Would you take 4 first rounds picks for Russ ?

[pmedic920]

Deleted double post.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

I also think the success of a QB is largely dependent upon the franchise selection him.

Only half of NFL franchises will probably make the most out of a good player and then put the correct pieces in place.

Seattle could still have success without Wilson, if Carroll/Schneider is still here and they selected let’s say, Justin Fields/Trevor Lawrence.

Scheme and franchise stability is crucial for developing a franchise QB.

If Wilson was a New York Jet, Jacksonville Jaguar, Cincinnati Bengal, Houston Texan, Dallas Cowboy, those teams will probably still struggle.

I think Carroll and Schneider would at least think about it.

Who wouldn’t?

If Carroll honestly believes in his system, run the ball, play great defense, and manage the game with the QB, why couldn’t he also find success with a talent young QB.

He would develop him the same way he did Wilson.

Seattle could do it if they wanted too.

 

[IndyHawk]

4 first rounders?Yes without hesitation..Father time is not RW's friend
But the QB pick has to be spot on.

 

[LTH]

depends on what picks they are and what year... I would seriously consider it...


LTH

 

[seabowl]

How quickly people forget the first 36 years.

 

[Jerhawk]

Welcome to the board :irishdrinkers:
You'll find out quickly that some on here would trade him for a box of onions.

I laughed too hard at this lmao

No, I wouldn't trade Russell for 4 1st round picks

 

[Fade]

Nope.

It took 36 years for the franchise to draft a HoF QB.

The Browns, and Dolphins collected a ton of picks. And they now are saddled to Baker Mayfield, and Tua. Very talented rosters, and coaching staffs, but they aren't winning anything in the next 5 years.

Look at Pete's choices at QB before Russ. Charlie Whitehurst and Matt Flynn. Hell no.

This team is not setup to groom and develop young QBs, either. It would be a disaster. With their Marty Ball offense, straight out of 1996. Even if they were given 10 first round picks. They would have a talented roster for sure, but I all but guarantee they would suck at QB. So they would be a 7-9 type of franchise. See the 2011 Seahawks. #2 Scoring Defense, Top 5 running game. Meh at QB.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Nope.

It took 36 years for the franchise to draft a HoF QB.

The Browns, and Dolphins collected a ton of picks. And they now are saddled to Baker Mayfield, and Tua. Very talented rosters, and coaching staffs, but they aren't winning anything in the next 5 years.

Look at Pete's choices at QB before Russ. Charlie Whitehurst and Matt Flynn. Hell no.

This team is not setup to groom and develop young QBs, either. It would be a disaster. With their Marty Ball offense, straight out of 1996. Even if they were given 10 first round picks. They would have a talented roster for sure, but I all but guarantee they would suck at QB. So they would be a 7-9 type of franchise. See the 2011 Seahawks. #2 Scoring Defense, Top 5 running game. Meh at QB.

So much this.

The only trade I’d even consider is Mahomes, because he’s younger, and KC wouldn’t do that trade because of it.

 

[Uncle Si]

Two part answer here.. pragmatically, id say yes if it meant getting Fields or the BYU kid. The other draft picks add talent in needed spots.

But also, getting the 35 mill off the payroll to use throughout the team is a huge bonus. And recent history bears that out. Using that money for key acquisitions to go with the new talent would set the team up for 4-5 years.

No offense to Wilson. Hes my favorite Seahawk and best QB the team has ever had.

But until they flex the qb payroll out of the cap, teams with so much invested in the qb will struggle to win the Super Bowl.

Now, that said, I don't know if I could bear watching RW play for another team.

 

[AgentDib]

But until they flex the qb payroll out of the cap, teams with so much invested in the qb will struggle to win the Super Bowl.

Teams struggle to win the Super Bowl regardless of their QB situation. The great thing about the salary cap and no individual limit is that everything is fair. The three best teams in the NFC are all paying their QBs top dollar and the three best teams in the AFC are not. You can do it either way.

The biggest advantage is having a good rookie QB and that is balanced out by most of the rookie QBs being bad.

 

[Mad Dog]

4 first rounders. More like 7 first rounders. And you’d have to spend them all on QBs before you hit on one. Teams like Miami have been trying since Marino left in the 90’s. SF has been trying to replace Young since 2000.

