New Orleans at Seattle (3 Viewers)

[drummer]

Wilson can barely be in the top 10 if we really looked at it. For one thing, take away the advantages he has in SEA, put him on another team like CLE, and then tell me if he could take a team like IND with nothing like Luck has since he came into the league.

The Seahawks have been without key players in every game this season, including last night playing without $19 mill worth of receiver and their #2 & 3 CBs. In fact I don't think it's too far fetched to say that Brees' supporting cast last night with Jimmy Graham and Pierre Thomas was better than Wilson's.

Put him on another team like Cleveland? Granted the downgrade from Golden Tate and Zach Miller to Josh Gordon and Jordan Cameron would be tough.. it'd be interesting to see what he would do there.

It would also be difficult to go from a defense ranked 2nd on both PA and giveaway/takeaway to 25th and 27th respectively.

the Browns defense is actually not that bad. If the offense could stay on the field a bit more they might be a pretty good team. It's actually not that far off from what we thought about the Seahawks defense heading into 2012--if they could catch a breather now and then they would be strong.

I think people discount what a good offense does for a defense, or rather what a bad offense will do to a defense.

Well, fair enough, but I doubt Wilson would take the CLE defense into 2nd place in those categories just by being Wilson.

Again, I'm a huge Wilson fan, and I'm not trying to take anything away from him. I just think people are over-hyping him a bit at this point by putting him with QBs who have put up HOF numbers over a few seasons under all kinds of different circumstances (like Brees not having his HC for a whole season last year) after one game. I'd love for he to get there though, and I'm a 49er fan. But I am also a fan of QB play, and I do think Wilson has the goods.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Again, I'm a huge Wilson fan, and I'm not trying to take anything away from him. I just think people are over-hyping him a bit at this point by putting him with QBs who have put up HOF numbers over a few seasons under all kinds of different circumstances (like Brees not having his HC for a whole season last year) after one game. I'd love for he to get there though, and I'm a 49er fan. But I am also a fan of QB play, and I do think Wilson has the goods.

Wilson has been awesome since mid-season last year: 38 TD passes and 8 INTs, with an average at best receiving corps, since Week 9 last year. That is awesome by any standard, so while I get that some tend to overreact after a single game, Wilson has been awesome for a while now, and I think last night was probably the last straw in converting those who hadn't yet realized how good he is.

 

[Bamac]

Absolutely, but look at how successful they've been in the draft so far. A few will leave and those guys will be replaced by new talent, hand picked and trained by the same people that stocked the current team with new talent.

This, they've been the best in the NFL at it during the last 3 years and they've hit on way to many players for it to be luck. The people who put the current team together with young talent are still going to be there when people are up for contracts and college players are eligible for the draft.

Big numbers affect randomness. Assume that if all teams are equally good at drafting. Each year, because of luck, you might expect 50% of teams to have average drafts, 25% to have below-average drafts, and 25% to have above-average drafts. So the odds of any given team having three above-average drafts in a row would be a little over 1.5%. But the odds of *some* team having three good years in a row is much higher -- almost 40%. Even five years in a row wouldn't be crazy; the odds of at least one team doing that are about 12%.

There are some pretty decent studies suggesting that draft outcomes are driven by luck. The problem with those studies is that they can't say anything about any particular drafter, so if a draft genius or two actually does exist, the studies will probably call them lucky. But to identify these potential geniuses, you can't just look at outcomes. You'd have to "evaluate the evaluators", which means you'd have to be a draft genius yourself (or at least know what it takes to be one) *and* you'd have to have access to the potential geniuses' notes, film study, etc. In other words, it ain't happening.

Moral of the story, maybe Carroll et al are exceptional talent evaluators, but three years of results don't tell us much one way or the other.

 

[mad sweeney]

Absolutely, but look at how successful they've been in the draft so far. A few will leave and those guys will be replaced by new talent, hand picked and trained by the same people that stocked the current team with new talent.

This, they've been the best in the NFL at it during the last 3 years and they've hit on way to many players for it to be luck. The people who put the current team together with young talent are still going to be there when people are up for contracts and college players are eligible for the draft.

