QB Russell Wilson, NYG (2 Viewers)

[fridayfrenzy]

There must be some history between you guys I am not aware of. I don't get any of that from the post. Based on what I see you guys are putting words in his mouth and creating convenient strawmen to attack. I could be wrong

Just to be clear...this is the comment that started this whole thing:

He'd better be at or near the top in PR from the pocket. If you lead the NFL in rushing by that amount, you're facing radically depleted secondaries every time you drop back. You'll get chased out of the pocket more often, since teams are selling out at the LOS to stop the run, but that won't affect your rating for when you manage to stay in one

I see your point. It is the tone that I read it in (e.g. attacking). I think it was the "he'd better be" phrase.

 

[JamesTheScot]

There must be some history between you guys I am not aware of. I don't get any of that from the post. Based on what I see you guys are putting words in his mouth and creating convenient strawmen to attack. I could be wrong

Just to be clear...this is the comment that started this whole thing:

He'd better be at or near the top in PR from the pocket. If you lead the NFL in rushing by that amount, you're facing radically depleted secondaries every time you drop back. You'll get chased out of the pocket more often, since teams are selling out at the LOS to stop the run, but that won't affect your rating for when you manage to stay in one

He sets up a bogus IF/THEN paradigm.

Every time means every time, right? Maybe not. It's easy to dismiss that comment as being a bit loose and broad. But then again, if he has a position and it's apparently supported by such a loose and broad generalization (and we have to assume it is since he selected that analysis as his support for his position), that should call into question the validity of his position, right?

No history here at all. I just take issue with what he said. The "threat of Lynch" theory is a very convenient yet specious argument to grab hold of.

I mean, Lynch in his CAREER has 56 carries on 3rd or 4th down when there are 4 or more yards to go. He also has a total of 36 carries when his team is tied or trailing with 4 minutes (or less) to go. This is a guy that has 120 game appearances, 108 starts and 2033 carries to his credit.

The poster's position was silly when you actually take time to think about it. I'm just not buying that in obvious passing situations the threat of Lynch is really swinging the odds in favor of Wilson.

 

[The Commish]

To me, his comment translates to something like this:

"With such a successful running game it should be easy to acknowledge that secondaries aren't fully stocked since teams are selling out to stop the run. This makes it significantly easier for a QB to hit his target if he isn't chased out of the pocket"

Rub here, of course, is he's frequently chased out of the pocket because the o-line wasn't the best, so he's scrambling a lot and those plays don't go towards his PR while being in the pocket.

You guys are reading way more into what was said than I think was intended, but I could be wrong. Only the OP of the comment really knows what he meant. Just my opinion that he guys took what he said and ran off with it.

 

[Tau837]

Freelove has been posting the same stuff about Wilson for quite some time. I'm sure he has posted similar stuff several times in this thread. His view that he repeats frequently is that Wilson is only successful as a passer because he is throwing to wide open WRs much more often than his peers, whether because he scrambles around long enough that they are wide open or because of the threat of Lynch and Wilson running, which draws the defense forward.

The thing is, both things can be true. That is, it can be true that Seattle WRs do get open more often because of the scrambling and the running game while also being true that Wilson is a very good passer. It's a good thing that scrambling and the running game help his targets to get open, because the group he has played with for most of his career hasn't been very good at creating separation. We don't really know how well Wilson would perform with multiple quality targets, because he hasn't had any. Tate as a #1 WR is the best he has had. Give him Green Bay's targets and see how he does. Or Denver's. Or Indy's. Etc.

Multiple articles have been posted where the authors have broken down film and performed some deep analysis to quantify Wilson's abilities. They have shown that Wilson is the best passer in the NFL when out of the pocket and that he is a very good passer in the pocket. Some of those articles have specifically shown game film showing Wilson throwing perfect deep balls from the pocket, and not to wide open WRs.

But when that stuff gets posted, Freelove either ignores it or says the authors don't know what they are talking about, since it doesn't fit his narrative. Given that is his history, it is no surprise that other posters familiar with his agenda react to it.

 

[Freelove]

But we do know what he's capable of as a passer. Why? Because we've seen him pass for a number of years now. The wishful thinking of fanbois notwithstanding, we can watch him throw short, intermediate, and deep routes all we want.

