Russel Wilson

[rlkats]

Well I must say.

Kaps oline = shitty
Wilsons oline = shitty

Kap sacked 14 plus times
Wilson saxked 16 plus times

Yet while i constantly hear excusesfor kap, there is none. He has regressed beyond all qb skills.

I watch wilson tonight and see him scramble and make accurate throws and keep his head up. I am must say more impressed with him than i ever was. Ugh sick to my stomach. Well crap. Here goes the years of suck.

 

[ringless]

Well I must say.

Kaps oline = shitty
Wilsons oline = shitty

Kap sacked 14 plus times
Wilson saxked 16 plus times

Yet while i constantly hear excusesfor kap, there is none. He has regressed beyond all qb skills.

I watch wilson tonight and see him scramble and make accurate throws and keep his head up. I am must say more impressed with him than i ever was. Ugh sick to my stomach. Well crap. Here goes the years of suck.

Russell certainly had some just amazing plays tonight that were unbelievable. Kid certainly deserves every dollar he is getting.

On another note, the Seahawks don't look nearly has good as they have the last few years. And I think this division doesnt truly have a clear leader at this point anymore. I originally thought Seattle was the best, but it could be any of the other 2 teams between STL and AZ. Each week I am a little less impressed with them and they look a little more beatable. Clearly still a talented team and when you have Wilson and that Defense you are always going to be hard to beat. But they are not as good as 2013-2014 and it shows.

 

[rlkats]

Ya im simply doing a respect credit to wilson not who has the best team in the NFCW.

Besides I did love watching the Rams beat the Cards.

 

[ringless]

Ya im simply doing a respect credit to wilson not who has the best team in the NFCW.

Besides I did love watching the Rams beat the Cards.

Russell deserves all the credit in the world. He is the most elusive QB in the league and most likely top 5 IQ wise on top.

I also love watching every team in the league have their way with SF!

 

[rlkats]

Ya im simply doing a respect credit to wilson not who has the best team in the NFCW.

Besides I did love watching the Rams beat the Cards.

Russell deserves all the credit in the world. He is the most elusive QB in the league and most likely top 5 IQ wise on top.

I also love watching every team in the league have their way with SF!

Hahaha. Dont get mad. Hahahahahhaah

 

[Ambrose83]

seattle is still the team to beat IMO.. because RW will always make just enough plays.. if you think that having Kam back isnt the reason our D has been downright stupid the last 2 weeks then you are on something... if he started the season we are 3-1 at worst IMO.... but thats that. 18 punts in 20 poss is stupid and its not like the lions do not have offensive weapons.... az did not look like world beaters against a average rams team, the 9ers are hot garbage.. I still think we dont lose another div game.... but we will see. I will say we have the worst o line, even SF has a better one.

 

[ringless]

Yes but in regards to the Bears the general opinion was that they were the worst team in the league. Then Detroit was the only team left without a win in the league. I though the win over the Lions would have been more dominant. So I guess Cinci will be a really good test.

While the Seahawks are still the team to beat, and if we played tomorrow I think you'd beat us. I think the gap is a lot smaller than last year. I don't think the Cardinals are a better team than they are last year because the defense regressed. I do think the Rams are going to be playing a lot better this year as well. In saying that I think any of these 3 teams could end up winning the division.

And I think if Seattle had to play NE today they would lose hands down.

Seattle still likely wins the division. Arizona and St Louis should both lose to GB. Arizona will most likely lose to Cinci, possibly Pittsburgh. In Seattle, and maybe even to the Rams again. Cards likely end up as a WC this year.

But last year Seattle led the league in explosive plays, had a top 5 scoring offense, and top 10 in yards and thats going to be hard to accomplish again without the O-line becoming better.

 

[Sports Hernia]

I hate to admit this, but with Seattle's offensive woes, O-line problem and the life sucking black hole at OC, I think the division is up for grabs. I think it's going to come down to a battle of attrition between the Hawks and Cards. I expect a lot more ugly games on Seattle's end if the o-line and OC don't pull their heads out.

