Is this the year of the qb? Is Wilson a top 4 qb?

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Rams Huddle Is this the year of the qb? Is Wilson a top 4 qb?

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 45 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #16387
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Every year, we hear about the Lessons taught to us by who is in the final 4.

    And more often than not the lessons from different years are contradictory.

    The lessons I draw from the NFL final 4 each year is…you learn different lessons.

    I have seen it claimed that Brady, Luck, Rodgers, and Wilson are there because they’re the 4 best qbs.

    Personally while I think Wilson is good and is an important part of why they’re there, he does not strike me as a top 5 qb.

    The other 3 do, but then that leaves out 2.

    #16391
    bnw
    Blocked

    Wilson is definitely a top 4 QB. They don’t ask more of him because they emphasize the run. Wilson can do it all.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #16394
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Wilson is definitely a top 4 QB. They don’t ask more of him because they emphasize the run. Wilson can do it all.

    Well we differ on that. I see nothing that tells me that he can do it all, at the level of a Luck. I see a lot of evidence that he’s a good fit for a running team with a top defense. I also think that you could put about 12-15 different qbs on the Seahawks and the result would be the same if not in some cases better.

    #16395
    bnw
    Blocked

    No. Absolutely no. You should pay more attention. He isn’t a fluke and he is crucial to their success. He is by design the ultimate safety valve to move the chains. This is year after year. I was not impressed with him either but midway this season I couldn’t deny it any further. Give him his due. He’s tough, smart, durable, cool under pressure, an accurate passer and a definite winner. Luck wouldn’t win with the Seahawks because the O line is crappy. Wilson on the Rams this season and the Rams are playing this weekend. Right now he’s the best and that is something to ponder since he is still young. He deserves to be the highest paid QB and there is no one near him in skill set. I’m amazed he’s lasted this long given the emphasis on the run but he makes it look easy.

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by bnw.
    • This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by bnw.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #16399
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    i would say he is a top 5 quarterback. i think he could play in any system and be successful.

    #16404
    cgsuddeath
    Participant

    I’m not convinced.I don’t see him doing the same against better teams.Sorry.

    #16406
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Rogers is a 9.936
    Luck is a 9.314
    Brady is a 9.294
    Wilson is a 9.134

    Thats all there is to it.
    Simple algebra.

    w
    v

    #16415
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    i think he could play in any system and be successful.

    The issue is not the system, it’s the situation.

    Brees is a better qb than Wilson at this point, but then the Saints defense is 31st in the league.

    Seattle is in the playoffs, not the Saints, because they have the #1 defense in the league.

    You think if we switched Brees and Wilson, that the Brees-quarterbacked Seahawks don’t do as well? (Obviously they do as well.) You think the Wilson-quarterbacked Saints do better?

    Yet the Saints are 2nd in passing attempts, 3rd in passing yards…while Seattle is 32nd in passing attempts, and 27th in yards.

    No one says Wilson isn’t good or that he’s just average. But c’mon. They’re 1st on defense and 32nd in passing attempts. He has an ideal situation and isn’t asked to carry the team. I think that Seattle gets the same results with more than a dozen different qbs.

    #16420
    Dak
    Participant

    You can shut down Wilson (and teams have) and the Seahags still win. That’s a TEAM there. I think Wilson is perfect for that team in a lot of ways. But, I don’t think he’s the same on a lot of other teams. On most teams, if you struggle to find passing yards, the team would lose. With his current situation, he can still win because of the defense and running game. And, you know that if you have a strong running game, it’s going to open the passing game.

    I like Wilson. But, no, I don’t think he’s one of the top 4 QBs. Hey, maybe he will in a few years.

    #16423
    bnw
    Blocked

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>InvaderRam wrote:</div>
    i think he could play in any system and be successful.

    The issue is not the system, it’s the situation.

    Brees is a better qb than Wilson at this point, but then the Saints defense is 31st in the league.

    Seattle is in the playoffs, not the Saints, because they have the #1 defense in the league.

    You think if we switched Brees and Wilson, that the Brees-quarterbacked Seahawks don’t do as well? (Obviously they do as well.) You think the Wilson-quarterbacked Saints do better?