What do we know from doing that? His velocity on intermediate and deep balls is terrible. He's forced to throw higher and slower than virtually all his peers, resulting in a virtually complete absence of deep connections to open field runners, and a ludicrously high volume of jump balls and comebacks. These are fine plays -- IF, and only if, you can rely on almost complete one-on-one isolation owing to scheme and game dynamics. But the skill in seeing and exploiting this is very different from the skill needed to run a high octane offense that demands threading needles downfield, and we know Wilson can't do this.

Despite throwing a fairly high percentage of deep balls against eight man fronts, which often turn into nine-man fronts as CB's have to abandon assignments when he scrambles and threatens big runs to their side of the field, he's got among the least successful TD conversion rates on those deep passes of anyone in the league. Why? Because he can't throw in such a way that a downfield receiver can break a play. The best he can do is use his clearly superior understanding of the game to dissect the play, and know that he's got a single coverage he can exploit. Alas, his arm only lets him exploit these plays for firsts -- almost never for huge plays, owing to his minus velocity. He doesn't hit streaking downfield receivers, because in the NFL, even beaten defenses are fast and athletic enough that the windows to do that are small, and demand the velocity to thread needles downfield. Wilson simply lacks that. He doesn't have the skills to translate to a different kind of QB, unless it's something akin to a West Coast QB. Scouts knew his vertical game was a limitation since he was in college. They underestimated his football mind. He's compensated, but he's a flawed QB.

Instead of being afraid that someone with superior understanding of what's going on on the field has found weaknesses in your Golden Boi's game, you might try learning something.

It's something you can't buy at PFF. PFF is a crutch for people who want to play at understanding, but don't know what's happening in an NFL offense or defense well enough to be able to contextualize the data. It's a lazy man's site, and has resulted in a lot of people trumpeting their misunderstandings as fact. I'd suggest deleting the bookmark, and picking up a few rudimentary texts on strategy. You'll understand everything from scouting to stats far differently that you do now.

 

[ImTheScientist]

FreeLove doesn't understand the value of putting touch on the deep ball.

 

[Tau837]

But we do know what he's capable of as a passer. Why? Because we've seen him pass for a number of years now. The wishful thinking of fanbois notwithstanding, we can watch him throw short, intermediate, and deep routes all we want.

What do we know from doing that? His velocity on intermediate and deep balls is terrible. He's forced to throw higher and slower than virtually all his peers, resulting in a virtually complete absence of deep connections to open field runners, and a ludicrously high volume of jump balls and comebacks. These are fine plays -- IF, and only if, you can rely on almost complete one-on-one isolation owing to scheme and game dynamics. But the skill in seeing and exploiting this is very different from the skill needed to run a high octane offense that demands threading needles downfield, and we know Wilson can't do this.

Despite throwing a fairly high percentage of deep balls against eight man fronts, which often turn into nine-man fronts as CB's have to abandon assignments when he scrambles and threatens big runs to their side of the field, he's got among the least successful TD conversion rates on those deep passes of anyone in the league. Why? Because he can't throw in such a way that a downfield receiver can break a play. The best he can do is use his clearly superior understanding of the game to dissect the play, and know that he's got a single coverage he can exploit. Alas, his arm only lets him exploit these plays for firsts -- almost never for huge plays, owing to his minus velocity. He doesn't hit streaking downfield receivers, because in the NFL, even beaten defenses are fast and athletic enough that the windows to do that are small, and demand the velocity to thread needles downfield. Wilson simply lacks that. He doesn't have the skills to translate to a different kind of QB, unless it's something akin to a West Coast QB. Scouts knew his vertical game was a limitation since he was in college. They underestimated his football mind. He's compensated, but he's a flawed QB.

Instead of being afraid that someone with superior understanding of what's going on on the field has found weaknesses in your Golden Boi's game, you might try learning something.

It's something you can't buy at PFF. PFF is a crutch for people who want to play at understanding, but don't know what's happening in an NFL offense or defense well enough to be able to contextualize the data. It's a lazy man's site, and has resulted in a lot of people trumpeting their misunderstandings as fact. I'd suggest deleting the bookmark, and picking up a few rudimentary texts on strategy. You'll understand everything from scouting to stats far differently that you do now.