 

[Ambrose83]

Yes but in regards to the Bears the general opinion was that they were the worst team in the league. Then Detroit was the only team left without a win in the league. I though the win over the Lions would have been more dominant. So I guess Cinci will be a really good test.

While the Seahawks are still the team to beat, and if we played tomorrow I think you'd beat us. I think the gap is a lot smaller than last year. I don't think the Cardinals are a better team than they are last year because the defense regressed. I do think the Rams are going to be playing a lot better this year as well. In saying that I think any of these 3 teams could end up winning the division.

And I think if Seattle had to play NE today they would lose hands down.

Seattle still likely wins the division. Arizona and St Louis should both lose to GB. Arizona will most likely lose to Cinci, possibly Pittsburgh. In Seattle, and maybe even to the Rams again. Cards likely end up as a WC this year.

But last year Seattle led the league in explosive plays, had a top 5 scoring offense, and top 10 in yards and thats going to be hard to accomplish again without the O-line becoming better.

i dont buy the pats beat up hands down, they got worse on D, no better on offense. We should have beat them last year when they had 2 weeks to prepare and our entire secondary and D line was injured.... they barely managed 20+ pts when we had our worst tackling game I can recall due to injuries IMO. While the offense is not looking great,, the d is and I still think we would hang with them.... only 1 team has best us by 10 in 4 years... that is a remarkable thing... i do not see a team beating us hands down anytime soon.

 

[WilsonMVP]

seattle is still the team to beat IMO.. because RW will always make just enough plays.. if you think that having Kam back isnt the reason our D has been downright stupid the last 2 weeks then you are on something... if he started the season we are 3-1 at worst IMO.... but thats that. 18 punts in 20 poss is stupid and its not like the lions do not have offensive weapons.... az did not look like world beaters against a average rams team, the 9ers are hot garbage.. I still think we dont lose another div game.... but we will see. I will say we have the worst o line, even SF has a better one.

In the last 2 games the Seattle Defense has allowed less points against us than the Seattle offense...think about that

 

[sutz]

Just to throw a bit of realism in here, Wilson makes a lot of his own problems, too. He continues to hold the ball too long at times, and can have a tendency to run into sacks, too. His growing confidence in throwing to Graham is going to pay big dividends as the season progresses, I hope.

Having said that, that last scramble and throw to Kearse was simply amazing. He really is becoming the reincarnation of Fran Tarkenton and Jim Zorn.

 

[Popeyejones]

Just to throw a bit of realism in here, Wilson makes a lot of his own problems, too. He continues to hold the ball too long at times, and can have a tendency to run into sacks, too. His growing confidence in throwing to Graham is going to pay big dividends as the season progresses, I hope.

Yeah, one of the interesting things about WIlson is that you can't really eliminate Wilson-at-his-worst without also eliminating Wilson-at-his-best.

I think some people opportunistically think of the Hawks as "lucky" because Wilson-at-his-best is making the entire pass rush miss him one after the other before breaking the opponents' back with a huge chunk play that reasonably should never happen. And it happens over and over again, because this is Wilson-at-his-best.

The Hawks aren't "lucky" for this though, because Wilson at his worst (taking multiple insanely deep sacks a game, fumbling, sometimes seemingly just waiting it out for the play to breakdown) is the cost of doing business to get Wilson-at-his-best.

I think Tarkenton is the best comparison. From Wilson's rookie year I said Steve Young (which explains why I've always liked him so much), but at this point (and if Wilson continues with this style moving forward) I think Tarkenton is the better comparison. The Young people remember COULD improvise, but he didn't lean on it like Wilson still does (which he still might grow out of, as Young did by the time the Young people remember emerged).