Big numbers affect randomness. Assume that if all teams are equally good at drafting. Each year, because of luck, you might expect 50% of teams to have average drafts, 25% to have below-average drafts, and 25% to have above-average drafts. So the odds of any given team having three above-average drafts in a row would be a little over 1.5%. But the odds of *some* team having three good years in a row is much higher -- almost 40%. Even five years in a row wouldn't be crazy; the odds of at least one team doing that are about 12%. There are some pretty decent studies suggesting that draft outcomes are driven by luck. The problem with those studies is that they can't say anything about any particular drafter, so if a draft genius or two actually does exist, the studies will probably call them lucky. But to identify these potential geniuses, you can't just look at outcomes. You'd have to "evaluate the evaluators", which means you'd have to be a draft genius yourself (or at least know what it takes to be one) *and* you'd have to have access to the potential geniuses' notes, film study, etc. In other words, it ain't happening.

Moral of the story, maybe Carroll et al are exceptional talent evaluators, but three years of results don't tell us much one way or the other.

 

[proninja]

Absolutely, but look at how successful they've been in the draft so far. A few will leave and those guys will be replaced by new talent, hand picked and trained by the same people that stocked the current team with new talent.

This, they've been the best in the NFL at it during the last 3 years and they've hit on way to many players for it to be luck. The people who put the current team together with young talent are still going to be there when people are up for contracts and college players are eligible for the draft.

Big numbers affect randomness. Assume that if all teams are equally good at drafting. Each year, because of luck, you might expect 50% of teams to have average drafts, 25% to have below-average drafts, and 25% to have above-average drafts. So the odds of any given team having three above-average drafts in a row would be a little over 1.5%. But the odds of *some* team having three good years in a row is much higher -- almost 40%. Even five years in a row wouldn't be crazy; the odds of at least one team doing that are about 12%. There are some pretty decent studies suggesting that draft outcomes are driven by luck. The problem with those studies is that they can't say anything about any particular drafter, so if a draft genius or two actually does exist, the studies will probably call them lucky. But to identify these potential geniuses, you can't just look at outcomes. You'd have to "evaluate the evaluators", which means you'd have to be a draft genius yourself (or at least know what it takes to be one) *and* you'd have to have access to the potential geniuses' notes, film study, etc. In other words, it ain't happening.

Moral of the story, maybe Carroll et al are exceptional talent evaluators, but three years of results don't tell us much one way or the other.

This was a useful post. Thanks.

 

[drummer]

Again, I'm a huge Wilson fan, and I'm not trying to take anything away from him. I just think people are over-hyping him a bit at this point by putting him with QBs who have put up HOF numbers over a few seasons under all kinds of different circumstances (like Brees not having his HC for a whole season last year) after one game. I'd love for he to get there though, and I'm a 49er fan. But I am also a fan of QB play, and I do think Wilson has the goods.

Wilson has been awesome since mid-season last year: 38 TD passes and 8 INTs, with an average at best receiving corps, since Week 9 last year. That is awesome by any standard, so while I get that some tend to overreact after a single game, Wilson has been awesome for a while now, and I think last night was probably the last straw in converting those who hadn't yet realized how good he is.

Again, fair enough, although I go season by season when it comes to looking at QB's. That's a great stretch of games though. If he put that all into one season of 16 games, than that's elite by any standards. Then again, Matt Stafford went 47-16 for over 5000 yards in a season in 2011.

 

[PainTrain]

Wilson can barely be in the top 10 if we really looked at it. For one thing, take away the advantages he has in SEA, put him on another team like CLE, and then tell me if he could take a team like IND with nothing like Luck has since he came into the league.

The Seahawks have been without key players in every game this season, including last night playing without $19 mill worth of receiver and their #2 & 3 CBs. In fact I don't think it's too far fetched to say that Brees' supporting cast last night with Jimmy Graham and Pierre Thomas was better than Wilson's.

Put him on another team like Cleveland? Granted the downgrade from Golden Tate and Zach Miller to Josh Gordon and Jordan Cameron would be tough.. it'd be interesting to see what he would do there.

It would also be difficult to go from a defense ranked 2nd on both PA and giveaway/takeaway to 25th and 27th respectively.

Do you believe that he is simply a product of a good defensive unit? What other advantages prop him up? Receivers? Oline? Pete Carroll? Or would any QB perform like he does with Lynch in the backfield?

 

[drummer]

Wilson can barely be in the top 10 if we really looked at it. For one thing, take away the advantages he has in SEA, put him on another team like CLE, and then tell me if he could take a team like IND with nothing like Luck has since he came into the league.

The Seahawks have been without key players in every game this season, including last night playing without $19 mill worth of receiver and their #2 & 3 CBs. In fact I don't think it's too far fetched to say that Brees' supporting cast last night with Jimmy Graham and Pierre Thomas was better than Wilson's.

