Russell Wilson and the 3 year, $45.5 million baseline

[Rocket]

From what I have heard the only hold is the guaranteed money. Hawks want to keep at 20 mil or less and Wilson wants at least 40MIl+ Tannenhill is getting.

Kewl !! What/who is your source??? :shock:

It was an article on the Times earlier this month

New York Times?
LA Times?
Times UK?
Seattle Times?
Which times?
Which author?
Did it sound like a WAG (unnamed sources close to Wilsons hairdresser)

 

[Rocket]

Assuming it was the Seattle Times, a recent (5/17) "analysis" by CONdotta equivocates his ass off and doesn't hang on the guaranteed money, says the info is from "other sources" and really barely mentions it.
YMMV, of course. We all have our own unique perspectives and abilities.

Me, I believe the most plausible story is the "roll the dice thru next year" scenario, if there is a scenario other than just $$$. The dude is CONFIDENT, if nothing else. :th2thumbs:

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... situation/

 

[RichNhansom]

I wonder if Wilson is betting on himself because he knows his weapons are about to get significantly better. Consider he has only ever had elite level talent to throw to one time and it was only for 1 quarter of play. In that one quarter he put up 3 TD's and it is a complete mystery as to why he wasn't named ProBowl MVP.

As for Wilson benefiting from Lynch and our running game, how does he benefit from the 10th ranked running game in the league? That is where we would be ranked if not for Wilson's 850 yards rushing and instead giving him an NFL average of around 75 yards a season that is the typical QB. You can bet your ass defenses are trying to account for Wilson, he is why our running game is ranked #1.

You can also question by taking away those nearly 800 yards some 3rd down conversions and drive extending plays you are taking away some of the time our defense is on the sidelines resting.

If you believe any RB's performance has no correlation to the performance of his QB I don't even know what to say to you. Comparing apples to starfish is not the same as a QB and RB who work together. Of course there is causation and correlation. Maybe I miss understood the point being made earlier but that is how it sounded to me.

I wouldn't call myself a Wilson or Lynch fan but I understand what each does for this team and I respect the hell out of it.

 

[KiwiHawk]

I wonder if Wilson is betting on himself because he knows his weapons are about to get significantly better. Consider he has only ever had elite level talent to throw to one time and it was only for 1 quarter of play. In that one quarter he put up 3 TD's and it is a complete mystery as to why he wasn't named ProBowl MVP.

As for Wilson benefiting from Lynch and our running game, how does he benefit from the 10th ranked running game in the league? That is where we would be ranked if not for Wilson's 850 yards rushing and instead giving him an NFL average of around 75 yards a season that is the typical QB. You can bet your ass defenses are trying to account for Wilson, he is why our running game is ranked #1.

You can also question by taking away those nearly 800 yards some 3rd down conversions and drive extending plays you are taking away some of the time our defense is on the sidelines resting.

If you believe any RB's performance has no correlation to the performance of his QB I don't even know what to say to you. Comparing apples to starfish is not the same as a QB and RB who work together. Of course there is causation and correlation. Maybe I miss understood the point being made earlier but that is how it sounded to me.

I wouldn't call myself a Wilson or Lynch fan but I understand what each does for this team and I respect the hell out of it.

The question is not how much Wilson helps the defense and running game but how much better he is at doing so than a possible alternative, and whether that difference represents the largest increase in the NFL given he wants to be the highest paid at his position.

Certainly his rushing yards stack up, but Vick and Kaepernick can run. It's not a unique talent. It also exposes Wilson to injury as we've seen happen to Griffin. So that alone doesn't make him top of the heap.

Add his passing and rushing yards and you get comfortably into the respectable 3000 yard club. But the benchmark for the top guys is 4000.

If the job is to hand the ball off to the running back and occasionally pass to keep the defense honest, doesn't that describe Alex Smith more than Aaron Rodgers?

I'm just illustrating that were being asked to pay #1 money for a guy who has yet to show #1 talent, and that makes me question the wisdom of it.

 

[Anthony!]

I wonder if Wilson is betting on himself because he knows his weapons are about to get significantly better. Consider he has only ever had elite level talent to throw to one time and it was only for 1 quarter of play. In that one quarter he put up 3 TD's and it is a complete mystery as to why he wasn't named ProBowl MVP.

