Anyone remember when Russell Wilson wasn't an elite QB

[Rjk214]

I remember that thread with some people saying Wilson wasn't elite and Luck and others were better.. Wilson is sooo legit and clutch. It's unbelievable. He makes defenses look lost out there!

[The Accountant]

That was a forward pass. But yeah he looks superb


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ninjacookies]

First it was he has an awesome run game.

Then it was his defense masks his ineptitude.

Always had zero offensive line like Luck.


And after all that, there are still people who don't understand/watch football that still call him a game manager.

[Hawksmack]

I don’t remember that thread sorry.

[Verufian]

First it was he has an awesome run game.

Then it was his defense masks his ineptitude.

Always had zero offensive line like Luck.


And after all that, there are still people who don't understand/watch football that still call him a game manager.

I can’t even fathom what this team would look like with, lets just say, Kirk Cousins.

What’s our record? He’s a good QB, but would he survive AND succeed?

For every one “head shaking” poor attempt at an offensive play the Seahawks have, he has 4 others that he turns into + plays. Who else could do better on THIS team?

A Tom Brady would get destroyed, not because he isn’t good, but because he would literally have 1 second to make a decision after he yells hut, before some 300lb dude is literally in your face.

We will never know. But what I DO know, is he MAKES this team. He is one player you can’t replace. Any other player can be replaced, and it wouldn’t be this huge disparity that it would have if RW wasn’t our QB.

#RW3_4_MVP

[mike1498]

1) I don't remember anyone saying he was not elite
2) When Luck is healthy you can argue that Luck is better. RW is amazing and deserves credit but he'd be injured just as much as Luck if he was behind that aweful line
(10 sacks to sacksonville, c'mon sometimes I think they'd be better off trading their whole oline for a bag of football because at least the footballs can be useful)

[Rjk214]

1) I don't remember anyone saying he was not elite
2) When Luck is healthy you can argue that Luck is better. RW is amazing and deserves credit but he'd be injured just as much as Luck if he was behind that aweful line
(10 sacks to sacksonville, c'mon sometimes I think they'd be better off trading their whole oline for a bag of football because at least the footballs can be useful)

Luck isn't even remotely on the same level as Wilson, healthy or not (Wilson could improve the Indy team tomorrow. Luck wouldn't make Seattle any better. More than likely they'd be worse)... It's not even a question.

I'll find the thread and repost it. There was plenty of talk that he wasn't elite and only a game manager. Also Seattle has been widely regarded as having the worst O line for the past 5 years.

[Verufian]

1) I don't remember anyone saying he was not elite
2) When Luck is healthy you can argue that Luck is better. RW is amazing and deserves credit but he'd be injured just as much as Luck if he was behind that aweful line
(10 sacks to sacksonville, c'mon sometimes I think they'd be better off trading their whole oline for a bag of football because at least the footballs can be useful)

Except for our Super Bowl winning year, I could argue that Seattle and Indy had very similarly BAD offensive lines from 2014-Current.

RW on Indy will be like a +4 WAR. Just him. Luck on Seattle would be like a -3 WAR for SEA.

Just my opinion, though.

I’d also cut Bennett and Avril, invest that cap into the O line. A better O line allows for mediocre RB’s to be serviceable.

We’re getting old now. Need to get young, hungry players and say “goodbye” to the older ones that were solid in 2013, then just got old after they got paid.

[pejc300]

1) I don't remember anyone saying he was not elite
2) When Luck is healthy you can argue that Luck is better. RW is amazing and deserves credit but he'd be injured just as much as Luck if he was behind that aweful line
(10 sacks to sacksonville, c'mon sometimes I think they'd be better off trading their whole oline for a bag of football because at least the footballs can be useful)

Just checked your join date; yeah, you weren't around in those days. It was quite fun.

[tacoma34]

I don’t remember that thread sorry.

Me neither

[thenwhatjk]

I totally remember those threads

[TWard]

Luck isn't even remotely on the same level as Wilson, healthy or not (Wilson could improve the Indy team tomorrow. Luck wouldn't make Seattle any better. More than likely they'd be worse)... It's not even a question.