Put him on another team like Cleveland? Granted the downgrade from Golden Tate and Zach Miller to Josh Gordon and Jordan Cameron would be tough.. it'd be interesting to see what he would do there.

It would also be difficult to go from a defense ranked 2nd on both PA and giveaway/takeaway to 25th and 27th respectively.

Do you believe that he is simply a product of a good defensive unit? What other advantages prop him up? Receivers? Oline? Pete Carroll? Or would any QB perform like he does with Lynch in the backfield?

I would say a great defense, especially a great scoring defense, helps any QB in the league.

 

[JuniorNB]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

 

[pizzatyme]

Wilson is terrific at some things and needs some additional work on others. He has some bad misses when not pressured while in the pocket. That could be due to his height or possibly footwork.

He has the making and the team to be great for many years, however.

 

[MarcO]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

 

[proninja]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

Sometimes in life you don't get the recognition for what you're doing until after you've done it.

 

[sporthenry]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

 

[proninja]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

All of the reasons you gave have precisely nothing to do with how the qb's are playing this year. Clearly, Wilson isn't at their level in terms of career accomplishments, but is he at their level this year? Super Bowls in the past have nothing to do with that.

Seahawks fans seem to be arguing that Wilson is playing at that level right now

People arguing against them seem to be arguing that Wilson doesn't have the resume of those four

They're different conversations going past each other in the wind. I don't disagree with either of the main points, because they don't contradict each other.

 

[sporthenry]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

All of the reasons you gave have precisely nothing to do with how the qb's are playing this year. Clearly, Wilson isn't at their level in terms of career accomplishments, but is he at their level this year? Super Bowls in the past have nothing to do with that.

Seahawks fans seem to be arguing that Wilson is playing at that level right now

People arguing against them seem to be arguing that Wilson doesn't have the resume of those four

They're different conversations going past each other in the wind. I don't disagree with either of the main points, because they don't contradict each other.

So I guess we can put Nick Foles in there too?

 

[proninja]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

All of the reasons you gave have precisely nothing to do with how the qb's are playing this year. Clearly, Wilson isn't at their level in terms of career accomplishments, but is he at their level this year? Super Bowls in the past have nothing to do with that.

Seahawks fans seem to be arguing that Wilson is playing at that level right now

People arguing against them seem to be arguing that Wilson doesn't have the resume of those four

They're different conversations going past each other in the wind. I don't disagree with either of the main points, because they don't contradict each other.

So I guess we can put Nick Foles in there too?

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

All of the reasons you gave have precisely nothing to do with how the qb's are playing this year. Clearly, Wilson isn't at their level in terms of career accomplishments, but is he at their level this year? Super Bowls in the past have nothing to do with that.

Seahawks fans seem to be arguing that Wilson is playing at that level right now

People arguing against them seem to be arguing that Wilson doesn't have the resume of those four

They're different conversations going past each other in the wind. I don't disagree with either of the main points, because they don't contradict each other.

So I guess we can put Nick Foles in there too?

I haven't seen a single Eagles game, don't have any idea, and don't think my opinion would be particularly worthwhile on that subject because of it.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

All of the reasons you gave have precisely nothing to do with how the qb's are playing this year. Clearly, Wilson isn't at their level in terms of career accomplishments, but is he at their level this year? Super Bowls in the past have nothing to do with that.

Seahawks fans seem to be arguing that Wilson is playing at that level right now

People arguing against them seem to be arguing that Wilson doesn't have the resume of those four

They're different conversations going past each other in the wind. I don't disagree with either of the main points, because they don't contradict each other.

So I guess we can put Nick Foles in there too?

Foles is 8-0 over the past two seasons in games decided by a touchdown or less? If so, then ABSOLUTELY!

 

[proninja]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

All of the reasons you gave have precisely nothing to do with how the qb's are playing this year. Clearly, Wilson isn't at their level in terms of career accomplishments, but is he at their level this year? Super Bowls in the past have nothing to do with that.

Seahawks fans seem to be arguing that Wilson is playing at that level right now

People arguing against them seem to be arguing that Wilson doesn't have the resume of those four

They're different conversations going past each other in the wind. I don't disagree with either of the main points, because they don't contradict each other.

So I guess we can put Nick Foles in there too?

Foles is 8-0 over the past two seasons in games decided by a touchdown or less? If so, then ABSOLUTELY!

