Mister Martie
Footballguy
Or if they practiced how to defend a hail mary.It would have helped if they put a defense on the field against Oregon.How did the Badgers lose three games with this dude as the QB? Still drives me crazy...
Or if they practiced how to defend a hail mary.It would have helped if they put a defense on the field against Oregon.How did the Badgers lose three games with this dude as the QB? Still drives me crazy...
Yep.Or if they practiced how to defend a hail mary.It would have helped if they put a defense on the field against Oregon.How did the Badgers lose three games with this dude as the QB? Still drives me crazy...
Michigan State, yeah. Brutal loss. He was barely over the goal line.Yep.Or if they practiced how to defend a hail mary.It would have helped if they put a defense on the field against Oregon.How did the Badgers lose three games with this dude as the QB? Still drives me crazy...
Seattle is built to be a team that will win on the ground and grind out wins playing solid defense. Over the long haul Stafford is going to have many more monster games throwing for more than 400 yards. Wilson may never get that chance to post monster games (passing yards) because of the way his team is built. Sure, he will have some 4 TD games like he has recently, but you have to know that TDs aren't the better barometer for future statistical success. For a QB passing yardage is much more likely to indicate future statistical success. Think back to the Aikman days. He was a wonderful efficient QB on a running team. Aikman had some monster games, but they were few and far between.How did I do?considering offering stafford for this guy in dyno. Talk me off the ledge
Decently. Stafford's value is likely at a career low right now. But watching Wilson this year has been fun, and watching Stafford this year has been painful. Obviously that's not a good reason to make a move in and of itself. The bigger question IMO than whether he keeps the passing TDs up is whether that read option gets figured out, or if he keeps putting up RGIII stats on the ground.Seattle is built to be a team that will win on the ground and grind out wins playing solid defense. Over the long haul Stafford is going to have many more monster games throwing for more than 400 yards. Wilson may never get that chance to post monster games (passing yards) because of the way his team is built. Sure, he will have some 4 TD games like he has recently, but you have to know that TDs aren't the better barometer for future statistical success. For a QB passing yardage is much more likely to indicate future statistical success. Think back to the Aikman days. He was a wonderful efficient QB on a running team. Aikman had some monster games, but they were few and far between.How did I do?considering offering stafford for this guy in dyno. Talk me off the ledge
I watch just about all of these. Kid's disposition is incredible. I love the "Go Hawks!" at the conclusion of every press conference.
1. Russell Wilson, QB, SEA (+33.1)
I remember talking about Wilson with Neil Hornsby during preseason. He came away convinced he was pretty special, to which my cynical response was let’s see how he would do during the regular season. Well, the cynic in me dies a little every time I see Wilson, instead I’m stunned by his play. He was superb against San Francisco and his form, especially in the second half of the year, makes a mockery of the fact 74 players were taken ahead of him in any draft class. There aren’t 74 players in the league I’d take over him.
Update?I highly doubt itIMO if we could go back and hold the draft over knowing what we know now, Luck and RGIII would still go 1-2. And maybe Tannehill would go before Wilson.But the important difference is Wilson would be a top 10-15 pick, not a third round pick. He's proven that he deserved to be picked in the first half of the first round, just as he would have been if he were 2-3 inches taller.It's not meaningless if you asked them now and they still would all take Luck and RG3 ahead of Wilson. Every single one would. Today. Tannehill I'm not sure about.So while on draft day "there's not a GM in the NFL that would take Wilson ahead of Luck, RG3, or Tanneyhill" that is meaningless NOW.....
What order he and Tannehill would be taken in doesn't really matter with regard to how well Wilson is performing and how he looks for the future.
If you played in the land of hypothetical the draft would go Wilson, RGIII, Luck.Update?I highly doubt itIMO if we could go back and hold the draft over knowing what we know now, Luck and RGIII would still go 1-2. And maybe Tannehill would go before Wilson.But the important difference is Wilson would be a top 10-15 pick, not a third round pick. He's proven that he deserved to be picked in the first half of the first round, just as he would have been if he were 2-3 inches taller.It's not meaningless if you asked them now and they still would all take Luck and RG3 ahead of Wilson. Every single one would. Today. Tannehill I'm not sure about.So while on draft day "there's not a GM in the NFL that would take Wilson ahead of Luck, RG3, or Tanneyhill" that is meaningless NOW.....
What order he and Tannehill would be taken in doesn't really matter with regard to how well Wilson is performing and how he looks for the future.
If a shorter than ideal QB in future drafts can bring his level of maturity, character, work ethic, arm strength, accuracy, pocket awareness, and athleticism then yes he's made them some money.'Sabertooth said:What does Wilson, at his height do for the future of the draft? I think he may have made some shorter QBs some serious money.