I'll find the thread and repost it. There was plenty of talk that he wasn't elite and only a game manager. Also Seattle has been widely regarded as having the worst O line for the past 5 years.


I know I’m a Colts fan but you gotta take in account that the Colts also have a terrible defense, and have had one for many, many years.

Seattle’s defense gave up 10 points to one of the 2 best teams in the league, meanwhile Indy would’ve given up likely 30-40, if not more. Could Russell have put up 30-40+ against the Eagles if he played on the Colts? He would almost have to play flawlessly tonight, and most games, if he played for Indy.

(And I’m not saying Wilson isn’t elite because he is. I’m just saying).

[TWard]

I totally remember those threads


I do as well

[HBMC]

I remember that thread with some people saying Wilson wasn't elite and Luck and others were better.. Wilson is sooo legit and clutch. It's unbelievable. He makes defenses look lost out there!

In an Aaron Rodgers'-esque vibe, sure. What I mean by this is playing off of the rules as they're played in the NFL now (getting a lot of free yards thanks to PI's) and also requiring a lot of out of the pocket throws to get more desirable match ups and using throwing angles to create separation for mediocre receivers. His speed is hard to account for and most D-Linemen aren't disciplined enough to not attack him and make him hold the ball. Making Wilson sit back and try to throw from the pocket is about the best way to beat him.

As a traditional pocket passer, he's improved, but he's still not what I'd call "elite" at making all of the throws without having to have a metric assload of time, scrambling and odd throwing angles to get the job done. It's rare that he sits there and makes a timing throw (mainly because their WR's can get pushed off of their routes fairly easily and that's not the offense they run), it's usually a pick play or using deception with RPO's to buy time. It works with him as he has a great handle with the ball.

Of course, if Wilson was consistently asked to be a traditional PP QB, he'd probably regress statically. I'm not here to rub anyone's belly about their favorite QB, he's doing what he is best at apparently, which is total chaos.

[Rjk214]

In an Aaron Rodgers'-esque vibe, sure. What I mean by this is playing off of the rules as they're played in the NFL now (getting a lot of free yards thanks to PI's) and also requiring a lot of out of the pocket throws to get more desirable match ups and using throwing angles to create separation for mediocre receivers. His speed is hard to account for and most D-Linemen aren't disciplined enough to not attack him and make him hold the ball. Making Wilson sit back and try to throw from the pocket is about the best way to beat him.

As a traditional pocket passer, he's improved, but he's still not what I'd call "elite" at making all of the throws without having to have a metric assload of time, scrambling and odd throwing angles to get the job done. It's rare that he sits there and makes a timing throw (mainly because their WR's can get pushed off of their routes fairly easily and that's not the offense they run), it's usually a pick play or using deception with RPO's to buy time. It works with him as he has a great handle with the ball.

Of course, if Wilson was consistently asked to be a traditional PP QB, he'd probably regress statically. I'm not here to rub anyone's belly about their favorite QB, he's doing what he is best at apparently, which is total chaos.

I didn't know they rate "elite" QBs by being a pocket passer. "Elite" to most people simply means the ability to get the job done. In that regard Wilson is a top 5 QB currently (If not top 3)

It's so easy to say oh but he can't stay behind a line and throw. Ok? I didn't realize the point to being a QB was to sit behind the pocket. I thought the goal was to move the ball downfield so your team can win. I must've forgotten how the game was played.

[ninjacookies]

I didn't know they rate "elite" QBs by being a pocket passer. "Elite" to most people simply means the ability to get the job done. In that regard Wilson is a top 5 QB currently (If not top 3)

It's so easy to say oh but he can't stay behind a line and throw. Ok? I didn't realize the point to being a QB was to sit behind the pocket. I thought the goal was to move the ball downfield so your team can win. I must've forgotten how the game was played.

The game has changed so much in the past 2 decades.

Just look at Cam's MVP season. He is anything but the traditional QB, and doesn't throw the prettiest ball. He's at his best when defenses break down having to account for his rushing threat and making improvisational decisions outside the pocket.