Uh, I'm pretty sure Wilson's lost a couple by less than 7 in there, given that they haven't lost by more than 7 for a good long while

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'd put Wilson in the same tier as Romo, Rothleisberger, Ryan, Cutler etc. Of course, he's on a much better team than any of those, which makes him look better.

Rodgers, P/Manning, Brees, and Brady are alone in the top tier. Wilson isn't even sniffing that yet.

no offense but - says who? is Wilson not playing at the same level as those guys right now? if he's not, I'd love to see the argument for that because the stats bear out that he is absolutely playing at that level.

The difference between most of those tier guys is results. All 4 have Super Bowls and have been doing it for a lot longer. Same reason why nobody argues Romo deserves to be in the top tier. Statistically he is there or pretty close but nobody puts him in that tier either. Same reason why Flacco and Ryan weren't elevated.

Not that he can't play himself into it but you need sustained excellence and results to be in there. Not to mention, Wilson seems to have a great set up with his defense and running game. If he can continue to do this with constant roster upheaval, he'll eventually get his due.

All of the reasons you gave have precisely nothing to do with how the qb's are playing this year. Clearly, Wilson isn't at their level in terms of career accomplishments, but is he at their level this year? Super Bowls in the past have nothing to do with that.

Seahawks fans seem to be arguing that Wilson is playing at that level right now

People arguing against them seem to be arguing that Wilson doesn't have the resume of those four

They're different conversations going past each other in the wind. I don't disagree with either of the main points, because they don't contradict each other.

So I guess we can put Nick Foles in there too?

Foles is 8-0 over the past two seasons in games decided by a touchdown or less? If so, then ABSOLUTELY!

Uh, I'm pretty sure Wilson's lost a couple by less than 7 in there, given that they haven't lost by more than 7 for a good long while

No, that's what I want Foles to do. Wilson does have the most wins of any QB in NFL history in his first two seasons, at 22 with Big Ben.

 

[proninja]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

 

[drummer]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Depends on the answer that best fits you.

 

[drummer]

No, that's what I want Foles to do. Wilson does have the most wins of any QB in NFL history in his first two seasons, at 22 with Big Ben.

I don't like the use of wins as a QB stat. See: Alex Smith.

 

[proninja]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Depends on the answer that best fits you.

I figured I'd let them phrase it in a way that excludes Wilson. Give them creative license, if you will.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

According to this board, no.

 

[MarcO]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Depends on the answer that best fits you.

I figured I'd let them phrase it in a way that excludes Wilson. Give them creative license, if you will.

I guess after the Hawks win the Superbowl this year and Wilson has exactly as many Superbowl rings as Brees, Rodgers, and Payton, then he'll be allowed into the "Top 5 club". He'll have to wait a couple more years to join Eli and Brady ;-)

 

[proninja]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Depends on the answer that best fits you.

I figured I'd let them phrase it in a way that excludes Wilson. Give them creative license, if you will.

I guess after the Hawks win the Superbowl this year and Wilson has exactly as many Superbowl rings as Brees, Rodgers, and Payton, then he'll be allowed into the "Top 5 club". He'll have to wait a couple more years to join Eli and Brady ;-)

Ahh, the absurdity of trying to find the place in history for a guy not yet two seasons into his career.

Where does he stand this year? This year, nobody has a ring yet.

 

[sporthenry]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Not really. The whole point of the top QB tier, at least IMO, is that it is relatively stable. If you really wanna go on stats, year by year, then you'd have guys like Eli, Stafford, Romo, Rivers, Schaub all making the elite tier in any given year. At that point, it isn't very elite, is it? But you guys can carry on with your loaded comments if you want.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Not really. The whole point of the top QB tier, at least IMO, is that it is relatively stable. If you really wanna go on stats, year by year, then you'd have guys like Eli, Stafford, Romo, Rivers, Schaub all making the elite tier in any given year. At that point, it isn't very elite, is it? But you guys can carry on with your loaded comments if you want.

Tied for the most wins in the first two years of his career. 2nd best qb raiting in the nfl. Only tied the all time td record for a rookie qb last year.

At some point you all will wake up to the truth.

 

[drummer]

So the answer is Big Ben. That ain't bad.

 

[sporthenry]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Not really. The whole point of the top QB tier, at least IMO, is that it is relatively stable. If you really wanna go on stats, year by year, then you'd have guys like Eli, Stafford, Romo, Rivers, Schaub all making the elite tier in any given year. At that point, it isn't very elite, is it? But you guys can carry on with your loaded comments if you want.

