Russell Wilson Offered $21m/yr - He declines

[iueyedoc]

You know they also didn't have the star RB in either of those two seasons, since he was a rookie the SB year and he missed the entire next season with an injury. Jamal Lewis was a big factor to that team and they also didn't even have the backup the year after the SB who happened to be a yet to really flourish Priest Holmes.

Yeah, I don't think Dilfer made Balt defense better, but it has been argued in this thread that a QB that manages the game well and helps maintain TOP is worth upwards of 10 spots to a defenses ranking. But apparently that only counts for one QB.

 

[Bearly]

So, QB's that have #1 D's and great running games can seem elite while truthfully not being so...except, of course, R Wilson. Hell, he took Seattle's above average defense made them #1 3 years running and carried them to a SB victory, all while abstaining from sex and fielding phone calls from God. Truly Elite.

reminds me a of a great tune.
[video=youtube;achqPGyhhHE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=achqPGyhhHE[/video]

 

[onebud34]

So, QB's that have #1 D's and great running games can seem elite while truthfully not being so...except, of course, R Wilson. Hell, he took Seattle's above average defense made them #1 3 years running and carried them to a SB victory, all while abstaining from sex and fielding phone calls from God. Truly Elite.

*sarcasm off

Neither Orton nor Dilfer seemed elite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Packer Fan]

So, QB's that have #1 D's and great running games can seem elite while truthfully not being so...except, of course, R Wilson. Hell, he took Seattle's above average defense made them #1 3 years running and carried them to a SB victory, all while abstaining from sex and fielding phone calls from God. Truly Elite.

For me the book is still out on Wilson, it's still too early for me.

But the difference between say a guy like Dilfer and a guy like Wilson is that one sucked for a period of time and the other has been great so far.

Dilfer's magical SB season.
76.6 passer rating, 75 yards rushing. (Dilfer is 70.2 for his career)

Wilson so far.
Passing ratings:
100.0
101.2
95.0
And Wilson averages 626 yards rushing a year.

The comparison between Wilson and Dilfer at this point is laughable.

 

[onebud34]

Yeah, I don't think Dilfer made Balt defense better, but it has been argued in this thread that a QB that manages the game well and helps maintain TOP is worth upwards of 10 spots to a defenses ranking. But apparently that only counts for one QB.

Wilson isn't a game manager though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[iueyedoc]

reminds me a of a great tune.

Oh shit. Made me think of this:

[video=youtube;vcX6tCZbb50]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcX6tCZbb50[/video]

 

[Pegger]

So you're saying that teams can win SB's with #1 defenses and great running games and QB's that just make a few plays when needed? Interesting.

But Baltimore gave up 108 and 100 more points in the seasons bookending Trents SB with Balt. Are you ignoring his effect on the defense? Or is that just a R Wilson effect?

There is not one way to win a Superbowl. Some teams win with a defense (Ravens), some with offense (Colts), some teams win by cheating (Pats, Saints) and some teams win by just getting hot at the right time (Giants). There's no one way to build a winner.

With that being said the game has become such a passing league that many owners and GMs have been candid that having a 'franchise' QB is critical to success. In the 90s the QB was the most important position on the field. With rule changes and advancements in the game that's now been amplified by 5X.

Wilson is a 'franchise' QB the same way Cutler, Stafford and Romo were when they came up for renewal. He'll get an Aaron Rodgers type contract not because he's as good as Rodgers, but because the Rodgers deal will be 2 years old and that's just the way contract inflation works.

 

[iueyedoc]

For me the book is still out on Wilson, it's still too early for me.

But the difference between say a guy like Dilfer and a guy like Wilson is that one sucked for a period of time and the other has been great so far.

Dilfer's magical SB season.
76.6 passer rating, 75 yards rushing. (Dilfer is 70.2 for his career)

Wilson so far.
Passing ratings:
100.0
101.2
95.0
And Wilson averages 626 yards rushing a year.

The comparison between Wilson and Dilfer at this point is laughable.

I know, all my posts have been using others criteria for judging elite, worthy of #1 league wide money, QB's. Mediocre statistics, but winning with elite defenses and running games. Dilfer had it one season, went 10-2 and won a SB, McMahon went 39-7 with a SB win, and Wilson has gone 42-14 and won a SB with the same. Of course Wilson is better than Dilfer and in all likelihood superior to McMahon, though, sans injury, who knows. The point is these guys were never considered elite, but were able to succeed when put in the ideal situation. RW has done the same with the same and that does not equal the highest paid player in the NFL. Now he may end up that, and I would be happy if he was...as long as it isn't the Bears paying him that sum.