I think the thing I like most about Wilson is that he rushes with purpose. This year he's been forced into rushing situations more than he'd probably like due to a total lack of competent half backs, but for the most part he's a pass first/rush second qb. This is what has lead to his consistently efficient numbers year in and year out.


Little known fact, but he's also 3rd in the league in both passing yards and td's headed into tonight's game.

Far cry from the 'game manager' tag bestowed upon him for most of his career.

The fact that he's turned an UDFA like Baldwin into a premier receiver I think speaks volumes about his abilities as a qb.

[HBMC]

I didn't know they rate "elite" QBs by being a pocket passer. "Elite" to most people simply means the ability to get the job done. In that regard Wilson is a top 5 QB currently (If not top 3)

Meandering metrics of "elite" have always been a troublesome thing to pin down. If winning is "elite-ness" then yes, Wilson does a lot of that. If being able to threaten every single part of the field without being forced to run around like a headless chicken is considered "Elite", then he'd fail that test.

Drew Brees is a perfect measure of how wilson could be later in his career if he wouldn't run as much. Possibly a lot of yards and TD's, but also inexplicable INT's because of his height. I am hoping the NFL will continue to add the helmet cameras to QB's and show how cluttered a QB's field of view is as that technology improves.

It's so easy to say oh but he can't stay behind a line and throw. Ok? I didn't realize the point to being a QB was to sit behind the pocket. I thought the goal was to move the ball downfield so your team can win. I must've forgotten how the game was played.

The reason NFL coaches want QB's who stay in the pocket is so that they don't have to worry about them getting clobbered outside of the pocket.

You're confusing efficacy with form, (most) NFL coaches are incredibly rigid in their structuring of how an offense works and how they can protect the most valuable asset on the team, the QB. Having a QB who is constantly free-lancing behind the LOS can lead to his linemen having zero percent chance of protecting him from someone who can seriously hurt him. The game of football is incredibly complex and isn't as simple as "the job got done", that's an objective, not the reason why it happens.

The Seahawks are perfectly willing to gamble with Wilson outside of the pocket and it works for them, but it will likely shorten his career.

[BigL7370]

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=722612

[JustinVerlander07]

Luck isn't even remotely on the same level as Wilson, healthy or not (Wilson could improve the Indy team tomorrow. Luck wouldn't make Seattle any better. More than likely they'd be worse)... It's not even a question.

I'll find the thread and repost it. There was plenty of talk that he wasn't elite and only a game manager. Also Seattle has been widely regarded as having the worst O line for the past 5 years.

This is not an apples to apples comparison. I'm not a big Luck guy and think he was overrated hugely 4 years ago, but the "Luck isn't on the same level as Wilson" is both unfair and most likely wrong. Luck hasn't been healthy in 2 years because he played QB for an incompetent franchise that hasn't gotten him any help. His o-line has always been one of the bottom 5 in the league and his offensive teammates have been largely meh outside of TY Hilton.

OK, put Wilson on Indy. Are they better? Yea. Why? Because Jacoby Brissett is currently their QB. They still wouldn't be good because that roster is not good.

[RogerGodahell]

He's gotten better. I don't think he was elite a couple years ago. He's grown as a passing quarterback. He was the benefactor of having an elite defense and an elite rb which gave him time to mature as a passer. He definitely didn't come into the league carrying the team on his shoulders but he has gotten better and now he is.

[Seahawks fan]

He's gotten better. I don't think he was elite a couple years ago. He's grown as a passing quarterback. He was the benefactor of having an elite defense and an elite rb which gave him time to mature as a passer. He definitely didn't come into the league carrying the team on his shoulders but he has gotten better and now he is.

I agree he wasn't Elite when he entered the league but many labeled him as a "game manager" I think that is what most fans disliked. Game Managers don't set the NFL record for most TDs by a rookie nor do they throw for 3k-4k yards every single season. Game Managers also don't rush for 841 yards in a season..heck he almost has as many rushing yards in less than 6 seasons than Mcnabb had in his 13 year career. Wilson is a weapon plain and simple.