As for Wilson benefiting from Lynch and our running game, how does he benefit from the 10th ranked running game in the league? That is where we would be ranked if not for Wilson's 850 yards rushing and instead giving him an NFL average of around 75 yards a season that is the typical QB. You can bet your ass defenses are trying to account for Wilson, he is why our running game is ranked #1.

You can also question by taking away those nearly 800 yards some 3rd down conversions and drive extending plays you are taking away some of the time our defense is on the sidelines resting.

If you believe any RB's performance has no correlation to the performance of his QB I don't even know what to say to you. Comparing apples to starfish is not the same as a QB and RB who work together. Of course there is causation and correlation. Maybe I miss understood the point being made earlier but that is how it sounded to me.

I wouldn't call myself a Wilson or Lynch fan but I understand what each does for this team and I respect the hell out of it.

The question is not how much Wilson helps the defense and running game but how much better he is at doing so than a possible alternative, and whether that difference represents the largest increase in the NFL given he wants to be the highest paid at his position.

Certainly his rushing yards stack up, but Vick and Kaepernick can run. It's not a unique talent. It also exposes Wilson to injury as we've seen happen to Griffin. So that alone doesn't make him top of the heap.

Add his passing and rushing yards and you get comfortably into the respectable 3000 yard club. But the benchmark for the top guys is 4000.

If the job is to hand the ball off to the running back and occasionally pass to keep the defense honest, doesn't that describe Alex Smith more than Aaron Rodgers?

I'm just illustrating that were being asked to pay #1 money for a guy who has yet to show #1 talent, and that makes me question the wisdom of it.

That is not true first off his rushing and passing yards this year were over 4000, 2nd he leads all NFL QBS with the most 4th qtr/ot game winning drives over the last 3 years. He is also doing behind one of the worst pass blocking olines in the league and up till this coming year with a receiving crops that is ranked in the bottom 10 with no true #1. You are paying him like atop QB because he allows you to go cheap on the oline, because he does help our run game, because he does help our Wr with his scrambling, because he does not turn the ball over and because when you need it more often than not he come through. You need to take all that into consideration. To put it in perspective you mention Vick and Kap. Kap is a career 60% complt and 90 Qb rating with more offensive talent around him and only 8 4th qtr/ot drives since 2012. Vick is a career 56% complt , and 80 Qb rating with 14 4th qtr/ot drives in over 13 years. Wilson is a career 63% complt, 98.6 Qb rating with 15 4th qtr/ot drives. See the difference.

 

[McGruff]

I wonder if Wilson is betting on himself because he knows his weapons are about to get significantly better. Consider he has only ever had elite level talent to throw to one time and it was only for 1 quarter of play. In that one quarter he put up 3 TD's and it is a complete mystery as to why he wasn't named ProBowl MVP.

As for Wilson benefiting from Lynch and our running game, how does he benefit from the 10th ranked running game in the league? That is where we would be ranked if not for Wilson's 850 yards rushing and instead giving him an NFL average of around 75 yards a season that is the typical QB. You can bet your ass defenses are trying to account for Wilson, he is why our running game is ranked #1.

You can also question by taking away those nearly 800 yards some 3rd down conversions and drive extending plays you are taking away some of the time our defense is on the sidelines resting.

If you believe any RB's performance has no correlation to the performance of his QB I don't even know what to say to you. Comparing apples to starfish is not the same as a QB and RB who work together. Of course there is causation and correlation. Maybe I miss understood the point being made earlier but that is how it sounded to me.

I wouldn't call myself a Wilson or Lynch fan but I understand what each does for this team and I respect the hell out of it.

The question is not how much Wilson helps the defense and running game but how much better he is at doing so than a possible alternative, and whether that difference represents the largest increase in the NFL given he wants to be the highest paid at his position.

Certainly his rushing yards stack up, but Vick and Kaepernick can run. It's not a unique talent. It also exposes Wilson to injury as we've seen happen to Griffin. So that alone doesn't make him top of the heap.

Add his passing and rushing yards and you get comfortably into the respectable 3000 yard club. But the benchmark for the top guys is 4000.

If the job is to hand the ball off to the running back and occasionally pass to keep the defense honest, doesn't that describe Alex Smith more than Aaron Rodgers?

I'm just illustrating that were being asked to pay #1 money for a guy who has yet to show #1 talent, and that makes me question the wisdom of it.

Russell Wilson total yards from scrimmage for his career is 11.827. Divide that by three seasons and you get 3,942 yards per year, 58 yards short of your mythical 4000 yard glass ceiling.