 

[drdiags]

Right now, Wilson is a turnover machine. The ball to Lockett was a huge gamble that paid off, but he does gamble with some of his recievers, while not as aggressive with the one he should be.

11 fumbles last year, all recovered. Seems like you are seeing more turnovers from Wilson since the GB playoff game. Earlier in his career he seemed more protective of the rock. Hope this gets cleaned up. His pocket clock needs to quicken and he has to stop that 20 yd backwards scrambling. Throw it away or take a sack.

But he is my quarterback, so go Wilson!

 

[Trenchbroom]

Just to throw a bit of realism in here, Wilson makes a lot of his own problems, too. He continues to hold the ball too long at times, and can have a tendency to run into sacks, too. His growing confidence in throwing to Graham is going to pay big dividends as the season progresses, I hope.

Yeah, one of the interesting things about WIlson is that you can't really eliminate Wilson-at-his-worst without also eliminating Wilson-at-his-best.

I think some people opportunistically think of the Hawks as "lucky" because Wilson-at-his-best is making the entire pass rush miss him one after the other before breaking the opponents' back with a huge chunk play that reasonably should never happen. And it happens over and over again, because this is Wilson-at-his-best.

The Hawks aren't "lucky" for this though, because Wilson at his worst (taking multiple insanely deep sacks a game, fumbling, sometimes seemingly just waiting it out for the play to breakdown) is the cost of doing business to get Wilson-at-his-best.

I think Tarkenton is the best comparison. From Wilson's rookie year I said Steve Young (which explains why I've always liked him so much), but at this point (and if Wilson continues with this style moving forward) I think Tarkenton is the better comparison. The Young people remember COULD improvise, but he didn't lean on it like Wilson still does (which he still might grow out of, as Young did by the time the Young people remember emerged).

Agreed. But Wilson has never had a top 10 O-line to block for him. When Breno Giacomini and Paul McQuistan are two starters for Russell's best O-line in his career, you know that our O-line is crap.

Tarkenton for now. Young? Maybe someday when he doesn't have to scramble just to survive.

 

[Ramfan128]

Just to throw a bit of realism in here, Wilson makes a lot of his own problems, too. He continues to hold the ball too long at times, and can have a tendency to run into sacks, too. His growing confidence in throwing to Graham is going to pay big dividends as the season progresses, I hope.

Yeah, one of the interesting things about WIlson is that you can't really eliminate Wilson-at-his-worst without also eliminating Wilson-at-his-best.

I think some people opportunistically think of the Hawks as "lucky" because Wilson-at-his-best is making the entire pass rush miss him one after the other before breaking the opponents' back with a huge chunk play that reasonably should never happen. And it happens over and over again, because this is Wilson-at-his-best.

The Hawks aren't "lucky" for this though, because Wilson at his worst (taking multiple insanely deep sacks a game, fumbling, sometimes seemingly just waiting it out for the play to breakdown) is the cost of doing business to get Wilson-at-his-best.

I think Tarkenton is the best comparison. From Wilson's rookie year I said Steve Young (which explains why I've always liked him so much), but at this point (and if Wilson continues with this style moving forward) I think Tarkenton is the better comparison. The Young people remember COULD improvise, but he didn't lean on it like Wilson still does (which he still might grow out of, as Young did by the time the Young people remember emerged).

Agreed. But Wilson has never had a top 10 O-line to block for him. When Breno Giacomini and Paul McQuistan are two starters for Russell's best O-line in his career, you know that our O-line is crap.

Tarkenton for now. Young? Maybe someday when he doesn't have to scramble just to survive.

I agree with Popeye and I think the point is, it wouldn't matter if he had the Cowboys Oline....you've seen plays where Wilson had good protection (not many this year) and still waits and then runs around...the Oline is bad and he has had to run for his life, but that's also his game.

 

[Ramfan128]

Yes but in regards to the Bears the general opinion was that they were the worst team in the league. Then Detroit was the only team left without a win in the league. I though the win over the Lions would have been more dominant. So I guess Cinci will be a really good test.