Yes, we should all bow to your superior understanding of the game.

It is the absolutes you post in that makes your posts off base:

"he can't throw in such a way that a downfield receiver can break a play"

"He doesn't hit streaking downfield receivers"

Those of us who watch every Seattle game have seen him do this many times. So these absolute statements are false. Furthermore, you make other claims without any substantive support:

"Scouts knew his vertical game was a limitation since he was in college."

If that is true, you should be able to post some links to prove it.

Finally, you completely ignore that he has played with a subpar pass blocking OL and one of the weakest groups of targets in the league in his career to date. You ignore the fact that throwing jump balls and comebacks often can be an artifact of his targets being unable to create separation.

Please provide further enlightenment.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

But we do know what he's capable of as a passer. Why? Because we've seen him pass for a number of years now. The wishful thinking of fanbois notwithstanding, we can watch him throw short, intermediate, and deep routes all we want.

What do we know from doing that? His velocity on intermediate and deep balls is terrible. He's forced to throw higher and slower than virtually all his peers, resulting in a virtually complete absence of deep connections to open field runners, and a ludicrously high volume of jump balls and comebacks. These are fine plays -- IF, and only if, you can rely on almost complete one-on-one isolation owing to scheme and game dynamics. But the skill in seeing and exploiting this is very different from the skill needed to run a high octane offense that demands threading needles downfield, and we know Wilson can't do this.

Despite throwing a fairly high percentage of deep balls against eight man fronts, which often turn into nine-man fronts as CB's have to abandon assignments when he scrambles and threatens big runs to their side of the field, he's got among the least successful TD conversion rates on those deep passes of anyone in the league. Why? Because he can't throw in such a way that a downfield receiver can break a play. The best he can do is use his clearly superior understanding of the game to dissect the play, and know that he's got a single coverage he can exploit. Alas, his arm only lets him exploit these plays for firsts -- almost never for huge plays, owing to his minus velocity. He doesn't hit streaking downfield receivers, because in the NFL, even beaten defenses are fast and athletic enough that the windows to do that are small, and demand the velocity to thread needles downfield. Wilson simply lacks that. He doesn't have the skills to translate to a different kind of QB, unless it's something akin to a West Coast QB. Scouts knew his vertical game was a limitation since he was in college. They underestimated his football mind. He's compensated, but he's a flawed QB.

Instead of being afraid that someone with superior understanding of what's going on on the field has found weaknesses in your Golden Boi's game, you might try learning something.

It's something you can't buy at PFF. PFF is a crutch for people who want to play at understanding, but don't know what's happening in an NFL offense or defense well enough to be able to contextualize the data. It's a lazy man's site, and has resulted in a lot of people trumpeting their misunderstandings as fact. I'd suggest deleting the bookmark, and picking up a few rudimentary texts on strategy. You'll understand everything from scouting to stats far differently that you do now.

It is hilarious you mention RW's deep balls as an issue when it is widely known that he actually has one of the best long balls in the NFL. Let me guess, others are wrong and you are right, correct?

http://regressing.deadspin.com/charts-who-are-the-best-deep-passers-in-the-nfl-1469917039

"• Rodgers is the NFL's best deep passer, but Wilson isn't too shabby in that department either. Though he gets the reputation of a "game manager," which usually implies that he's a quarterback who can't go downfield and throws a lot of dump-offs and checkdowns, Wilson actually threw the ball 20 or more yards downfield on 11.5 percent of his attempts this season. Overall that's higher than Rodgers (11 percent) and Brady (10.3 percent). In fact, Drew Brees only goes deep on 9.7 percent of his attempts, which is second-lowest among qualified passers."

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/106450764/russell-wilson-seattle-seahawks-nfc-championship

"If there has been one aspect of Russell Wilson’s game that stands out above all over his brief NFL career, it’s his deep ball. No one can match the frequency and precision that Wilson has shown on targets over 20 yards the past two seasons. For Wilson’s career he has gone deep on 15.6% of his passes, been accurate on 48.6% of those, and averaged 16.5 yards per attempt."

