much discussion if there weren't Flynn around though I never understood discussing Flynn because it is not as if he is some grizzled vet with previous success - there is basically no evidence that he would perform any better than Wilson.

    People cling to this line of reasoning for whatever irrational bias or lack of perspective that leads them to look past the good things and not appreciate the successes of our rookie QB.


    There is evidence, no matter how small a sample size. Flynn has more TDs in one game than Wilson does in his career. Before the usual "Green Bay has godlike receivers and the Lions suck" crowd rushes in with their pitch forks, think long and hard about this:

    If that is the reason that Flynn did so well, how come Rodgers has yet to break that record? Does he not play with the exact same receivers and play against the same team twice a year?

    People cling to the line of reasoning that there is no way Flynn could do better and that leads to an irrational bias and lack of perspective to look past the flaws of our current QB to settle for mediocrity.


    Now Flynn might be better than Rodgers? I done heard it all.
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 18832
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Who is taking boa guy on a date?
    "Are we rockin' and rollin' or what?!''

    -- Seattle coach Pete Carroll, celebrating with his coaches after the Seahawks pulled off a trade with the Jets, netting running back Leon Washington on Saturday, via Seahawks.com
    User avatar
    MLOhawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3038
    Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:35 pm
    Location: Seattle, WA - USA


  • amill87 wrote:People cling to the line of reasoning that there is no way Flynn could do better and that leads to an irrational bias and lack of perspective to look past the flaws of our current QB to settle for mediocrity.


    Who are the people 'clinging' to that? Not one person to my knowledge has argued there is 'no way' Flynn could do better. He might do better, he might not. What most people argue is - the coaches made this decision based on judgements we could never hope to make. And the coaches had no agenda, because THEY signed Flynn in the first place. They judged Wilson was the better choice.

    And most people are happy to roll with that without the weekly sky-is-falling bitch-fest just because a rookie QB is going to have growing pains.

    You talk about people being irrational, yet there's nothing more irrational than clinging to one games worth of evidence to draw a conclusion. A game that has absolutely zero relevance to Flynn's situation in Seattle. He lost the job, thems the facts. Nobody is ignoring flaws within Wilson's game, they are embraced. Some people don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water because a rookie QB has had a rocky road early in his career. Perhaps - just maybe - there's a long term benefit to getting the growing pains out of the way? That's not settling for mediocrity, that's striving for the long term. It could easily be argued that settling for mediocrity is going with the former 7th round pick who's been a back up virtually his entire career (college and NFL) who couldn't beat out a third round rookie for the gig in Seattle. The same guy who after that wonderful display against Detroit, generated a free agent market that can be kindly referred to as 'lukewarm' at best. Who knows what he'd be doing right now if Seattle hadn't signed him? He might be back in Green Bay, still being a backup.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7926
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • Throwdown wrote:Now Flynn might be better than Rodgers? I done heard it all.


    You are better than that. I did not say Flynn is better than Rodgers. Mearly pointed out what stats show you. Do not try to belittle your opposition by making bold inaccurate statements.


    theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    Who are the people 'clinging' to that? Not one person to my knowledge has argued there is 'no way' Flynn could do better. He might do better, he might not. What most people argue is - the coaches made this decision based on judgements we could never hope to make. And the coaches had no agenda, because THEY signed Flynn in the first place. They judged Wilson was the better choice.

    And most people are happy to roll with that without the weekly sky-is-falling bitch-fest just because a rookie QB is going to have growing pains.

    You talk about people being irrational, yet there's nothing more irrational than clinging to one games worth of evidence to draw a conclusion. A game that has absolutely zero relevance to Flynn's situation in Seattle. He lost the job, thems the facts. Nobody is ignoring flaws within Wilson's game, they are embraced. Some people don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water because a rookie QB has had a rocky road early in his career. Perhaps - just maybe - there's a long term benefit to getting the growing pains out of the way? That's not settling for mediocrity, that's striving for the long term. It could easily be argued that settling for mediocrity is going with the former 7th round pick who's been a back up virtually his entire career (college and NFL) who couldn't beat out a third round rookie for the gig in Seattle. The same guy who after that wonderful display against Detroit, generated a free agent market that can be kindly referred to as 'lukewarm' at best. Who knows what he'd be doing right now if Seattle hadn't signed him? He might be back in Green Bay, still being a backup.



    So clinging to 5 games of subpar QB play is rational? You claim Flynn has too small a sample size, so does Wilson.