 

[iueyedoc]

Wilson isn't a game manager though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He most certainly is. He has ranked 26th, 22, and 19th in attempts. He is a very, very good game manager, and that is not a bad thing, but he is definitely a game manager. Could he be more? Maybe, but again, paying a guy as the most valued player in the NFL, based on assumption is a dangerous fools game.

 

[onebud34]

He most certainly is. He has ranked 26th, 22, and 19th in attempts. He is a very, very good game manager, and that is not a bad thing, but he is definitely a game manager. Could he be more? Maybe, but again, paying a guy as the most valued player in the NFL, based on assumption is a dangerous fools game.

As it sits right now he's in the top 5 for career passer rating

So to this point he's a HOF game manager?

Most game mangers have passer ratings in the 70-80 range.

 

[Pegger]

I know, all my posts have been using others criteria for judging elite, worthy of #1 league wide money, QB's. Mediocre statistics, but winning with elite defenses and running games. Dilfer had it one season, went 10-2 and won a SB, McMahon went 39-7 with a SB win, and Wilson has gone 42-14 and won a SB with the same. Of course Wilson is better than Dilfer and in all likelihood superior to McMahon, though, sans injury, who knows. The point is these guys were never considered elite, but were able to succeed when put in the ideal situation. RW has done the same with the same and that does not equal the highest paid player in the NFL. Now he may end up that, and I would be happy if he was...as long as it isn't the Bears paying him that sum.

I'd say the game has changed a lot since McMahon and even Dilfer. The level of offensive complexity and passing friendly rule changes have made QBs more important than ever. IMO if you take that Bears team or that Ravens team and apply todays rules that would really handcuff much of what they did in coverage both QBs would have been exposed for being liabilities when being asked to do more.

In short, Wilson comes through. He doesn't get as many opportunities as a Luck/Rodgers because many 4th quarters his defense is locking down the game or they are running out the clock, but when looking at his efficency when he's asked to perform he does.

In all honestly when I'm comparing him to other QBs I keep thinking of Drew Brees. I'm not focusing on height, but rather that both are just great at making everyone around them better and coming up big when their team needs them too. I'd also say both guys are very good when evaluating their off field contributions to their local communities.

 

[Pegger]

He most certainly is. He has ranked 26th, 22, and 19th in attempts. He is a very, very good game manager, and that is not a bad thing, but he is definitely a game manager. Could he be more? Maybe, but again, paying a guy as the most valued player in the NFL, based on assumption is a dangerous fools game.

Game managers go through their careers avoiding mistakes. Wilson consistently and efficently makes plays with his arm and feet.

Stats can be very misleading. Watch a few games. He's buying time, keeping his eyes downfield and converting big 3rd down drives while hitting Luke Wilson on a triple move. That's the furthest thing from a game manager.

Look at the 'attempts' stat and take the top 10 Qbs and make an argument that those are your top 10 QBs. Go ahead, I'm waiting...

 

[onebud34]

Game managers go through their careers avoiding mistakes. Wilson consistently and efficently makes plays with his arm and feet.

Stats can be very misleading. Watch a few games. He's buying time, keeping his eyes downfield and converting big 3rd down drives while hitting Luke Wilson on a triple move. That's the furthest thing from a game manager.

Look at the 'attempts' stat and take the top 10 Qbs and make an argument that those are your top 10 QBs. Go ahead, I'm waiting...

Aaron Rodgers was a game manager last year if that's the lone stat that defines a "game manager" QB.

 

[iueyedoc]

As it sits right now he's in the top 5 for career passer rating

So to this point he's a HOF game manager?

Most game mangers have passer ratings in the 70-80 range.

Has anyone arguing he is not worth $21+M/Yr said he wasn't an efficient passing, good leader? He is definitely that, but he currently is 197th all time in pass attempts, 181st in yards, and 160th in passing TD's, so HOF is a bit premature.