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/12/07/signature-stats-play-action-deep-passing/

 

[CapnJB]

But we do know what he's capable of as a passer. Why? Because we've seen him pass for a number of years now. The wishful thinking of fanbois notwithstanding, we can watch him throw short, intermediate, and deep routes all we want.

What do we know from doing that? His velocity on intermediate and deep balls is terrible. He's forced to throw higher and slower than virtually all his peers, resulting in a virtually complete absence of deep connections to open field runners, and a ludicrously high volume of jump balls and comebacks. These are fine plays -- IF, and only if, you can rely on almost complete one-on-one isolation owing to scheme and game dynamics. But the skill in seeing and exploiting this is very different from the skill needed to run a high octane offense that demands threading needles downfield, and we know Wilson can't do this.

Despite throwing a fairly high percentage of deep balls against eight man fronts, which often turn into nine-man fronts as CB's have to abandon assignments when he scrambles and threatens big runs to their side of the field, he's got among the least successful TD conversion rates on those deep passes of anyone in the league. Why? Because he can't throw in such a way that a downfield receiver can break a play. The best he can do is use his clearly superior understanding of the game to dissect the play, and know that he's got a single coverage he can exploit. Alas, his arm only lets him exploit these plays for firsts -- almost never for huge plays, owing to his minus velocity. He doesn't hit streaking downfield receivers, because in the NFL, even beaten defenses are fast and athletic enough that the windows to do that are small, and demand the velocity to thread needles downfield. Wilson simply lacks that. He doesn't have the skills to translate to a different kind of QB, unless it's something akin to a West Coast QB. Scouts knew his vertical game was a limitation since he was in college. They underestimated his football mind. He's compensated, but he's a flawed QB.

Instead of being afraid that someone with superior understanding of what's going on on the field has found weaknesses in your Golden Boi's game, you might try learning something.

It's something you can't buy at PFF. PFF is a crutch for people who want to play at understanding, but don't know what's happening in an NFL offense or defense well enough to be able to contextualize the data. It's a lazy man's site, and has resulted in a lot of people trumpeting their misunderstandings as fact. I'd suggest deleting the bookmark, and picking up a few rudimentary texts on strategy. You'll understand everything from scouting to stats far differently that you do now.

I'll just leave this here. You have to watch for a while, but there's that one time where he made that play.

 

[Tau837]

But we do know what he's capable of as a passer. Why? Because we've seen him pass for a number of years now. The wishful thinking of fanbois notwithstanding, we can watch him throw short, intermediate, and deep routes all we want.

What do we know from doing that? His velocity on intermediate and deep balls is terrible. He's forced to throw higher and slower than virtually all his peers, resulting in a virtually complete absence of deep connections to open field runners, and a ludicrously high volume of jump balls and comebacks. These are fine plays -- IF, and only if, you can rely on almost complete one-on-one isolation owing to scheme and game dynamics. But the skill in seeing and exploiting this is very different from the skill needed to run a high octane offense that demands threading needles downfield, and we know Wilson can't do this.

Despite throwing a fairly high percentage of deep balls against eight man fronts, which often turn into nine-man fronts as CB's have to abandon assignments when he scrambles and threatens big runs to their side of the field, he's got among the least successful TD conversion rates on those deep passes of anyone in the league. Why? Because he can't throw in such a way that a downfield receiver can break a play. The best he can do is use his clearly superior understanding of the game to dissect the play, and know that he's got a single coverage he can exploit. Alas, his arm only lets him exploit these plays for firsts -- almost never for huge plays, owing to his minus velocity. He doesn't hit streaking downfield receivers, because in the NFL, even beaten defenses are fast and athletic enough that the windows to do that are small, and demand the velocity to thread needles downfield. Wilson simply lacks that. He doesn't have the skills to translate to a different kind of QB, unless it's something akin to a West Coast QB. Scouts knew his vertical game was a limitation since he was in college. They underestimated his football mind. He's compensated, but he's a flawed QB.

Instead of being afraid that someone with superior understanding of what's going on on the field has found weaknesses in your Golden Boi's game, you might try learning something.

It's something you can't buy at PFF. PFF is a crutch for people who want to play at understanding, but don't know what's happening in an NFL offense or defense well enough to be able to contextualize the data. It's a lazy man's site, and has resulted in a lot of people trumpeting their misunderstandings as fact. I'd suggest deleting the bookmark, and picking up a few rudimentary texts on strategy. You'll understand everything from scouting to stats far differently that you do now.