    Funny that you seemed to skip my first post in this thread because I addressed the whole "why did noone sign Flynn" thing. Why did no-one draft Wilson before the third round if he was so good? The argument goes both ways.

    Also you may be one to blindly follow every decision the coaches make and agree with them but I do not. Almost every week, the fans are calling for Bevell's head yet we are supposed to trust him when he likely wanted Wilson to start as well? What about Carroll? Is he some kind of QB guru? Or can he actually get a QB worth a damn without having the best prospects in the country knocking down his door?
    User avatar
    amill87
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1331
    Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:35 pm


  • amill87 wrote:So clinging to 5 games of subpar QB play is rational? You claim Flynn has too small a sample size, so does Wilson.

    Funny that you seemed to skip my first post in this thread because I addressed the whole "why did noone sign Flynn" thing. Why did no-one draft Wilson before the third round if he was so good? The argument goes both ways.

    Also you may be one to blindly follow every decision the coaches make and agree with them but I do not. Almost every week, the fans are calling for Bevell's head yet we are supposed to trust him when he likely wanted Wilson to start as well? What about Carroll? Is he some kind of QB guru? Or can he actually get a QB worth a damn without having the best prospects in the country knocking down his door?



    What am I clinging to from those five games? Have I used anything from those five games in my argument? Have you even read what I just wrote?

    This is the problem with your 'argument'. First of all, you make spurious claims like, "People cling to the line of reasoning that there is no way Flynn could do better" yet when challenged as to who has actually made this opinion (nobody has) you just ignore it. You try and argue people are irrational for backing a coaching decision which appears to be a lot more educated than either you or I could ever hope to make visiting an internet chat forum. You argue people are looking beyond Wilson's flaws (they aren't, in fact I've written an entire article on them) and are 'settling for mediocrity'... when actually people are just willing to let this play out, back the team and see if a rookie quarterback can show progress over the course of the season. That to me is the very definition of a rational approach.

    Nobody is saying YOU should blindly follow the coach's logic, but you better have some good evidence to back it up. No offense, but your own personal judgement is miniscule compared to the analysis made by an entire coaching staff who had zero agenda having both signed Flynn and drafted Wilson. I'm not challenging anything here - I would've supported PC's choice whether Flynn or Wilson started the year. So it's not up to me to provide any kind of 'evidence' to back up my position as humble fan.

    As for 'why didn't anyone draft Wilson earlier' - well isn't it obvious? He's a 5-10 quarterback and conventional wisdom says he's unlikely to succeed. There have been a number of stigma's around the league, some have stuck - others have been disproved. Shorter QB's have worked in the league but most don't get a chance and that is understandable. That is why Wilson lasted until the third. There's no mystery why he lasted until he did in the draft.

    Flynn's situation is different because despite having that big game against Detroit in an actual NFL game, without the height restrictions, with the whole 'Green Bay' schtick - his market was cold as ice in free agency. There's an obvious distinction why Wilson lasted until the third. So what was the issue with Flynn? Is it - just maybe - he isn't as good as some people hoped?
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7926
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • bestfightstory wrote:Wow! This guy really has Seahawks fans figured out!! Where have you been all our lives?

    And how tall are you?


    Seriously, the OP knows how to build a strawman argument.

    The REAL bone of contention isn't whether Wilson has potential. Haven't heard a single fan say he doesn't. The bone of contention is whether Flynn would give the Seahawks a better chance to win NOW.

    The key comparison isn't every rookie QB who started day one for the previous 20 years. Even if Wilson ranked at the top of that list it wouldn't matter. The key comparison is how does Wilson's first five games compare to TJacks first five last year. Last season the Hawks pass pro was atrocious. Way worse than this year. This years crew has given up 10 sacks so far. Not great. Last years gave up 10 sacks IN THE FIRST TWO GAMES. This year we have an excellent rushing attack. Last year at this time our ground game was tepid. 60 yards rushing per game less. This year, Golden Tate is finally getting it. He's become a pro. Last year, Golden Tate was still trying to get it. This year, we can pass to our TE's. Last year, our TE's were too busy with pass pro.

    Yet despite all that, last season thru 5 games TJack had a higher QB rating and passed for 60 more yards per game and the Seahawks averaged more points per game than the first five games under Wilson.

    It isn't even debatable. Despite Wilson's potential, he's a downgrade at QB over Tavaris Jackson RIGHT NOW. That isn't to say he won't improve beyond TJack.