While the Seahawks are still the team to beat, and if we played tomorrow I think you'd beat us. I think the gap is a lot smaller than last year. I don't think the Cardinals are a better team than they are last year because the defense regressed. I do think the Rams are going to be playing a lot better this year as well. In saying that I think any of these 3 teams could end up winning the division.

And I think if Seattle had to play NE today they would lose hands down.

Seattle still likely wins the division. Arizona and St Louis should both lose to GB. Arizona will most likely lose to Cinci, possibly Pittsburgh. In Seattle, and maybe even to the Rams again. Cards likely end up as a WC this year.

But last year Seattle led the league in explosive plays, had a top 5 scoring offense, and top 10 in yards and thats going to be hard to accomplish again without the O-line becoming better.

I just don't know what will happen now. The only thing I'm pretty sure of is that the Niners will be in last place.

I still need to see the Rams win a game they should win.

Seahawks don't look good, at all, Chancellor's return has obviously helped, but they also beat two bad teams at home...games they should have won without Chancellor.

I think we learn about the Cardinals this week. Detroit isn't a great team, but they just hung with Seattle in Seattle on Monday night....and they've had 3 road games thus far, with their only home game coming against the Broncos. Not too shocking that they're 0-4.

 

[Popeyejones]

Just to throw a bit of realism in here, Wilson makes a lot of his own problems, too. He continues to hold the ball too long at times, and can have a tendency to run into sacks, too. His growing confidence in throwing to Graham is going to pay big dividends as the season progresses, I hope.

Yeah, one of the interesting things about WIlson is that you can't really eliminate Wilson-at-his-worst without also eliminating Wilson-at-his-best.

I think some people opportunistically think of the Hawks as "lucky" because Wilson-at-his-best is making the entire pass rush miss him one after the other before breaking the opponents' back with a huge chunk play that reasonably should never happen. And it happens over and over again, because this is Wilson-at-his-best.

The Hawks aren't "lucky" for this though, because Wilson at his worst (taking multiple insanely deep sacks a game, fumbling, sometimes seemingly just waiting it out for the play to breakdown) is the cost of doing business to get Wilson-at-his-best.

I think Tarkenton is the best comparison. From Wilson's rookie year I said Steve Young (which explains why I've always liked him so much), but at this point (and if Wilson continues with this style moving forward) I think Tarkenton is the better comparison. The Young people remember COULD improvise, but he didn't lean on it like Wilson still does (which he still might grow out of, as Young did by the time the Young people remember emerged).

Agreed. But Wilson has never had a top 10 O-line to block for him. When Breno Giacomini and Paul McQuistan are two starters for Russell's best O-line in his career, you know that our O-line is crap.

Tarkenton for now. Young? Maybe someday when he doesn't have to scramble just to survive.

I agree with Popeye and I think the point is, it wouldn't matter if he had the Cowboys Oline....you've seen plays where Wilson had good protection (not many this year) and still waits and then runs around...the Oline is bad and he has had to run for his life, but that's also his game.

Yeah. I think there's a common misconception that mobile QBs should take less sacks, but they take more, because they make their lineman's job really hard, and like Wilson, they end up taking sacks because they also make guys miss sacks.

Guys like Manning and Brady make their lines look better than they are because they get the ball out insanely quickly and their lineman always know where they'll be. Scrambling guys like Wilson are just insanely hard to block for (I say this having coached O-Line for both types of QBs, albeit only at the HS level).

TBF through four games this year I'm seeing less of the maddening stuff from Wilson (bailing horizontally or backwards from the top of the pocket even w/out any pressure; he's finally stepping in a little bit more), but Wilson's game is also what it is. TBF I think it's fairly smart for the Hawks to not have invested in the O-Line over these past few years, because with Lynch and Wilson doing so is probably more beside the point than it is with any other RB/QB tandem I can think of (even historically). With the decline of Lynch and Wilson's development I think they might start putting draft capital into the line again, but for now, I understand why they haven't.