Tied for the most wins in the first two years of his career. 2nd best qb raiting in the nfl. Only tied the all time td passing record for a rookie qb last year.

At some point you all will wake up to the truth.

By 2nd best QB rating, I assume you mean 3rd behind Foles/Peyton. Or if you go by QBR, he is 7th. DYAR he is 7th. DVOA 6th.

As someone already mentioned, wins isn't necessarily a good stat. Is Peyton worse because he had a 3-13 record his first year?

As far as rookie records, what about RGIII and his record passer rating or TD-INT ratio? Luck and his record yards or GW drives? Newton and his record total TD's or yards? Big Ben and his record wins?

So if you want to continue to cherry pick stats, I can do the same and then make some ridiculous arguments as well. I'm sure this will be seen as "hating" on Wilson but I don't understand the need for instant gratification, as if saying he is elite somehow makes him better. Personally, I'm not going to have a list of "elite" QBs that has constant turnover. But Wilson seems like a good QB who has the chance to be special. Hearing about his work ethic was impressive but putting him up against Brady or Manning is most likely just setting him up for failure.

 

[mad sweeney]

He's tied with Ben in wins and avoided the sophomore slump that the other three had. He's won more playoff games than all of them combined as well (the 3 other youngsters, not Ben). So of your list of guys with records, they're falling or failing. Wilson's staying on top and he's playing lights out. Might not have the stats of the current elite, but what's more important in the nfl is wins and he's been a strong leader on a team with a lot of them. All that said, he needs to keep it up at this level for a few years before he earns an elite ranking, which will come sooner if he can lead them to the Prize.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

Wilson has been amazing this year but he also hasn't been been in any real shootouts or desperate come from behind games. I think thats the biggest difference between him and the top 4 right now. There just isn't that evidence that he can win a game by himself if he needs to without relying on a good defense and running game.

I'm not sure how many times the Seahawks have trailed big this year, only HOU and TB come to mind, but those are the situations where you can really evaluate a QB. When the other team knows you need to score points through the air quickly and still can't prevent it. I'm not saying this to be critical of Wilson at all, just he doesn't have any games like Brady against the Saints this year, nor does this team look like it would completely fall apart without him like the Packers without Rodgers. The sky is the limit for Wilson, but I don't think he has done enough YET to be considered up with those all time greats.

 

[ScottyDog]

Big ups to Wilson. That guy just gets better and better. He's definitely in the top 3 QBs in the league.

Huh?

Why not?

Because he's not one of the best 3 QBs in the NFL?

Ohhh OK. I think he is.

You taking over for ItS now?

Can't be proven true or untrue at this point. It's a matter of opinion. At this point, general consensus is Wilson would be #2 in MVP voting behind Peyton.

People won't annoint him in only his 2nd year, but we'll see what they say in February.

Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Brees and who? Top 5 for sure in my opinion, and he undoubtedly outplayed Brees tonight. Just because Wilson isn't asked to throw the ball 40 times a game doesn't mean he wouldn't put up #s with the best of them if he was.

I'll tell you right now, there is not one player on the planet I would rather have right now on the Seahawks than Russell Wilson.

There is no way with Aaron Rodgers healthy that Wilson is in any mention of the top 3. Wilson can barely be in the top 10 if we really looked at it. For one thing, take away the advantages he has in SEA, put him on another team like CLE, and then tell me if he could take a team like IND with nothing like Luck has since he came into the league. I believe in Wilson, and I think he can win games on his own with a very challenged franchise. But he is in a really perfect storm in SEA, yet if he went down the talent on defense with Lynch on offense alone keeps them in contention.

Putting him above Brees after one game is smoking crack.

I don't care a whole lot about the top 10 / not top 10 side of the debate. It's a fun topic to debate and near impossible to prove.

But I think you are seriously underestimating how well Wilson graded out but for his height. He absolutely would have been right there with Luck and RG3 in the QB sweepstakes had he been taller.

I absolutely believe he could carry a team if asked to do so. His winning % wouldn't be what it is because he would have gone to a weaker team but his total numbers would be larger. But it's just crazy talk to act like he doesn't deserve the attention and accolades that are starting to come in. I'm not a Seattle fan, so I can kinda understand the backlash against the Seahawks. But I am a big fan of Wilson and I hate to see his skill and talent diminished because haters want to rain on the Seattle parade.