[bojesphob]

Elite isn't just winning. That's part of it, sure, but there is an "It" factor that goes into it. Consistency, week in week out getting the job done, even if the rest of the team doesn't have "it" that week. Brady and Rodgers right now are the elite in the league: You can count on one hand for both of them the number of *bad* games they've both had in the past several years. Wilson is good, don't get me wrong, but elite? Not right now, no. If Ben, Brady, and Rodgers retire right now, then he would be the elite, but no, not right now compared to who else is elite right now.

[MeteoriteGuy]

You guys act like being a game manager, which basically means putting your team in a position to win, is a bad thing. News flash, every quarterback in the league goes into every game trying to be a game manager.

[Seahawks fan]

You guys act like being a game manager, which basically means putting your team in a position to win, is a bad thing. News flash, every quarterback in the league goes into every game trying to be a game manager.

Very true but in the context others use it in they act like he was Trent Dilfer from the 2000 ravens. "All he does is win games because of his defense and hands off to Lynch..anyone could do that" When stats/eye test show much more.

[titletowncards]

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4519/24971645208_a22a743e5d.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/E3Ed83)stop-trying-to-tell-me-wilson-is-an-elite-qb-its-not-going-to-happen (https://flic.kr/p/E3Ed83) by Chris Orgeman (https://www.flickr.com/photos/152217137@N08/), on Flickr

[Rjk214]

Elite isn't just winning. That's part of it, sure, but there is an "It" factor that goes into it. Consistency, week in week out getting the job done, even if the rest of the team doesn't have "it" that week. Brady and Rodgers right now are the elite in the league: You can count on one hand for both of them the number of *bad* games they've both had in the past several years. Wilson is good, don't get me wrong, but elite? Not right now, no. If Ben, Brady, and Rodgers retire right now, then he would be the elite, but no, not right now compared to who else is elite right now.

When you compare Wilson to Brady through their first 3 years its kind of funny. Wilson actually outpaced him in almost everything. Obviously we have 10 extra years to discuss what Brady has done since that is why making an argument where someone has done something for 10+ years to 5 years is difficult...

Obviously an older QB will always be more "elite" than a younger one to the naked eye. That is a simple argument to make

I would say you have Brady & Rodgers. Wilson probably currently ranks in the next group of 3 with Ben & (Whoever you want to add). But for a younger guy he is the top of the class and I don't think anyone can even remotely argue that anymore

[broncomanning18]

When you compare Wilson to Brady through their first 3 years its kind of funny. Wilson actually outpaced him in almost everything. Obviously we have 10 extra years to discuss what Brady has done since that is why making an argument where someone has done something for 10+ years to 5 years is difficult...

Obviously an older QB will always be more "elite" than a younger one to the naked eye. That is a simple argument to make

I would say you have Brady & Rodgers. Wilson probably currently ranks in the next group of 3 with Ben & (Whoever you want to add). But for a younger guy he is the top of the class and I don't think anyone can even remotely argue that anymore

his cards sure dont reflect it :(

[Hawksmack]

his cards sure dont reflect it :(

That’s because we don’t manipulate the market. We left you all some extra Rc tickets to chase though. Enjoy the streaks :)!

[broncomanning18]

That’s because we don’t manipulate the market. We left you all some extra Rc tickets to chase though. Enjoy the streaks :)!

can we manipulate it LOL It sure would be nice if his contenders were worth more than $200.

[rdaveigajr]

That was a forward pass. But yeah he looks superb


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Must have not seen Jameis last week LOL, sucked cause I had started Desean Jackson

[MFaulkCollector]

Luck isn't even remotely on the same level as Wilson, healthy or not (Wilson could improve the Indy team tomorrow. Luck wouldn't make Seattle any better. More than likely they'd be worse)... It's not even a question.