    Yet the Saints are 2nd in passing attempts, 3rd in passing yards…while Seattle is 32nd in passing attempts, and 27th in yards.

    No one says Wilson isn’t good or that he’s just average. But c’mon. They’re 1st on defense and 32nd in passing attempts. He has an ideal situation and isn’t asked to carry the team. I think that Seattle gets the same results with more than a dozen different qbs.

    No they don’t do as well with Brees as QB. Wilson moves that offense with his legs and arm on broken plays. There is no comparing stats for that. It’s anarchy and Wilson swims those waters better than anyone.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #16424
    rfl
    Participant

    I think the issue with Wilson depends on one’s definition of a QB’s role.

    As a tough competitor who can make plays under pressure, Wilson is definitely elite. He is in some ways a throwback QB who would fit into the ’50s era game. He drives the offense without being a spectacular passer–a Bobby Layne type guy.

    A guy like this can win–especially on a good team–and make the Hall. He can be a great player.

    But a guy like this is probably a bit more dependent on overall team quality. Specifically, he is dependent on a viable running game. I have a hard time seeing Wilson do well without an effective running game. And, indeed, when we have beaten him we have first shut down Lynch. Similarly, such a QB is not really the kind of guy who can pass a team back into a game after falling behind.

    Is that a way of saying he is ultimately a 2nd level QB? That’s a matter of personal preference.

    Most people would assume that the very best QBs shred defenses with the passing game. Of course, these QBs are also dependent on teammates, especially OL and receivers. But, most observers would probably feel that a great passing QB can overcome more team deficits than the other type. I don’t need to go through the arguments, ’cause you guys know them.

    In this sense, Wilson is, IMO, 2nd tier. He is not an elite passer. I have seen the Ram Defense, which has talent but also flaws and limits, shut him down more than once. He simply does not look to me to be an elite passing QB. If you’re looking for that type, Wilson won’t satisfy you.

    I suggest that, in the end, the test of a great, great QB lies in his ability to inspire in opponents a sense of inevitability. Playing against a Warner, a Montana or an Elway, or a Unitas, one just never feels confident. Get a lead and you just tremble,m expecting the comeback you can’t stop.

    I don’t think Wilson inspires that kind of fear. He can be stopped. Rather readily, if you can hold up to that running game. So, to me, he remains a 2nd tier QB.

    But all this is academic. ON A GOOD TEAM–such as his Hawks–Wilson can win, and win, and win. And it’s hard to argue against that.

    By virtue of the absurd ...

    #16425
    bnw
    Blocked

    Again the fact that Wilson plays behind a crappy O line is disregarded. That he only has to pass 20 times a game is disrespected. What team can have a potent passing offense and win without being able to run the ball? Seahawks run the ball to set up the pass. If Wilson had better WRs to throw to his numbers would be even better. He doesn’t fit according to his numbers as an elite passer but when called upon he is one. Turning broken plays into positive yards whether by his arm or legs he excels and is elite. As a runner he is elite. As a winning QB he is elite. If the Seahawks win the Super Bowl this year then how can anyone continue to not give Wilson his due? With a crappy O line at that. He will be the highest paid QB which makes all other QBs 2nd tier.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #16466
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    He can be stopped. Rather readily, if you can hold up to that running game. So, to me, he remains a 2nd tier QB.

    But all this is academic. ON A GOOD TEAM–such as his Hawks–Wilson can win, and win, and win. And it’s hard to argue against that.

    I think that was all well put. You sum up this view pretty well I think.

    #16468
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    i don’t know. if wilson was on the saints team, i think his numbers would go dramatically up. likewise if you put brees in the seahawks offense his numbers go down.

    it’s close. i definitely don’t think he’s a top 4 qb. but i think number 5 is where there’d be legitimate debate.

    #16518
    lyser
    Participant

    Wilson makes that O go. You could argue Lynch, but I think Wilson is the man is Seattle – we will find out more over the next two weeks and next season when Lynch is likely gone. Dude makes plays when things break down – is the BEST running QB in the league and a great passer – reminds me of Steve Young. He is a top 5 QB. Name 5 better and its splitting hairs. Plus he already has the hardware and is looking for more.