Oh and Nick Foles,Colin Kaepernick, Matt Schaub,Billy Volek, Robert Griffin, Matt Moore and David Garrard are all in the top 21 all time in passer rating, 14 of the top 20 all time are active, so that tells you what that fact snippet is worth.

 

[Pegger]

Aaron Rodgers was a game manager last year if that's the lone stat that defines a "game manager" QB.

I think we are on the same page. I was asking him to make an arguement that attempts = franchise QB, when in reality a QB who is very efficent in their first 20 passes rarely are racking up attempts in 'grabage time'.

I'm a huge believer in Wilson and think if Seattle was dumb enough to make him available I hope my team is jumping to the chance at acquiring him. Trade picks, players and use up a bunch of cap space. I don't care, just do what can to get a franchise guy that can play at a very high level for the next 7-10 years.

 

[Packer Fan]

Game managers go through their careers avoiding mistakes. Wilson consistently and efficently makes plays with his arm and feet.

Stats can be very misleading. Watch a few games. He's buying time, keeping his eyes downfield and converting big 3rd down drives while hitting Luke Wilson on a triple move. That's the furthest thing from a game manager.

Look at the 'attempts' stat and take the top 10 Qbs and make an argument that those are your top 10 QBs. Go ahead, I'm waiting...

I think the low attempts (and consequently low number of passing TD's) can give the perception of game manager.

Look at the top of the list in TD's

Andrew Luck
Peyton Manning
Aaron Rodgers
Tony Romo
Tom Brady
Drew Brees
Ben Roethlisberger
Philip Rivers


Wilson is middle of the with half of Luck's number.

 

[Pegger]

Has anyone arguing he is not worth $21+M/Yr said he wasn't an efficient passing, good leader? He is definitely that, but he currently is 197th all time in pass attempts, 181st in yards, and 160th in passing TD's, so HOF is a bit premature.

Oh and Nick Foles,Colin Kaepernick, Matt Schaub,Billy Volek, Robert Griffin, Matt Moore and David Garrard are all in the top 21 all time in passer rating, 14 of the top 20 all time are active, so that tells you what that fact snippet is worth.

You are talking about single season, not career, so you're doing it wrong.

Correction - I checked the career passer rating and you are right. My look needed 1500 attempts, so Wilson, RG3, Foles, etc.. are not included, but I'd make an argument that you always have to look beyond the stats. For example, RG3 had a 86.9 passer rating last year. Looking only at that number you'd say he had a decent year. Now understand in 7 starts he had only 4 TD passes and was sack at a higher rate than both Colt McCoy and Kirk Cousins. His passer rating got a big boost from passing a lot of balls behing the LOS when Gruden was just trying to get the ball out of his hands.

Stats are meaningless without context.

Let's talk about Wilson's QB rating with an understanding how that stat is accumulated - Is it boosted by short passes? No (high YPC/YPA). Is it boosted by hogging TDs in the red zone? I don't think so and can't find the specific site that offers that data.

 

[Pegger]

I think the low attempts (and consequently low number of passing TD's) can give the perception of game manager.

Look at the top of the list in TD's

Andrew Luck
Peyton Manning
Aaron Rodgers
Tony Romo
Tom Brady
Drew Brees
Ben Roethlisberger
Philip Rivers


Wilson is middle of the with half of Luck's number.

TDs are partially an indicator of QB talent, but also how the Offensive Coordinator is trying to score. Seattle grinds the ball within the 20 (most of the time ) where other teams like to spread it out. I'd also argue that each of those palyers have at least one red zone passing threat, whereas Seattle does not.

 

[onebud34]

Has anyone arguing he is not worth $21+M/Yr said he wasn't an efficient passing, good leader? He is definitely that, but he currently is 197th all time in pass attempts, 181st in yards, and 160th in passing TD's, so HOF is a bit premature.

Oh and Nick Foles,Colin Kaepernick, Matt Schaub,Billy Volek, Robert Griffin, Matt Moore and David Garrard are all in the top 21 all time in passer rating, 14 of the top 20 all time are active, so that tells you what that fact snippet is worth.

It tells me that Wilson is a top passer in a passing league

 

[iueyedoc]

You are talking about single season, not career, so you're doing it wrong.

I am in fact looking at career passer rating, so you are interpreting it wrong. You must look at current leaders since Wilson is about 300 attempts short of qualifying on the all time career list.
You know, because meaningful statistics require a certain volume.