It is hilarious you mention RW's deep balls as an issue when it is widely known that he actually has one of the best long balls in the NFL. Let me guess, others are wrong and you are right, correct?

http://regressing.deadspin.com/charts-who-are-the-best-deep-passers-in-the-nfl-1469917039

"• Rodgers is the NFL's best deep passer, but Wilson isn't too shabby in that department either. Though he gets the reputation of a "game manager," which usually implies that he's a quarterback who can't go downfield and throws a lot of dump-offs and checkdowns, Wilson actually threw the ball 20 or more yards downfield on 11.5 percent of his attempts this season. Overall that's higher than Rodgers (11 percent) and Brady (10.3 percent). In fact, Drew Brees only goes deep on 9.7 percent of his attempts, which is second-lowest among qualified passers."

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/106450764/russell-wilson-seattle-seahawks-nfc-championship

"If there has been one aspect of Russell Wilson’s game that stands out above all over his brief NFL career, it’s his deep ball. No one can match the frequency and precision that Wilson has shown on targets over 20 yards the past two seasons. For Wilson’s career he has gone deep on 15.6% of his passes, been accurate on 48.6% of those, and averaged 16.5 yards per attempt."

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/12/07/signature-stats-play-action-deep-passing/

<Freelove>

Come on, ff. Obviously that "success" has occurred because Wilson threw jump balls and comebacks with no velocity to receivers who were wide open because their defenders abandoned them to defend the run.

Plus, don't you know that PFF and your other sources and their users/readers lack fundamental understanding of the game?!?

</Freelove>

 

[burnall]

Who are they going to lose?

This is the mantra of folks who aren't aware of the Seattle salary cap situation and has been for at least 3 years. "Wait until you have to pay him!" is the cry of Sabertooth and his ilk, which is why you see him all over this thread saying they need to pay him.

It's not a matter of who they are going to lose in the short term but in the long term it does hurt them. A high QB salary can be overcome but requires great drafting and efficient use of free agent money (i.e. Patriots). It's a fact that the big money top QB's are getting takes away from money that could be used to keep players or sign free agents.

On the other hand, a great QB is a trump card in this league and allows the team to win despite holes on the roster

Patriots is a terrible example brady is one of the lower paid QB's in the league. at 9 M , hes an example of the counter point, take lower money get some more talent players aroud you (revis gronk) win a super bowl.

 

[PDX_Seahawk]

Questioning RW's arm strength is so ridiculous. People do realize that the only measurable that kept him from being a first round pick was his height, right? Several scouts/GM's on record saying as much.

 

[JamesTheScot]

To me, his comment translates to something like this:

"With such a successful running game it should be easy to acknowledge that secondaries aren't fully stocked since teams are selling out to stop the run. This makes it significantly easier for a QB to hit his target if he isn't chased out of the pocket"

Rub here, of course, is he's frequently chased out of the pocket because the o-line wasn't the best, so he's scrambling a lot and those plays don't go towards his PR while being in the pocket.

You guys are reading way more into what was said than I think was intended, but I could be wrong. Only the OP of the comment really knows what he meant. Just my opinion that he guys took what he said and ran off with it.

The problem is even the less sensational version you posted isn't proven as true.

Is there anything to indicate that Wilson faces a "depleted secondary" on 3rd and long? That's why I posted Lynch's stats in those situations. The D would have to have game film on Lynch that would tell them to ignore obvious passing situations in favor of stacking the box against Lynch in those 3rd and longs, right?

Yet he has very few rushes in those situations. Why would a D sell-out to stop the run in obvious passing situations when there isn't anything to indicate that the offense is going to go through Lynch's legs in those situations?

It's simply crazy talk. Could Wilson benefit on 1st and 10 from having Lynch in the backfield? Sure. But do they actually take advantage of that or do they play two down ball with Lynch and then predictably go to Wilson when it's 3rd and 4+ and a conversion is needed? We know that opponents track tendencies. What are Seattle's tendencies?