And that number has gone UP every year for Russell. BOTH his passing yards and his rushing yards have increased every year. This isn't Cam or RGIII putting up strong rookie years followed by years of mediocrity (or worse). This is a guy who shattered rookie records for efficiency and wins and keeps getting better.

 

[Hawkfan77]

The question is not how much Wilson helps the defense and running game but how much better he is at doing so than a possible alternative, and whether that difference represents the largest increase in the NFL given he wants to be the highest paid at his position.

Certainly his rushing yards stack up, but Vick and Kaepernick can run. It's not a unique talent. It also exposes Wilson to injury as we've seen happen to Griffin. So that alone doesn't make him top of the heap.

Add his passing and rushing yards and you get comfortably into the respectable 3000 yard club. But the benchmark for the top guys is 4000.

If the job is to hand the ball off to the running back and occasionally pass to keep the defense honest, doesn't that describe Alex Smith more than Aaron Rodgers?

I'm just illustrating that were being asked to pay #1 money for a guy who has yet to show #1 talent, and that makes me question the wisdom of it.

Just because you refuse to admit what Wilson does for the offense does not make him overvalued.

According to this article:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... /04/page/3

If you scroll down to the middle of the page, you'll see the graphic titled: "Added Wins if Offense Contributed Average Passing Efficiency (Total from 2012-2014)"

The Seahawks rank 5th on that list with a rating of -5.73. -A negative number indicates the additional games the team would have lost, had their offense passing efficiency been the league average.

Basically if Wilson had just average efficiency, the Hawks would lose close to 6 games per year more than their current totals. Meaning Wilson's passing efficiency adds close to 6 wins every year.

 

[AVL]

No matter what he accomplishes/ falls into, Wilson will never be elite to many unless he grows 4 or 5 inches.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

No doubt. You have be over 6 feet tall, throw for 4 or 5 thousand yards, and 30 plus touchdowns to be Elite :roll:
Because that's more important than win/loss record, and making the super bowl etc.
Guys like Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford, Romo, etc. can put up all the numbers they want, doesn't equal playoff success.

 

[Rocket]

On the upside, Wagner's contract isn't done yet either.
I think we've established that the FO can negotiate more then one deal at a time.

 

[ctrcat]

I wonder if Wilson is betting on himself because he knows his weapons are about to get significantly better. Consider he has only ever had elite level talent to throw to one time and it was only for 1 quarter of play. In that one quarter he put up 3 TD's and it is a complete mystery as to why he wasn't named ProBowl MVP.

As for Wilson benefiting from Lynch and our running game, how does he benefit from the 10th ranked running game in the league? That is where we would be ranked if not for Wilson's 850 yards rushing and instead giving him an NFL average of around 75 yards a season that is the typical QB. You can bet your ass defenses are trying to account for Wilson, he is why our running game is ranked #1.

You can also question by taking away those nearly 800 yards some 3rd down conversions and drive extending plays you are taking away some of the time our defense is on the sidelines resting.

If you believe any RB's performance has no correlation to the performance of his QB I don't even know what to say to you. Comparing apples to starfish is not the same as a QB and RB who work together. Of course there is causation and correlation. Maybe I miss understood the point being made earlier but that is how it sounded to me.

I wouldn't call myself a Wilson or Lynch fan but I understand what each does for this team and I respect the hell out of it.

The question is not how much Wilson helps the defense and running game but how much better he is at doing so than a possible alternative, and whether that difference represents the largest increase in the NFL given he wants to be the highest paid at his position.

Certainly his rushing yards stack up, but Vick and Kaepernick can run. It's not a unique talent. It also exposes Wilson to injury as we've seen happen to Griffin. So that alone doesn't make him top of the heap.

Add his passing and rushing yards and you get comfortably into the respectable 3000 yard club. But the benchmark for the top guys is 4000.

If the job is to hand the ball off to the running back and occasionally pass to keep the defense honest, doesn't that describe Alex Smith more than Aaron Rodgers?

I'm just illustrating that were being asked to pay #1 money for a guy who has yet to show #1 talent, and that makes me question the wisdom of it.

Russell Wilson total yards from scrimmage for his career is 11.827. Divide that by three seasons and you get 3,942 yards per year, 58 yards short of your mythical 4000 yard glass ceiling.

And that number has gone UP every year for Russell. BOTH his passing yards and his rushing yards have increased every year. This isn't Cam or RGIII putting up strong rookie years followed by years of mediocrity (or worse). This is a guy who shattered rookie records for efficiency and wins and keeps getting better.