In the land of the real:By passing yards: Luck, Griffin, WilsonIf you played in the land of hypothetical the draft would go Wilson, RGIII, Luck.
I don't know if he made anyone any money, but I'd guess that NFL teams will not be so quick to dismiss college QB's due to their height. Beyond that, it's still going to be up to the individual ability of each college QB.What does Wilson, at his height do for the future of the draft? I think he may have made some shorter QBs some serious money.
Oh man, I can't wait for today's game! I'm particularly interested in how we play the Rams compared to in week 4. I had a thought over the past week that it was rather unfortunate that we played away so many games early in the season when Wilson was still learning and could have used home field advantage. We might have won those away games if they were scheduled late in the season.At any rate, here's to hoping Russell Wilson breaks Manning's rookie record today...I'll be at the Hawks/Rams game today, get to see Wilson make some history!
And first rookie to go 8-0 at home.Finished with 26TDs, 4rushing TDs, 10ints a 100 QB Rating, and lead his team to 11 wins. Single greatest rookie season by a QB ever.
Sorry.:By passing yards: Luck, Griffin, WilsonFinished with 26TDs, 4rushing TDs, 10ints a 100 QB Rating, and lead his team to 11 wins.
Single greatest rookie season by a QB ever.
WINS??? Probably trump all those stats..... Wilson had 11.... RGIII Had 7.Sorry.:By passing yards: Luck, Griffin, WilsonFinished with 26TDs, 4rushing TDs, 10ints a 100 QB Rating, and lead his team to 11 wins.
Single greatest rookie season by a QB ever.
By passing TD's: Wilson. Luck, Griffin
By fewest INT's: Griffin, Wilson, Luck
By QB rating: Griffin, Wilson, Luck
By rushing yards: Griffin, Wilson, Luck
By rushing TD's: Griffin, Luck, Wilson
By fewest fumbles lost: Griffin, Wilson, Luck
By team offensive yards per play: Griffin, Wilson, Luck
LOL, you post his stats and then say they don't matter. It's "Rookie of the Year". Not "Rookie on Team With Most Wins In The Year." Going by that measure some Patriots rookie will win.WINS??? Probably trump all those stats..... Wilson had 11.... RGIII Had 7.
RGIII had 8.... oddly enough that "measure" is what a lot of people with votes are using. John Clayton for example is ALL OVER THAT and insists that is why Luck should be ROY. His vote counts.....mine and yours does not. While its shouldn't be the only thing that counts....when it comes to QB it is important.Also, where did I say stats don't matter? Please re-read the first post of mine you responded to.LOL, you post his stats and then say they don't matter. It's "Rookie of the Year". Not "Rookie on Team With Most Wins In The Year." Going by that measure some Patriots rookie will win.WINS??? Probably trump all those stats..... Wilson had 11.... RGIII Had 7.
Griffin gets credit for Kirk Cousins' wins?Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Not really much of a debate. Griffin is the ROY this year. If you compare Wilson's season to the past 10 ROY winners, would he have won any of them? Perhaps.Seattle 2011: 7-9
Seattle 2012: 11-5
improvement under Wilson: 4 wins
Washington 2011: 5-11
Washington 2012: 10-6
improvement under Griffin: 5 wins
Division titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
He'd have won at least half by my count. Probably more.Not really much of a debate. Griffin is the ROY this year. If you compare Wilson's season to the past 10 ROY winners, would he have won any of them? Perhaps.Seattle 2011: 7-9
Seattle 2012: 11-5
improvement under Wilson: 4 wins
Washington 2011: 5-11
Washington 2012: 10-6
improvement under Griffin: 5 wins
Division titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
2002 Clinton Portis
2003 Anquan Boldin
2004 Ben Roethlisberger
2005 Carnell "Cadillac" Williams
2006 Vince Young
2007 Adrian Peterson
2008 Matt Ryan
2009 Percy Harvin
2010 Sam Bradford
2011 Cam Newton
The players’ schedule read “off” the past two days. But, of course, Russell Wilson was “on.”
Monday, the team’s rookie quarterback was in to lead the rest of the Seahawks’ rookie class through a workout at Virginia Mason Athletic Center – a routine initiated by Wilson when coach Pete Carroll started giving the players a “Victory Monday” after the overtime win in Chicago that kicked off the team’s five-game winning streak to close the regular season.
Tuesday, Wilson was in to get a jump on this week’s preparation for Sunday’s wild-card playoff game against the Washington Redskins at FedExField – an “off” day ritual for quarterbacks around the league, and especially the “separation is in the preparation” mentality that Wilson preaches and practices.
Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
Redskins were down against the Ravens when RGIII left the game. Therefore 8. If you feel like RGIII should get credited for a win when the team was down as he left the game.... ok, we have to disagree.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. You weaken your argument when you "fudge" things.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
It doesn't matter if you disagree, that is how the stat is determined. Griffin started the game, his team won, he gets credit for the win. This isn't baseball, & you don't get to pick and choose how the stats are determined, just because it suits your argument.So, since Griffin led his team to a 5 win improvement, AND a division title, while Wilson led his team to a 5 win improvement, but no division title, Griffin's season was better, right?It's kind of silly when you look at it that way, isn't it? When you ignore all other factors, except for the one that makes your argument for you?Redskins were down against the Ravens when RGIII left the game. Therefore 8. If you feel like RGIII should get credited for a win when the team was down as he left the game.... ok, we have to disagree.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. You weaken your argument when you "fudge" things.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
I don't necessarily agree with Scientist, but this is pretty funny.then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.
You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin; he should do the same for Wilson, who didn't finish 3 games (even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson). I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, rather that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
No, you clearly misunderstood. The Redskins were losing when RGIII left the game, he doesn't get the credit for the win. Had the Redskins been winning and RGIII leaves due to injury (and they maintain the lead from that point on), sure...give him the win. Do you watch or follow baseball? mmm-kay, this really isn't as difficult as you are making it.You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin, Wilson didn't finish 3 games, so why didn't he discount those wins, even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson. I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, but that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
You realize that Blown Saves isn't a football statistic, right?No, you clearly misunderstood. The Redskins were losing when RGIII left the game, he doesn't get the credit for the win. Had the Redskins been winning and RGIII leaves due to injury (and they maintain the lead from that point on), sure...give him the win. Do you watch or follow baseball? mmm-kay, this really isn't as difficult as you are making it.You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin, Wilson didn't finish 3 games, so why didn't he discount those wins, even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson. I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, but that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
I do watch and follow baseball. You do realize that we are talking about football, right? Specifically, the NFL, right? mmm-kay, the NFL gives wins to a QB who starts the game. Since RGIII started the Baltimore game, he is credited with the win. YOU want to discount the win from RGIII to bolster your argument. But he is credited with the win by the NFL, so you saying it doesn't count means squat.It wouldn't be a whole lot different than me saying Wilson shouldn't get credit for the GB win, because the last TD shouldn't have counted. The NFL calls it a win, I can make excuses for why it doesn't/shouldn't count all I want, but it still counts as a win for Wilson.No, you clearly misunderstood. The Redskins were losing when RGIII left the game, he doesn't get the credit for the win. Had the Redskins been winning and RGIII leaves due to injury (and they maintain the lead from that point on), sure...give him the win. Do you watch or follow baseball? mmm-kay, this really isn't as difficult as you are making it.You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin, Wilson didn't finish 3 games, so why didn't he discount those wins, even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson. I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, but that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
It's still absurd. There are plenty of ways to bash ITS without relying on being ridiculous. It ruins any positive gains you may make in the matter.You misunderstand. Scientist discounted a win from RGIII b/c he didn't finish the game, despite the fact that the NFL gives Griffin credit for that win. I merely pointed out that if he chose to do that for Griffin; he should do the same for Wilson, who didn't finish 3 games (even though the NFL counts those as wins for Wilson). I wasn't saying discounting the wins was valid for either player, rather that Scientist was deciding which stats to count, based on it supporting his stance.That doesn't make a lick of sense. I'm not pimping Wilson over RG3, but if you don't know the difference between leaving a game while behind and thus not getting the win vs leaving the game due to an unassailable point total in a win then you're just not thinking at all.Assuming you mean that Griffin doesn't get credit for the win in the game Cousins started (which he doesn't/shouldn't), Griffin accounted for 9 wins, not 8. He started the Baltimore game, and thus gets credit for the win. If you are trying to discount that game because Griffin didn't finish the game, then you have to discount 3 wins from Wilson's total, since there were 3 games he didn't finish either.Griffin accounted for 8 wins.... not 10.Seattle 2011: 7-9Seattle 2012: 11-5improvement under Wilson: 4 winsWashington 2011: 5-11Washington 2012: 10-6improvement under Griffin: 5 winsDivision titles: Griffin 1, Wilson 0
I can't believe I went and calcualted it, but their average starting positions aren't as big of a factor as you are purporting. I didn't include the drives from the Cleveland game, nor did I include end of game, run out the clock drives. The Redskins average starting field position was their own 23.8 yard line.In total TD's, he's had a short field really often thanks to his top-rated defense. If Griffin or Luck got the ball in their opponents' territory half as often as Wilson, they'd lead him in TDs. Hench Wilson's TDs/Total yards being so much lower.