You think that Ryan was looking at how poorly Seattle was running the ball and how bad Wilson was killing them and kept telling himself that stopping Lynch was their path to victory? The overall strength of the team is what allows Wilson's coaches to take the game out of his hands and take their foot off the gas. Last night in the second half they clearly trusted their D to keep Brees down once they saw there weren't any miraculous halftime adjustments that were going to let Brees sling his way back into it.

Like I said I'm a believer in Wilson. But no way is he in the top 3 conversation.

This guy who I respect for his talent evaluation disagrees: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1871748-updated-qb-power-rankings-after-nfl-week-13

And this guy also: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000292497/article/qb-index-ranking-the-starters-132

 

[mad sweeney]

Wilson has been amazing this year but he also hasn't been been in any real shootouts or desperate come from behind games. I think thats the biggest difference between him and the top 4 right now. There just isn't that evidence that he can win a game by himself if he needs to without relying on a good defense and running game.

I'm not sure how many times the Seahawks have trailed big this year, only HOU and TB come to mind, but those are the situations where you can really evaluate a QB. When the other team knows you need to score points through the air quickly and still can't prevent it. I'm not saying this to be critical of Wilson at all, just he doesn't have any games like Brady against the Saints this year, nor does this team look like it would completely fall apart without him like the Packers without Rodgers. The sky is the limit for Wilson, but I don't think he has done enough YET to be considered up with those all time greats.

Well, he did it several times last year, once against Brady. Also basically had two drives against the Bears, one to tie and go to OT and the other to win it in OT that works to satisfy those criteria. I think he was only one game behind Luck for the most wins when trailing in the 4th quarter, though Luck may have pulled ahead by another win last week, I don't remember the way that game played out. Monday night he wasn't in a shootout because he scored on every drive but one until the game was out of reach. He's dominated the Niners' defense twice, but again there was no need for a shootout because the D stopped their O. But who needs a shootout if you can just pound the other good team into the ground with overbearing offense and defense?

All of these criteria are being satisfied, he just needs to keep doing it for a few more seasons to climb onto the elite QB plateau. If you can't see that he's already well on his way up there, then you're not watching or you deliberately don't see it.

 

[JuniorNB]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Not really. The whole point of the top QB tier, at least IMO, is that it is relatively stable. If you really wanna go on stats, year by year, then you'd have guys like Eli, Stafford, Romo, Rivers, Schaub all making the elite tier in any given year. At that point, it isn't very elite, is it? But you guys can carry on with your loaded comments if you want.

Tied for the most wins in the first two years of his career. 2nd best qb raiting in the nfl. Only tied the all time td passing record for a rookie qb last year.

At some point you all will wake up to the truth.

By 2nd best QB rating, I assume you mean 3rd behind Foles/Peyton. Or if you go by QBR, he is 7th. DYAR he is 7th. DVOA 6th.

Ouch. That's gotta hurt. I'm not sure why ImThe Scientist even tries anymore. He gets #####slapped every time he posts something.

 

[mdlane]

Wilson has been amazing this year but he also hasn't been been in any real shootouts or desperate come from behind games. I think thats the biggest difference between him and the top 4 right now. There just isn't that evidence that he can win a game by himself if he needs to without relying on a good defense and running game.

I'm not sure how many times the Seahawks have trailed big this year, only HOU and TB come to mind, but those are the situations where you can really evaluate a QB. When the other team knows you need to score points through the air quickly and still can't prevent it. I'm not saying this to be critical of Wilson at all, just he doesn't have any games like Brady against the Saints this year, nor does this team look like it would completely fall apart without him like the Packers without Rodgers. The sky is the limit for Wilson, but I don't think he has done enough YET to be considered up with those all time greats.

Well, he did it several times last year, once against Brady. Also basically had two drives against the Bears, one to tie and go to OT and the other to win it in OT that works to satisfy those criteria. I think he was only one game behind Luck for the most wins when trailing in the 4th quarter, though Luck may have pulled ahead by another win last week, I don't remember the way that game played out. Monday night he wasn't in a shootout because he scored on every drive but one until the game was out of reach. He's dominated the Niners' defense twice, but again there was no need for a shootout because the D stopped their O. But who needs a shootout if you can just pound the other good team into the ground with overbearing offense and defense? All of these criteria are being satisfied, he just needs to keep doing it for a few more seasons to climb onto the elite QB plateau. If you can't see that he's already well on his way up there, then you're not watching or you deliberately don't see it.