I highly question Cam and RGIII in the same sentence. Cam has averaged nearly 4,250 all purpose yards a year with an insulting lack of weapons and protection. The rookie year was aided only by a washed up Jeremy Shockey and pre-Kuechly//Lotulelei/injured Davis, (ie zero D) and a Cam that had to be turned loose post-lockout to even be competitive. Stats be darned, he has improved since his rookie year and that's why he's won back-to-back division titles. RGIII he is not.

 

[Anthony!]

The question is not how much Wilson helps the defense and running game but how much better he is at doing so than a possible alternative, and whether that difference represents the largest increase in the NFL given he wants to be the highest paid at his position.

Certainly his rushing yards stack up, but Vick and Kaepernick can run. It's not a unique talent. It also exposes Wilson to injury as we've seen happen to Griffin. So that alone doesn't make him top of the heap.

Add his passing and rushing yards and you get comfortably into the respectable 3000 yard club. But the benchmark for the top guys is 4000.

If the job is to hand the ball off to the running back and occasionally pass to keep the defense honest, doesn't that describe Alex Smith more than Aaron Rodgers?

I'm just illustrating that were being asked to pay #1 money for a guy who has yet to show #1 talent, and that makes me question the wisdom of it.

Just because you refuse to admit what Wilson does for the offense does not make him overvalued.

According to this article:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... /04/page/3

If you scroll down to the middle of the page, you'll see the graphic titled: "Added Wins if Offense Contributed Average Passing Efficiency (Total from 2012-2014)"

The Seahawks rank 5th on that list with a rating of -5.73. -A negative number indicates the additional games the team would have lost, had their offense passing efficiency been the league average.

Basically if Wilson had just average efficiency, the Hawks would lose close to 6 games per year more than their current totals. Meaning Wilson's passing efficiency adds close to 6 wins every year.

Case closed, great find.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

Good suff!
I'd use something other than Crackho's contract for comparison. Wilson doesn't have an addiction to feed.

Just sayin!

 

[KiwiHawk]

Just because you refuse to admit what Wilson does for the offense does not make him overvalued.

According to this article:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... /04/page/3

If you scroll down to the middle of the page, you'll see the graphic titled: "Added Wins if Offense Contributed Average Passing Efficiency (Total from 2012-2014)"

The Seahawks rank 5th on that list with a rating of -5.73. -A negative number indicates the additional games the team would have lost, had their offense passing efficiency been the league average.

Basically if Wilson had just average efficiency, the Hawks would lose close to 6 games per year more than their current totals. Meaning Wilson's passing efficiency adds close to 6 wins every year.

You're not getting it. Wilson wants to be the highest-paid QB, not the 6th-highest-paid QB. Why link me things showing he's 6th best as proof he should be paid as the best and not the 6th best?

He's good - I get that - but is he THE BEST QB IN THE NFL? That's the question, not how many wins he represents, unless he is in fact #1 on that list, which he isn't.

Let me try to explain...

An Audi R8 is a nice car. It's much better than a Yugo and demonstrably better than a Chevy. It has a lot going for it - looks great, it's fast, handles well - all good. One of the best cars on the road.

So now I'm going to sell you one, but instead of charging you the price of an Audi R8 ($150,000), I'm going to charge you for a Bugatti Veyron ($2,250,000), but give you the Audi R8. Do you feel you have received a good deal? Or do you think you should have paid less for the car that isn't the very best?

Pretend for the sake of argument I linked a graph that showed the R8 would get you 5 more speeding tickets than a Chevy as proof of it's awesomeness.


And for you other people quoting me how many times Russell Wilson has come from behind, do you know what prevents QBs from coming back? BEING AHEAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Being behind in the 4th quarter is NOT a indicator of success.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

And he told you personally that he wants to be the highest paid in the league? :roll:

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Just because you refuse to admit what Wilson does for the offense does not make him overvalued.

According to this article:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... /04/page/3

If you scroll down to the middle of the page, you'll see the graphic titled: "Added Wins if Offense Contributed Average Passing Efficiency (Total from 2012-2014)"

The Seahawks rank 5th on that list with a rating of -5.73. -A negative number indicates the additional games the team would have lost, had their offense passing efficiency been the league average.

Basically if Wilson had just average efficiency, the Hawks would lose close to 6 games per year more than their current totals. Meaning Wilson's passing efficiency adds close to 6 wins every year.