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by lyser.
    #16520
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Wilson makes that O go. You could argue Lynch, but I think Wilson is the man is Seattle – we will find out more over the next two weeks and next season when Lynch is likely gone. Dude makes plays when things break down – is the BEST running QB in the league and a great passer – reminds me of Steve Young. He is a top 5 QB. Name 5 better and its splitting hairs.

    I don’t agree. Wilson fits a scheme. He gets to qb a team that is 32nd in passing attempts and 27th in passing yards, but 1st in defense and 4th in rushing attempts.

    Subtract Lynch from that offense and make it a decent and not great defense, and Wilson is far more exposed.

    I can name 7-8 better and it’s not splitting hairs, they’re better.

    #16521
    lyser
    Participant

    I don’t agree. Wilson fits a scheme. He gets to qb a team that is 32nd in passing attempts and 27th in passing yards, but 1st in defense and 4th in rushing attempts.

    Subtract Lynch from that offense and make it a decent and not great defense, and Wilson is far more exposed.

    I can name 7-8 better and it’s not splitting hairs, they’re better.

    Brady
    Luck
    Rogers – give u those guys.

    I feel the next tier (Brees, Rivers, Rothlisberger, Flacco, P. Manning (at his age) are all very even if not under Rusty Wilson. Debatable. Course there is always the wonder boy A. Davis…

    #16522
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    I don’t agree. Wilson fits a scheme. He gets to qb a team that is 32nd in passing attempts and 27th in passing yards, but 1st in defense and 4th in rushing attempts.

    Subtract Lynch from that offense and make it a decent and not great defense, and Wilson is far more exposed.

    I can name 7-8 better and it’s not splitting hairs, they’re better.

    Brady
    Luck
    Rogers – give u those guys.

    I feel the next tier (Brees, Rivers, Rothlisberger, Flacco, P. Manning (at his age) are all very even if not under Rusty Wilson. Debatable. Course there is always the wonder boy A. Davis…

    All this is of course IMO, as is the nature of value judgements. Anyway I think those other guys you list (all of them) make their offenses go by throwing the ball.

    Wilson complements his offense and defense, and has nowhere near the pressure to come through pass by pass those guys do.

    #17189
    JackPMiller
    Participant

    Wilson knows when to step his game up. There are those players in sports, that can make that key play, key throw, etc. Wilson does that. Sure you can talk about luck such as the onside kick Brandon Bostick muffed up on in the NFC Title game, but those things happen, but he still makes plays, like the throw to Doug Baldwin in that game as well.

    #17197
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Wilson complements his offense and defense, and has nowhere near the pressure to come through pass by pass those guys do.

    Doesn’t matter though. He played his part by being clutch in do it or die time. I have always counted clutch play highly in evaluating a qb.

    You know in 2012, when Softli was still on the air, he used to rave about Wilson around draft time. Just loved him.

    #17217
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Conversation about Wilson reminds me a bit
    of the conversations about Joe Montana over
    the years. Montana was surrounded by an allstar
    cast, and he didnt have the big arm,
    but he was clutch, and tough and smart, etc.
    Was he as pure a passer as Marino or Bert Jones
    or the stud-athletes? Nah.

    But he was Montana. And R.Wilson is R.Wilson.
    …yeah, i dunno what that means either 🙂

    If i were starting a team, i would take
    a Luck over Wilson. And i would take a young
    A.Rogers over Wilson. After that it gets murky.

    w
    v
    ===================
    Laram

    2 of the INT’s came off of perfect passes that receivers muffed so you can’t just look at the numbers.

    If I were starting a team today, it would begin with Russell Wilson.

    Aaron Rodgers is the best most gifted passer in the NFL, but Wilson is the best clutch player in the game.

    He’s a winner. You can always count on him to make the play(s) to win the game.

    People that want to claim that he’s a product of his defense haven’t paid attention.

    Go back to the NFC Championship game against the Whiners. Hags don’t make it w/o his clutch throws in the 4th qtr.

    The dude is money, and has been throughout his brief career..

    I don’t care if you win it with Showtime or you win it with the triangle.

    To coin a phrase…just win baby. And Russell Wilson wins!!