The funny thing is that Freelove talks down PFF and the "laziness" of using that source. Yet the most lazy analysis I've seen in the last few pages is the overbroad and silly generalization that Wilson only has efficient numbers because EVERY TIME he throws it, he's throwing at DB's that aren't covering their receivers because they're trying to see where Lynch is EVERY play. What he have is an unsupported assertion that the poster has apparently abandoned because he hasn't come back to defend it or support it in any meaningful way.

 

[The Commish]

To me, his comment translates to something like this:

"With such a successful running game it should be easy to acknowledge that secondaries aren't fully stocked since teams are selling out to stop the run. This makes it significantly easier for a QB to hit his target if he isn't chased out of the pocket"

Rub here, of course, is he's frequently chased out of the pocket because the o-line wasn't the best, so he's scrambling a lot and those plays don't go towards his PR while being in the pocket.

You guys are reading way more into what was said than I think was intended, but I could be wrong. Only the OP of the comment really knows what he meant. Just my opinion that he guys took what he said and ran off with it.

The problem is even the less sensational version you posted isn't proven as true.

Is there anything to indicate that Wilson faces a "depleted secondary" on 3rd and long? That's why I posted Lynch's stats in those situations. The D would have to have game film on Lynch that would tell them to ignore obvious passing situations in favor of stacking the box against Lynch in those 3rd and longs, right?

Yet he has very few rushes in those situations. Why would a D sell-out to stop the run in obvious passing situations when there isn't anything to indicate that the offense is going to go through Lynch's legs in those situations?

It's simply crazy talk. Could Wilson benefit on 1st and 10 from having Lynch in the backfield? Sure. But do they actually take advantage of that or do they play two down ball with Lynch and then predictably go to Wilson when it's 3rd and 4+ and a conversion is needed? We know that opponents track tendencies. What are Seattle's tendencies?

The funny thing is that Freelove talks down PFF and the "laziness" of using that source. Yet the most lazy analysis I've seen in the last few pages is the overbroad and silly generalization that Wilson only has efficient numbers because EVERY TIME he throws it, he's throwing at DB's that aren't covering their receivers because they're trying to see where Lynch is EVERY play. What he have is an unsupported assertion that the poster has apparently abandoned because he hasn't come back to defend it or support it in any meaningful way.

You keep going back to specific situations to attack a statement of generality. You continue to read more into the comment than what's there. Now I know that for sure since it was my comment. You have yourself wrapped up in all kinds of self made straw men. I'd give you a blow torch to help you fend them off, but I'm afraid you'd hurt yourself. I use the second bold statement as evidence for that.

 

[Faust]

Contract talks between Wilson, Seahawks to end at start of camp

 

[Faust]

Is Russell Wilson Overvalued in Fantasy Football?

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com
Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

 

[Freelove]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com
Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

No ####.

 

[Sabertooth]

He isn't going to be able to shake that kind of criticism.

Reminds me of the criticism you heard about Aikman.,

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com
Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

All it takes is one team to think he is a top tier QB in free agency to get paid as such and that is what Russell Wilson is willing to bet on.

 

[cr8f]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com
Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

I don't buy that. I know they have to post something this time of year but it's guesswork what would happen without Marshawn.

The Seahawks struggled mightily to get a good QB before Russell. Whitehurst, Taveris, etc. I don't see them going through that again to save a few bucks.

 

[JetMaxx]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com

Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

All it takes is one team to think he is a top tier QB in free agency to get paid as such and that is what Russell Wilson is willing to bet on.

Exactly. And Chip Kelly would do it in a second.

 

[Spin]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com
Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

Maybe there's a reason why they're former front office executives instead of, still currently employed front office executives.

 

[maxwelledison]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com

Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

Maybe there's a reason why they're former front office executives instead of, still currently employed front office executives.

Exactly. And even if active, that means nothing to me in a league where at least 5 franchises have demonstrated incompetence over long stretches of time.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

According to Profootballtalk, "word on the NFL grapevine" is that the Seahawks have offered Russell Wilson a long-term contract with an average-annual value of $21 million, and "significant guaranteed money."

It's a good start, but not what Wilson is looking for, which is to become the highest-paid player in the league. That requires surpassing Aaron Rodgers' annual $22 million. It's a standoff where Wilson owns much of the leverage, though Seattle has the ability to franchise tag its quarterback each of the next two years. In the end, a deal before Week 1 seems more likely than not. It's makes too much sense for both sides.