 

[ringless]

Yeah, one of the interesting things about WIlson is that you can't really eliminate Wilson-at-his-worst without also eliminating Wilson-at-his-best.

I think some people opportunistically think of the Hawks as "lucky" because Wilson-at-his-best is making the entire pass rush miss him one after the other before breaking the opponents' back with a huge chunk play that reasonably should never happen. And it happens over and over again, because this is Wilson-at-his-best.

The Hawks aren't "lucky" for this though, because Wilson at his worst (taking multiple insanely deep sacks a game, fumbling, sometimes seemingly just waiting it out for the play to breakdown) is the cost of doing business to get Wilson-at-his-best.

I think Tarkenton is the best comparison. From Wilson's rookie year I said Steve Young (which explains why I've always liked him so much), but at this point (and if Wilson continues with this style moving forward) I think Tarkenton is the better comparison. The Young people remember COULD improvise, but he didn't lean on it like Wilson still does (which he still might grow out of, as Young did by the time the Young people remember emerged).[/quote]

Agreed. But Wilson has never had a top 10 O-line to block for him. When Breno Giacomini and Paul McQuistan are two starters for Russell's best O-line in his career, you know that our O-line is crap.

Tarkenton for now. Young? Maybe someday when he doesn't have to scramble just to survive.[/quote]


I agree with Popeye and I think the point is, it wouldn't matter if he had the Cowboys Oline....you've seen plays where Wilson had good protection (not many this year) and still waits and then runs around...the Oline is bad and he has had to run for his life, but that's also his game.[/quote]

Yeah. I think there's a common misconception that mobile QBs should take less sacks, but they take more, because they make their lineman's job really hard, and like Wilson, they end up taking sacks because they also make guys miss sacks.

Guys like Manning and Brady make their lines look better than they are because they get the ball out insanely quickly and their lineman always know where they'll be. Scrambling guys like Wilson are just insanely hard to block for (I say this having coached O-Line for both types of QBs, albeit only at the HS level).

TBF through four games this year I'm seeing less of the maddening stuff from Wilson (bailing horizontally or backwards from the top of the pocket even w/out any pressure; he's finally stepping in a little bit more), but Wilson's game is also what it is. TBF I think it's fairly smart for the Hawks to not have invested in the O-Line over these past few years, because with Lynch and Wilson doing so is probably more beside the point than it is with any other RB/QB tandem I can think of (even historically). With the decline of Lynch and Wilson's development I think they might start putting draft capital into the line again, but for now, I understand why they haven't.[/quote]


That's a good point and something I've wondered about in the past. It's incredibly hard for OL to do their job correctly with all the lateral movement or the deep drops. While Russell has a bad O-line it gets compounded when he doesnt step up into the pocket. But at the same time you can see how quickly the line breaks down so I can understand why Russell goes to where he can create his own space. I can't really blame all of the turnovers on him. I saw some really bad snaps this season where it's lucky they're haven't been more fumbles. A bad snap with quick penetration and multiple hits is always going to lead to an increase in fumbles.

But when the game is on the line Wilson just has another gear he can go into despite how bad his o-line is playing or other players on the team and that is something that is just in him as a player. He creates his own luck through hard work.

 

[mrt144]

The deep drops are a play calling issue to some extent though. It's insane to call these plays routinely.

 

[b8rtm8nn]

Wilson is fantastic, who cares if he takes a non-traditional route to win. That is like saying you wouldn't want Drew Brees because you don't like his game, excpet he has taken his team to win the Superbowl and the play-offs numerous times.

Does Wilson need a good defense to keep the score tight? Yes.
Does Wilson need a decent running game to help keep the defense spread a bit? Yes.

But that is what Seattle has built and he fits great. Even in a down year, your team will be successful because he is just that competitive and that good at winning.