    The thing is, does ANYONE on here believe that Flynn isn't a better QB option that TJack? NO. Nobody thinks that for a minute. Which means it isn't even debatable that RIGHT NOW, Matt Flynn is the best QB on this team. He SHOULD be starting.

    Steve Young sat on the bench in San Fran for four years because the best QB was starting. Aaron Rodgers, same thing.

    The fact that Russell Wilson is the 6th best rookie QB to start day one in the last 20 years just goes to show how desperate most teams are that start their rookie QB's. Teams with better starting QB options simply do not start them, not even if their name is Rodgers or Young.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4490
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


  • amill87 wrote:Wilson has yet to prove he can consistently step up in the pocket and beat the blitz with his arm, not his legs. Brees can do this, that is why he is so good.


    Two responses. First, don't judge after five games.

    Second of all, when you actually watch Brees, he's not really a stand-tall pocket passer. He spends many snaps sliding, shuffling, and frenetically skittering around behind the line of scrimmage looking for targets, exhibiting what everyone would call "happy feet" on most other quarterbacks. But it works for Brees.

    People talk about "stepping up in the pocket", and they're right for some snaps (Wilson will have to do this at times), but in this case it sounds like taking a football platitude and assuming it applies to a QB that operates differently. Brees compensates for his height with liberal movement, creating lanes for himself with frequent shuffling that makes him look jittery and almost panicky if not for the epic touchdowns that result. He employs a much bigger pocket for himself than most QB's do, and Wilson is showing signs of figuring out his pocket too. That's how he'll succeed if he ever does.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11234
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • SalishHawkFan wrote:It isn't even debatable. Despite Wilson's potential, he's a downgrade at QB over Tavaris Jackson RIGHT NOW. That isn't to say he won't improve beyond TJack.


    By what standard do you keep concluding this? Wilson is miles ahead of T-Jack in every relevant category except yards per bloody game.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11234
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • @montana

    Youre right. I was a bit too generic about wilsons pocket but he needs to learn how to evade and decide.

    @english

    Im sorry my friend but youre missing the point. The point is stats dont show everything. And there are tons of people who thonk flynn cant be better than wilson. Hell if that were true wouldnt everyone want flynn since it would make the team better
    User avatar
    amill87
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1331
    Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:35 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    SalishHawkFan wrote:It isn't even debatable. Despite Wilson's potential, he's a downgrade at QB over Tavaris Jackson RIGHT NOW. That isn't to say he won't improve beyond TJack.


    By what standard do you keep concluding this? Wilson is miles ahead of T-Jack in every relevant category except yards per bloody game.

    Points per game being a pretty relevant category. And if you give this years team an extra 60 yards passing, they not only beat AZ, they probably don't have to win on a Hail Mary vs GB and maybe they pull it off vs the Rams.

    Oh, and what relevant category did Wilson beat out TJack in at the first five game mark? I keep bringing it up, but no one gives any tangible evidence to refute it. Because they can't, it's irrefutable.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4490
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


  • amill87 wrote:@english

    Im sorry my friend but youre missing the point. The point is stats dont show everything. And there are tons of people who thonk flynn cant be better than wilson. Hell if that were true wouldnt everyone want flynn since it would make the team better


    That's your response? That I'm missing the point?

    Deary me, what a weak as piss debate this is. You throw a bunch of stuff out there, hope it sticks, and when someone challenges you they're 'missing the point'. Good evening, sir.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7926
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • @montana

    Youre right. I was a bit too generic about wilsons pocket but he needs to learn how to evade and decide.

    @english

    Im sorry my friend but youre missing the point. The point is stats dont show everything. And there are tons of people who thonk flynn cant be better than wilson. Hell if that were true wouldnt everyone want flynn since it would make the team better
    User avatar
    amill87
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1331
    Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:35 pm


  • JSeahawks wrote:
    Hawkadeus wrote:Sad that the boa guy feels the need to turn every thread into a joke. Sorry for bothering bringing facts and figures to the table. One would think it would stoke more conversation. Maybe I should focus more on developing schtick. Seems to be what plays on this site as Mr bestfightstory is proving.


    Don't worry about the trolls. Thank you for the thoughtful post. Keep it up.

    Yeah, no need to let someone who disagrees with the facts you provided get to you, because if you do, it will give him satisfaction knowing he has needled, and it worked.
    He's wrong, and doesn't even know it.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3377
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Next


It is currently Thu Jul 31, 2014 4:03 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information