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by Avatar photowv.
    #17219
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Conversation about Wilson reminds me a bit
    of the conversations about Joe Montana over
    the years. Montana was surrounded by an allstar
    cast, and he didnt have the big arm,
    but he was clutch, and tough and smart, etc.
    Was he as pure a passer as Marino or Bert Jones
    or the stud-athletes? Nah.

    I wouldn’t put Wilson in Montana’s class…not even a little. Montana was a smooth, smart, heady qb quarter by quarter who could engineer a great passing game and did it early on WITHOUT Craig or Rice. Montana had already played on a superbowl team 2 seasons before they drafted Craig and 5 seasons before Rice. The 1981 SF offense is Montana, Ricky Patton, Clark, Solomon, and Earl Cooper at FB. He did it while SF was 9th in passing attempts and 19th in rushing yards. They too (in 81) had a top-ranked defense.

    Wilson is a gamer in an offense that does NOT depend on him to throw from the pocket 4 quarters. That makes him a perfect fit for an offense that takes advantage of his read-option skills while limiting his throws.

    The Rams have regularly matched up with Seattle because short of the occasional Ogletree screw-ups, they are set up to both limit Lynch and contain Wilson, making him a pocket passer. When that works…it works, though they haven’t had the qbs the last few games to take advantage (Clemens, Davis, Hill).

    Meanwhile the strategy of just containing Montana would never have worked like that. He was too quick-minded and savvy as a passing qb.

    Now people can argue that being clutch is tops, and that a read-option qb isn’t really to be judged the same as a more pure pocket passer (and compared to Wilson that’s what Montana was).

    So he belongs to a different category, and is perfect for Seattle’s situation.

    But my instinct is, put Luck on Seattle and they thrive, put Wilson on the Colts and they struggle.

    #17226
    Dak
    Participant

    That Green Bay game was a great showcase of what Wilson offers on the field. First of all, without that clutch Seattle defense, Green Bay wins running away, and you would have been talking about how Wilson’s INTs sunk the Seahawks. And, how Wilson would often run around and take sacks instead of getting rid of the ball and playing field position. Instead of putting the game away, Green Bay farts away great field position time and again. So, Seattle sticks around. Eventually, Lynch starts hitting some big runs and pops a TD. Seattle never gave up on the running game, even behind. That’s to the coaching staff’s credit. They knew that you can’t just put the game on Wilson’s shoulders. You need the credible threat of a running attack.

    In the process, Wilson hits on some key passes, and then he makes the clutch throw that wins the game.

    Wilson can make some big plays, with his feet and his arm, and oftentimes it’s in crunch time. I’ll give him that. He has that intangible where he always believes in his ability and he never shrinks from the moment.

    But, if he has a decent game and protects the ball, let’s be honest, Seattle wins that one handily. Without good field position most of the game, Green Bay would have had a tough time eking out points.

    #17239
    bnw
    Blocked

    But my instinct is, put Luck on Seattle and they thrive, put Wilson on the Colts and they struggle.

    Then you have not been watching Seahawks games these past three seasons. Seahawks constantly make a lot of something on broken plays. Luck would not succeed in that system to the extent Wilson has.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #17244
    Avatar photojoemad
    Participant

    if Lynch and Seattle doesn’t rush for 194 yards….

    if the FG holder doesn’t throw the Seahawks’ first TD pass of the game

    if Bostek blocks on the on-side kick instead of pulling a bill buckner

    if the hail mary duck is not completed on the 2 point conversion

    if Seattle’s defense doesn’t hold Green Bay to 16 points after 4 turnovers in the first half.

    we’d be talking about Wilson’s actual passer rating of 44, with a 50% completion rate, with 4 INTS (and that’s including the last 4 minutes of the game.)

    If Dieter Brock had this support in 1985, he’d be a Super Bowl QB and there’d be no 85 Bears.

    All these steps above needed to happen to dig Seattle out of the hole that Russell Wilson put them in to have this consideration.

    #17245
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I wouldn’t put Wilson in Montana’s class…not even a little. Montana was a smooth, smart, heady qb quarter by quarter who could engineer a great passing game and did it early on WITHOUT Craig or Rice. Montana had already played on a superbowl team 2 seasons before they drafted Craig and 5 seasons before Rice. The 1981 SF offense is Montana, Ricky Patton, Clark, Solomon, and Earl Cooper at FB. He did it while SF was 9th in passing attempts and 19th in rushing yards. They too (in 81) had a top-ranked defense.