You're not getting it. Wilson wants to be the highest-paid QB, not the 6th-highest-paid QB. Why link me things showing he's 6th best as proof he should be paid as the best and not the 6th best?

He's good - I get that - but is he THE BEST QB IN THE NFL? That's the question, not how many wins he represents, unless he is in fact #1 on that list, which he isn't.

Let me try to explain...

An Audi R8 is a nice car. It's much better than a Yugo and demonstrably better than a Chevy. It has a lot going for it - looks great, it's fast, handles well - all good. One of the best cars on the road.

So now I'm going to sell you one, but instead of charging you the price of an Audi R8 ($150,000), I'm going to charge you for a Bugatti Veyron ($2,250,000), but give you the Audi R8. Do you feel you have received a good deal? Or do you think you should have paid less for the car that isn't the very best?

Pretend for the sake of argument I linked a graph that showed the R8 would get you 5 more speeding tickets than a Chevy as proof of it's awesomeness.


And for you other people quoting me how many times Russell Wilson has come from behind, do you know what prevents QBs from coming back? BEING AHEAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Being behind in the 4th quarter is NOT a indicator of success.

No, being behind in the fourth quarter could be due to multiple factors most of them having nothing to do with the quarterback. Also it's a strawman to worry about raw numbers in any contract in the NFL it's all about the structure which is why NFLPA abhors Keapernick's contract and even the NFL itself is looking a bit sideways at it.

Also being highest paid won't be an issue after this year and whatever he gets will be a bargain in two years maximum three years. It would behoove the Seahawks to set the market before Luck and Newton enter the fray and if that means paying what looks like a little extra on the surface so what.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

And the Hawks are behind in the 4th quarter so often too :?

 

[Scottemojo]

Just because you refuse to admit what Wilson does for the offense does not make him overvalued.

According to this article:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... /04/page/3

If you scroll down to the middle of the page, you'll see the graphic titled: "Added Wins if Offense Contributed Average Passing Efficiency (Total from 2012-2014)"

The Seahawks rank 5th on that list with a rating of -5.73. -A negative number indicates the additional games the team would have lost, had their offense passing efficiency been the league average.

Basically if Wilson had just average efficiency, the Hawks would lose close to 6 games per year more than their current totals. Meaning Wilson's passing efficiency adds close to 6 wins every year.

You're not getting it. Wilson wants to be the highest-paid QB, not the 6th-highest-paid QB. Why link me things showing he's 6th best as proof he should be paid as the best and not the 6th best?

He's good - I get that - but is he THE BEST QB IN THE NFL? That's the question, not how many wins he represents, unless he is in fact #1 on that list, which he isn't.

Let me try to explain...

An Audi R8 is a nice car. It's much better than a Yugo and demonstrably better than a Chevy. It has a lot going for it - looks great, it's fast, handles well - all good. One of the best cars on the road.

So now I'm going to sell you one, but instead of charging you the price of an Audi R8 ($150,000), I'm going to charge you for a Bugatti Veyron ($2,250,000), but give you the Audi R8. Do you feel you have received a good deal? Or do you think you should have paid less for the car that isn't the very best?

Pretend for the sake of argument I linked a graph that showed the R8 would get you 5 more speeding tickets than a Chevy as proof of it's awesomeness.


And for you other people quoting me how many times Russell Wilson has come from behind, do you know what prevents QBs from coming back? BEING AHEAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Being behind in the 4th quarter is NOT a indicator of success.

Oh, where to start.
What price tag do you put on home playoff games? Hell, any play off games. Because that is what that link was all about.
Comparing Russ to new cars is silly. Bugatti's are rare, but not so rare as the ten best QBs in the NFL, none of whom are available for purchase right now. Dogging 4th qtr comebacks is obtuse. Joe Montana and John Elway are considered two of the best ever, 4th QTR comebacks were their bread and butter, anyone who dogs them for it is being intentionally ignorant.

Shit costs more today than it did last year. Or the year before. Russ can sign the biggest contract, and in 2 years be the 6th highest deal for a QB, that is the way it works. His contract isn't about what the handful of guys who may be better than him make, it is about what the 25 teams who want one of those guys would pay Russ to play for them.

This front office sat on an airplane in Denver hoping a QB who would cost more per year than any other in the league would give them a chance. He didn't. They would have had to change the whole offense for that guy. But they knew how rare it is to get a crack at one of the best. Even if it was only for a couple years at the back of his career. Which is why I am confident they will get a deal done with Russ. They know how rare it is to have one of those guys.