Not necessarily. Wilson also suffers from being on Seattle, and being affected by backlash to his teammates and the hyperbole of its fans.Take your post for example. Wilson "dominated" the Niners? Here are Wilson's stats from the last Niner game:

QBR. Pyd. TD. Int. Comp/Att. Sacks

63.9 142 1 1 8/19 4

That is not domination by any sense of the word. But here you have a Seattle fan arguing it is. If Seattle were not infected by such hyperbole and unnecessary boasting, Wilson would be much more recognized as an elite player. Moreover, if Seattle THE TEAM were not dominating opponents at home in an insanely loud stadium were QBs cannot audible, Wilson would be much more widely recognized as an elite player. But as it stands now, once Seattle stops dominating the league, no one is going to want to pay attention to them long enough to follow Wilson.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Let me ask a question:

Is there anything a QB could do to establish himself as playing at the level of the best QB's in the league before he has an extended track record? If so, what are they?

Ding ding ding!

Exactly.

Wilson lacks the history of doing it over several seasons. But being an elite QB in the now doesn't really have anything to do with track records. But we feel safer in going out on that limb if there are several years of proof. Brady was a stud before he was recognized as such because those same track record arguments were used against him in those early years but those early years are now used as proof that he is one now because...they are part of his track record. See how that works? The early years don't qualify you for stud purposes during those years. They only qualify you for stud status AFTER the fact.

It's silly because it's an argument that essentially admits that there are so many variables in play that we simply don't know who is legitimately a stud and who isn't. So we resort to hoping that time will equalize the variables and allow the cream to rise over time.

But there are some who may know what they are doing in terms of analysis and can call their shot now. Because there were some that were calling Rodgers, Peyton, Brady and Brees studs from early on. So it turns out they were right. So then who is to say that those elevating Wilson today are wrong in doing so? Just because I may be unable to discern that and need a few years to become comfortable saying so doesn't mean that others can't be better at it than I.

Why do we feel the need to tear down someone else's opinion when our main point of contention is that we simply lack the confidence to call the same shot this early?

 

[JamesTheScot]

There is no way with Aaron Rodgers healthy that Wilson is in any mention of the top 3. Wilson

can barely be in the top 10 if we really looked at it. For one thing, take away the advantages he has in SEA, put him on another team like CLE,

and then tell me if he could take a team like IND

with nothing like Luck has since he came into the league. I believe in Wilson, and I think he can win games on his own with a very

challenged franchise. But he is in a really perfect

storm in SEA, yet if he went down the talent on defense with Lynch on offense alone keeps them in contention.

Putting him above Brees after one game is smoking crack.

Put him on CLE and they are a playoff team.

He's better than Luck and Top 3 in the league. Someday people will accept that.

He's better than Luck yet when they played Luck won straight up?To be the best, you have to beat the best!

You think Tannehill, Rivers, Carson Palmer and, get this, Kellen Clemons are better than Luck?

Did you even think about that before you posted?

My post was as silly as him saying what he said. Sorry you missed my tone.

Fair enough. Not a fan of emoticons but they do help clarify tone.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Big ups to Wilson. That guy just gets better and better. He's definitely in the top 3 QBs in the league.

Huh?

Why not?

Because he's not one of the best 3 QBs in the NFL?

Ohhh OK. I think he is.

You taking over for ItS now?

Can't be proven true or untrue at this point. It's a matter of opinion. At this point, general consensus is Wilson would be #2 in MVP voting behind Peyton.

People won't annoint him in only his 2nd year, but we'll see what they say in February.

Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Brees and who? Top 5 for sure in my opinion, and he undoubtedly outplayed Brees tonight. Just because Wilson isn't asked to throw the ball 40 times a game doesn't mean he wouldn't put up #s with the best of them if he was.

I'll tell you right now, there is not one player on the planet I would rather have right now on the Seahawks than Russell Wilson.

There is no way with Aaron Rodgers healthy that Wilson is in any mention of the top 3. Wilson can barely be in the top 10 if we really looked at it. For one thing, take away the advantages he has in SEA, put him on another team like CLE, and then tell me if he could take a team like IND with nothing like Luck has since he came into the league. I believe in Wilson, and I think he can win games on his own with a very challenged franchise. But he is in a really perfect storm in SEA, yet if he went down the talent on defense with Lynch on offense alone keeps them in contention.

Putting him above Brees after one game is smoking crack.