    Wilson is a gamer in an offense that does NOT depend on him to throw from the pocket 4 quarters. That makes him a perfect fit for an offense that takes advantage of his read-option skills while limiting his throws.

    The Rams have regularly matched up with Seattle because short of the occasional Ogletree screw-ups, they are set up to both limit Lynch and contain Wilson, making him a pocket passer. When that works…it works, though they haven’t had the qbs the last few games to take advantage (Clemens, Davis, Hill).

    Meanwhile the strategy of just containing Montana would never have worked like that. He was too quick-minded and savvy as a passing qb.

    Now people can argue that being clutch is tops, and that a read-option qb isn’t really to be judged the same as a more pure pocket passer (and compared to Wilson that’s what Montana was).

    So he belongs to a different category, and is perfect for Seattle’s situation.

    But my instinct is, put Luck on Seattle and they thrive, put Wilson on the Colts and they struggle.

    Well, I am not persuaded.

    For one thing, I think that view minimizes the “Bill Walsh is an Offensive Genius” factor.
    A lot of what Montana did was because Walsh designed such a magnificent offense.
    I suspect if you put Russell Wilson on that 49er team, nothing much changes.
    Who knows though.

    w
    v

    #17246
    Avatar photojoemad
    Participant

    Well, I am not persuaded.
    For one thing, I think that view minimizes the “Bill Walsh is an Offensive Genius” factor.
    A lot of what Montana did was because Walsh designed such a magnificent offense.
    I suspect if you put Russell Wilson on that 49er team, nothing much changes.
    Who knows though.
    w
    v

    Montana went to the Championship game in Kansas City and was a concussion away from the Super Bowl that year, and that was without Bill Walsh.
    it took Steve Young, (who I think is better than Russell Wilson) some salary cap magic, border line cheating from Carmen Policy to get Steve Young to the Super Bowl.

    Montana was a great QB………

    I like Wilson, but he was drafted on pretty complete Seahawks teams. You have to consider that even Charlie Whitehurst won playoff games with Seattle.

    #17251
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    russell wilson is a great qb. i don’t think anything can convince me otherwise.

    trent dilfer. that guy was a caretaker on a team with a great defense.

    joe flacco. better than dilfer. but still just a very good qb on a team with a great defense.

    russell wilson is a great qb who happens to play on a team with a great defense. yeah he’s got a great running game. but look at his supporting cast. doug baldwin and jermaine kearse were his leading receivers this year. he’s the type of guy who makes his teammates better.

    #17253
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Montana went to the Championship game in Kansas City and was a concussion away from the Super Bowl that year, and that was without Bill Walsh.
    it took Steve Young, (who I think is better than Russell Wilson) some salary cap magic, border line cheating from Carmen Policy to get Steve Young to the Super Bowl.

    Montana was a great QB………

    I like Wilson, but he was drafted on pretty complete Seahawks teams. You have to consider that even Charlie Whitehurst won playoff games with Seattle.

    I agree, Montana was great. But the question is what does ‘great’ mean. Its contested ground as to what “great” means
    when we are talking about a player who is one eleventh of a Team. Its hard to isolate their attributes and its
    hard to compare ‘greatness’ for all the obvious reasons. This kind of thing is never ‘settled’ — its just
    a continuous conversation, with people wondering about all sorts of things over time. Fun stuff, in other words.

    For me, the Chief experience supports ‘my’ position — I remember thinking at the time, Montana looks good as a Chief
    but not nearly as good as when he was with Bill Walsh. The Montana vs Elway game was fun as i recall. Now we have Wilson vs Brady 🙂

    w
    v

    #17254
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    a continuous conversation, with people wondering about all sorts of things over time. Fun stuff, in other words.

    High-caliber football discussion is not about “fun.”

    It’s a life or death struggle to see who is right, and who in contrast must be consigned to the dustbin of evolutionary extinction.

    Which, come to think of it…IS fun…

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 45 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.