 

[McGruff]

Wilson has gotten better every year. Many say this year was a bit of a dip due to some turnovers, but he also threw AND ran for more yards . . . in spite of being without any legitimate #1 OR #2 receiving options. All that to say, Russell is trending up.

When Russell gets this contract, it won't be for what he has done. It will be a projection based on what they think he will do (within the context of their offense). And with Russell its not hard to predict. He's physically gifted. He's naturally inclined to the position. He works harder than anyone. He's proven he can produce. In three years he's shattered young QB records and doesn't look like the kind of person who will slow down.

In short, Russell is trending up.

Add in the fact that positional value and contract value is trending up as well, and you've got a scenario where even giving Russell slightly MORE than Aaron Rogers now will look like a bargain in the future when Russell likely will be argued among the top 2-3 QB's in the game and $22 million will look like an average QB contract.

Its all based on projections and models. Does that mean I (or the FO) think Russell will be a 5000 yard passer? Not a chance. But can he put up 4500 yards from scrimmage consistently, while threatening defenses like no other QB and protecting the ball and setting the tone and leadinng the team and representing the franchise? You bet he can!

 

[RichNhansom]

Just because you refuse to admit what Wilson does for the offense does not make him overvalued.

According to this article:
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/bl ... /04/page/3

If you scroll down to the middle of the page, you'll see the graphic titled: "Added Wins if Offense Contributed Average Passing Efficiency (Total from 2012-2014)"

The Seahawks rank 5th on that list with a rating of -5.73. -A negative number indicates the additional games the team would have lost, had their offense passing efficiency been the league average.

Basically if Wilson had just average efficiency, the Hawks would lose close to 6 games per year more than their current totals. Meaning Wilson's passing efficiency adds close to 6 wins every year.

You're not getting it. Wilson wants to be the highest-paid QB, not the 6th-highest-paid QB. Why link me things showing he's 6th best as proof he should be paid as the best and not the 6th best?

He's good - I get that - but is he THE BEST QB IN THE NFL? That's the question, not how many wins he represents, unless he is in fact #1 on that list, which he isn't.

Let me try to explain...

An Audi R8 is a nice car. It's much better than a Yugo and demonstrably better than a Chevy. It has a lot going for it - looks great, it's fast, handles well - all good. One of the best cars on the road.

So now I'm going to sell you one, but instead of charging you the price of an Audi R8 ($150,000), I'm going to charge you for a Bugatti Veyron ($2,250,000), but give you the Audi R8. Do you feel you have received a good deal? Or do you think you should have paid less for the car that isn't the very best?

Pretend for the sake of argument I linked a graph that showed the R8 would get you 5 more speeding tickets than a Chevy as proof of it's awesomeness.


And for you other people quoting me how many times Russell Wilson has come from behind, do you know what prevents QBs from coming back? BEING AHEAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Being behind in the 4th quarter is NOT a indicator of success.

Flacco wanted top dollar too. At least Wilson can make an argument. He has in many ways been the best QB in the history of the NFL for the first three years and how many QB's get worse after three years?

As for being ahead in the first place can you make that actually make sense please? I guess you could go through every QB's history and figure out who trailed the least in the 4th quarter but then you would also need to factor in about a million other factors as well. Maybe though you could figure out what percentage of times a QB trailed in the 4th that they came back and won but that would be the only way that comment makes any sense at all and I would be willing to bet if you did the homework and came up with accurate results we would never see them because it would probably significantly disprove your point. I think you would find that Wilson not only has the most come back wins but he also has the highest percentage of them as well as the largest comebacks during his first three years. I'd put money on it.

You seem to be working very hard to come up with analogies that make no sense and straw men argument that would likely be proven wrong if someone did the homework. Do you have any real information that supports your belief that Wilson doesn't deserve top dollar?

Keep in mind I am a Hasselbeck fan much more than Wilson. I don't buy his jersey or follow him on twitter or anything else but that doesn't prevent me from seeing the results Wilson is associated with as well as how this team was before he got here. Hey I wanted Flynn to start and thought he could be good but looking back I can comfortably say that with him we would still have no super bowl trophy. Not because Wilson was amazing against the Bronco's but because we won the #1 seed and home field throughout in large part because of games Wilson took over. Games we would otherwise have likely lost.