Look at the top seeds in the NFC. Rodgers, Brees, Wilson, Brady. That should tell you everything about dumping a HOF quality QB.

 

[Atradees]

What about Trevor Lawrence and two drafts with DTs and DEs at the top? A reduced hit at qb with DK and Lockett still here? Way more flexibility.....its intriguing at least and a giant risk I know........is this team a title contender now? Not so sure.

 

[Uncle Si]

But until they flex the qb payroll out of the cap, teams with so much invested in the qb will struggle to win the Super Bowl.

Teams struggle to win the Super Bowl regardless of their QB situation. The great thing about the salary cap and no individual limit is that everything is fair. The three best teams in the NFC are all paying their QBs top dollar and the three best teams in the AFC are not. You can do it either way.

The biggest advantage is having a good rookie QB and that is balanced out by most of the rookie QBs being bad.

When was the last time a team with the QB as the highest paid player won a Super Bowl?

Yes, you can do it both ways, but the statistics on winning (not making the playoffs or even the game) the Super Bowl bear out a trend.

 

[Uncle Si]

4 first rounders. More like 7 first rounders. And you’d have to spend them all on QBs before you hit on one. Teams like Miami have been trying since Marino left in the 90’s. SF has been trying to replace Young since 2000.

Look at the top seeds in the NFC. Rodgers, Brees, Wilson, Brady. That should tell you everything about dumping a HOF quality QB.

When was the last time Rodgers, Brees, Wilson won (or even played in) a Super Bowl though?

And with Brady, he was never the highest paid player in New England.

The NFL knows this and has discussed altering the QB cap hit. But the last 10 years demonstrate a trend in regards to highly paid QBs over their rookie counterparts. It seems the sum of the talent is more important than just the signal caller.

I would bet that the Chiefs and Bills would be favorites in any Super Bowl against the Bucs, Saints, Packers, Seahawks.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Welcome to the board :irishdrinkers:
You'll find out quickly that some on here would trade him for a box of onions.

2 boxes...Reds for salads and whites for salsa. :rumble: :stirthepot: :twisted:

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Only on dot negative would there be more threads about how "bad" Russ is than on the fact that they are 12-4, Division champs and hosting a playoff game in 3 days. And, have a ton of playoff experience, the better team, and a MUCH better QB, regardless who plays on Saturday.

 

[loafoftatupu]

No. There are no other Russell Wilsons, hopefully the FO will use some of that Legacy Allen Estate to clone him and have this miracle of DNA ready to play in the next decade. Russ might be playing for another 10 years, with growth acceleration we could have the clone transition seamlessly.

Besides... the Hawks FO would never waste 4 picks in the first round, they would turn those into like 30 picks for rounds 2-4 and a few 5-7s that actually make the team.

 

[TwistedHusky]

God no.

But I would trade 3 1sts for Pete if anyone would do it.

I would like to see if Wilson's success is the product of Pete or if Wilson could be better under a more offensively focused coach with more imaginative and wider range in playcalling.

 

[jamescasey1124]

Nah...
Not 4 1sts.
Not 4 1st supposedly in the 1-10 range.
Not for mahomes either.
Not when he only clearly has two years left in the tank.

When you have your qb...it is one less position you have to fill. If we could rangle in some top corners who play man and zone, but could also cover tight at all times...
I'll take some of those, but still not for Russ.

 

[bmorepunk]

4 first rounders. More like 7 first rounders. And you’d have to spend them all on QBs before you hit on one. Teams like Miami have been trying since Marino left in the 90’s. SF has been trying to replace Young since 2000.

Look at the top seeds in the NFC. Rodgers, Brees, Wilson, Brady. That should tell you everything about dumping a HOF quality QB.

The Bears have been looking for a solid QB since probably Sid Luckman.

The Jaguars were absolutely elite a few years ago, but they had one problem: Bortles.

I get the "teams aren't winning Super Bowl with too much cap tied up in the QB" but Brady's sweetheart deals with the Patriots heavily skewed that. No team is a multi-year threat to win a Super Bowl without a good to great QB, unless you get that crazy good rookie, but you end up paying them. And that most recent one, Mahomes, is already extended.

It makes it hard to win with the money tied up in the QB, but you certainly can't win it if your QB sucks.