Source: Profootballtalk on NBCSports.com

 

[Ghost Rider]

Rotoworld:

In a poll of 35 coaches, personnel men and former front office executives, only 11 viewed Russell Wilson as a top-tier quarterback.

"Because I think he needs Marshawn Lynch and the defense to do what he has done," one coordinator replied. Another offensive coach said the "bubble is going to burst" for Wilson if the team needs him to throw the ball on a frequent basis. "He is not a [first-tier QB]," a head coach said. "He cannot win the whole thing. Is that why they are not paying him? I think you could make an argument to put him down as a 3, but I would say he is a 2." It's possible the Seahawks feel the same way, as they've, to this point, balked at making Wilson the highest-paid player in the game like he wants to be. For what it's worth, Wilson is a top-tier QB in our book.

Source: ESPN.com
Jul 22 - 9:02 AM

Maybe there's a reason why they're former front office executives instead of, still currently employed front office executives.

Exactly.

And saying he cannot win the whole thing? Uh, he has won the whole thing.

Some coaches and coordinators continuing to not fully respect Wilson only helps him and the Seahawks, but they are too dumb to realize it.

It wouldn't surprise me if that unnamed head coach was Jay Gruden (see: doofus).

 

[Ghost Rider]

Oh, and everyone has a different definition of top tier QB. To some, it's the best of the best (Rodgers, Brady, Peyton and maybe Brees still), and to some that might extend to a few more (like Luck, Wilson, Roethlisberger, Romo). So, many of those 24 who said he was not a top tier QB might have been more of the former than the latter (in other words, they don't think he is top 3 or 4, which most of us would agree with), but naturally the article posted takes the narrative that he is overrated and only mentions the negative comments. The writer of that blurb is likely someone who doesn't think Wilson is all that, and wrote their blurb that way to reflect that. Wilson's performance as an NFL starting QB speaks for itself (72-26 TD-INt in three seasons, 7.9 YPA, nearly 1,900 rushing yards and 11 rushing scores, 98.6 passer rating, etc.), regardless of how some nimrods in the media want to spin it.

 

[Sabertooth]

I sure hope they pay him more than Rodgers. He deserves it!

 

[MaxThreshold]

I sure hope they pay him more than Rodgers. He deserves it!

How does he deserve more than Rodgers? What is the rationale between paying him more than the consensus best QB in the game?

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I sure hope they pay him more than Rodgers. He deserves it!

How does he deserve more than Rodgers? What is the rationale between paying him more than the consensus best QB in the game?

Rodgers was paid two years ago. Someone who isn't the best QB in the game will make more than him right away. Just the nature of the salary cap rising.

 

[The General]

Rotoworld:

According to Profootballtalk, "word on the NFL grapevine" is that the Seahawks have offered Russell Wilson a long-term contract with an average-annual value of $21 million, and "significant guaranteed money."

It's a good start, but not what Wilson is looking for, which is to become the highest-paid player in the league. That requires surpassing Aaron Rodgers' annual $22 million. It's a standoff where Wilson owns much of the leverage, though Seattle has the ability to franchise tag its quarterback each of the next two years. In the end, a deal before Week 1 seems more likely than not. It's makes too much sense for both sides.

Source: Profootballtalk on NBCSports.com

I don't see the leverage Wilson has. Maybe in 2 years.

 

[mphtrilogy]

His leverage is he is a top 5 qb

 

[cacksman]

I sure hope they pay him more than Rodgers. He deserves it!

How does he deserve more than Rodgers? What is the rationale between paying him more than the consensus best QB in the game?

think about it.

 

[The General]

His leverage is he is a top 5 qb

Hawks are trying to pay him like one this year - and don't have to.

Next year can franchise him, can again after that for another year but it gets less workable as far as I have heard.

Wilson leaves about 20 mil on the table he can't get back if he doesn't deal.

That is leverage.

 

[Tau837]

Wilson is going to get paid more than $20M per year beginning next season, no matter how it plays out. If the Seahawks are offering an extension that averages $20M+, including this season, I agree that is an incentive for him to sign it. But if it is only averaging franchise QB money in the added years, that doesn't represent leverage for the Seahawks.