I don't care a whole lot about the top 10 / not top 10 side of the debate. It's a fun topic to debate and near impossible to prove.

But I think you are seriously underestimating how well Wilson graded out but for his height. He absolutely would have been right there with Luck and RG3 in the QB sweepstakes had he been taller.

I absolutely believe he could carry a team if asked to do so. His winning % wouldn't be what it is because he would have gone to a weaker team but his total numbers would be larger. But it's just crazy talk to act like he doesn't deserve the attention and accolades that are starting to come in. I'm not a Seattle fan, so I can kinda understand the backlash against the Seahawks. But I am a big fan of Wilson and I hate to see his skill and talent diminished because haters want to rain on the Seattle parade.

You think that Ryan was looking at how poorly Seattle was running the ball and how bad Wilson was killing them and kept telling himself that stopping Lynch was their path to victory? The overall strength of the team is what allows Wilson's coaches to take the game out of his hands and take their foot off the gas. Last night in the second half they clearly trusted their D to keep Brees down once they saw there weren't any miraculous halftime adjustments that were going to let Brees sling his way back into it.

Like I said I'm a believer in Wilson. But no way is he in the top 3 conversation.

Why not? Track record?

That's the problem. People say he can't be top 3 now because he hasn't done it long enough.

I don't think he' stop 3 either. But it isn't because I need several years of proof to become bold enough to say so. I don't think he reads the field and has the nuances down as well as those other guys do. And that IS because he is so young. The advantage of years is not that it helps fantasy geeks like us to become comfortable enough to label someone a stud. It's the experience advantage a more seasoned QB has over a greener QB, and that does payoff in games big time.

That said, Wilson's natural talent when coupled with his drive and work ethic mean his ceiling is sky high. I am absolutely sold on his ability to become top 3. I don't know that his numbers will ever reach that high because team context does affect that. But in terms of the craft of being a QB, I'd take him at this point in his career over any of those other QB's at the same point in their careers despite having the advantage of knowing how they have turned out.

 

[mad sweeney]

Wilson has been amazing this year but he also hasn't been been in any real shootouts or desperate come from behind games. I think thats the biggest difference between him and the top 4 right now. There just isn't that evidence that he can win a game by himself if he needs to without relying on a good defense and running game.

I'm not sure how many times the Seahawks have trailed big this year, only HOU and TB come to mind, but those are the situations where you can really evaluate a QB. When the other team knows you need to score points through the air quickly and still can't prevent it. I'm not saying this to be critical of Wilson at all, just he doesn't have any games like Brady against the Saints this year, nor does this team look like it would completely fall apart without him like the Packers without Rodgers. The sky is the limit for Wilson, but I don't think he has done enough YET to be considered up with those all time greats.

Well, he did it several times last year, once against Brady. Also basically had two drives against the Bears, one to tie and go to OT and the other to win it in OT that works to satisfy those criteria. I think he was only one game behind Luck for the most wins when trailing in the 4th quarter, though Luck may have pulled ahead by another win last week, I don't remember the way that game played out. Monday night he wasn't in a shootout because he scored on every drive but one until the game was out of reach. He's dominated the Niners' defense twice, but again there was no need for a shootout because the D stopped their O. But who needs a shootout if you can just pound the other good team into the ground with overbearing offense and defense? All of these criteria are being satisfied, he just needs to keep doing it for a few more seasons to climb onto the elite QB plateau. If you can't see that he's already well on his way up there, then you're not watching or you deliberately don't see it.

Not necessarily. Wilson also suffers from being on Seattle, and being affected by backlash to his teammates and the hyperbole of its fans.Take your post for example. Wilson "dominated" the Niners? Here are Wilson's stats from the last Niner game:

QBR. Pyd. TD. Int. Comp/Att. Sacks

63.9 142 1 1 8/19 4

That is not domination by any sense of the word. But here you have a Seattle fan arguing it is. If Seattle were not infected by such hyperbole and unnecessary boasting, Wilson would be much more recognized as an elite player. Moreover, if Seattle THE TEAM were not dominating opponents at home in an insanely loud stadium were QBs cannot audible, Wilson would be much more widely recognized as an elite player. But as it stands now, once Seattle stops dominating the league, no one is going to want to pay attention to them long enough to follow Wilson.

What were his stats the game prior to that? It falls under what I said about not needing to be in a shoot out or put up gaudy numbers. His passing stats aren't the only qualifier.

 

[proninja]

Relevant article

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000292497/article/qb-index-ranking-the-starters-132