For example, suppose they offered him a 5 year extension for $105M. That is $21M per year, but that is over the 5 added years; this year isn't one of those years. He will get a signing bonus now for signing it, so he will see big money faster, but the overall value of the contract is the same or worse as he will get if he just plays it out.

If they are offering a 4 year extension for $105M, that is different, since including this season still averages top QB money.

My guess is that Seattle is offering the first scenario, not the second. And that's why there is no agreement.

 

[The General]

Wilson is going to get paid more than $20M per year beginning next season, no matter how it plays out. If the Seahawks are offering an extension that averages $20M+, including this season, I agree that is an incentive for him to sign it. But if it is only averaging franchise QB money in the added years, that doesn't represent leverage for the Seahawks.

For example, suppose they offered him a 5 year extension for $105M. That is $21M per year, but that is over the 5 added years; this year isn't one of those years. He will get a signing bonus now for signing it, so he will see big money faster, but the overall value of the contract is the same or worse as he will get if he just plays it out.

If they are offering a 4 year extension for $105M, that is different, since including this season still averages top QB money.

My guess is that Seattle is offering the first scenario, not the second. And that's why there is no agreement.

I see what you are saying and am not sure. Don't think even leaks have gotten that specific on terms of the deal.

Listening to the local media, mostly John Clayton, he seems to really be pressing the point that he is missing out on money this year that he can't get back. Another good point I read somewhere was that he is missing out on interest money in the bank/investments for another year.

One thing most people agree on is that this isn't going to get too contentious this year and Wilson is the type who will deflect distraction. Local media are also pretty surprised that no deal has been made yet, still have next week. People were all just taking for granted that this would get done this off season.

 

[Faust]

Russell Wilson hasn't turned down a Seahawks deal outright:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000503737/article/russell-wilson-hasnt-turned-down-a-seahawks-deal-outright

 

[flysack]

Oh, and everyone has a different definition of top tier QB. To some, it's the best of the best (Rodgers, Brady, Peyton and maybe Brees still), and to some that might extend to a few more (like Luck, Wilson, Roethlisberger, Romo). So, many of those 24 who said he was not a top tier QB might have been more of the former than the latter (in other words, they don't think he is top 3 or 4, which most of us would agree with), but naturally the article posted takes the narrative that he is overrated and only mentions the negative comments. The writer of that blurb is likely someone who doesn't think Wilson is all that, and wrote their blurb that way to reflect that. Wilson's performance as an NFL starting QB speaks for itself (72-26 TD-INt in three seasons, 7.9 YPA, nearly 1,900 rushing yards and 11 rushing scores, 98.6 passer rating, etc.), regardless of how some nimrods in the media want to spin it.

This with some of the worst WRs corps in the game.

 

[The General]

Going to get done by Friday I can feel it. I'll go 4 year extension: 21.5 mil / year, 52 Guaranteed.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I'm curious if they give him a bump in this years salary to intice him. Media reports say it would only be an extension but the Hawks have around 20 million earmarked for RW this year in cap space. The prorated signing bonus would not take up that amount.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Wilson's agent is in Seattle and meeting in person with Schneider. That has to be a positive sign.

 

[Faust]

Pessimism Wilson, Seahawks strike deal before camp:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000504987/article/pessimism-wilson-seahawks-strike-deal-before-camp

 

[Faust]

Negotiation 'deadline' hasn't helped Seahawks, Wilson:

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/seattle-seahawks-russell-wilson-contract-negotiation-deadline-073015?vid=486040643504

 

[ImTheScientist]

I sure hope they pay him more than Rodgers. He deserves it!

How does he deserve more than Rodgers? What is the rationale between paying him more than the consensus best QB in the game?

 

[The General]

Hearing it may be done on the twitters.

 

[The General]

21.9y / 31 mil signing bonus. 60 mil total guaranteed. Hope this is true.

Agent was just milking for every dollar he could get, no problem there.

 

[Hooper31]

Super happy that Wilson the QB in Seattle. BWagz next please.

 

[The General]

Super happy that Wilson the QB in Seattle. BWagz next please.

Yup. Get Kam to calm down as well.

 

[CapnJB]

 

[biju]

Deadlines spur action.