I'll find the thread and repost it. There was plenty of talk that he wasn't elite and only a game manager. Also Seattle has been widely regarded as having the worst O line for the past 5 years.

im not sure when the thread was posted.... but in 2012,13, 14.... wilson was a game manager......... last year he really came into his own as a passer and it has continued this year....... wilson has always been efficient; however... being efficient in 2012,13,14 mainly on high percentage max protect, play action, leaning heavily on the run,etc is not remotely close to 16,17 being efficient throwing downfield as "the man"... the entire offense

i don't think anyone has said in the last year or two that wilson is just a game manager........ for me personally, seeing him evolve from a high percentage play action type passer to an accurate top of the league "do it all" type of offensive weapon gives his career path more value. i am still unsure if his passing skills are at the level where he can play at the nfl level if his legs were zero threat...... but right now and in the near future he is very good

[Siberian13]

can we manipulate it LOL It sure would be nice if his contenders were worth more than $200.

How many fake contenders are floating around? I want one but decided on two base chrome sticker autos.

[SaveMeTheGum]

Re' - Remember that elite throw to Malcolm Butler? That was awesome.

https://i.imgur.com/u4ffHPpl.jpg

[cmisley]

One play comment from the NE groupie, wow great argument lol.

[packerfan4200]

"Anyone remember when Russell Wilson wasn't an elite QB"

Nope..

[SaveMeTheGum]

One play comment from the NE groupie, wow great argument lol.

No argument here. Wilson's gonna win me my fantasy football league this year. Would love to see a rematch of SB49

[mhcook]

There is something special about Russell that I can't articulate. When I've watched him, I've never seen elite or even what I felt like was top 15 QB.

With that said, he has had few to no weapons and has always won. I realize they usually have an exceptional defense, but I don't think they win half the games they have if you replace Wilson with a different QB. I don't know if it is the "IT" factor or if he is clutch or what it is but he has gotten phenomenal results long enough that him being elite is the only way to explain it.

[49erRCCollector]

Halftime of this game is why Wilson struggles with respect. Now he'll probably end up being 20/30 290 yards but his first halves are frequently bad until he starts making risky but effective passes late in the game.

[titletowncards]

13/25 122yds 1td 2int 45.8qb rating
/Thread

[jasonm2121]

Yep. Sure do.

[broncomanning18]

Yep. Sure do.

you are one of those, huh ? J/k, but where were you before ?

[ninjacookies]

Yup. Career is over. Leagues best pass rush and secondary made him look foolish. How does that even happen.

[kevinh1919]

You guys act like being a game manager, which basically means putting your team in a position to win, is a bad thing. News flash, every quarterback in the league goes into every game trying to be a game manager.

Eli Manning agrees with you!!!

:eek:

(runs and hides from the incoming posts)

[jasonm2121]

you are one of those, huh ? J/k, but where were you before ?

Just saw the thread. I think he's very good, but not with Rodgers and Brady.

[pgisback]

Nfl record 16 4th quarter tds. Imagine if he played all 4 quarters like that

[kevinh1919]

There is something special about Russell that I can't articulate. When I've watched him, I've never seen elite or even what I felt like was top 15 QB.

With that said, he has had few to no weapons and has always won. I realize they usually have an exceptional defense, but I don't think they win half the games they have if you replace Wilson with a different QB. I don't know if it is the "IT" factor or if he is clutch or what it is but he has gotten phenomenal results long enough that him being elite is the only way to explain it.

He is a playmaker!

(easy to root for, imo)

:)!

[ninjacookies]

Nfl record 16 4th quarter tds. Imagine if he played all 4 quarters like that

Biggest source of frustration for Seattle fans over the past four seasons.


He is the most brilliant procrastinator ever. Complete oxymoron.

[49erRCCollector]

Yup. Career is over. Leagues best pass rush and secondary made him look foolish. How does that even happen.

No, but he has these kind of first halves often, not against elite defenses.

[ninjacookies]

No, but he has these kind of first halves often, not against elite defenses.


Never argued against that. It's what his fans have grown accustomed to.


I was, however, unaware that clutch wins and overall numbers were completely negated by what transpires in the first 2 quarters of games. Why not just shrink the game to 30 minutes.

[RAV2773]

No, but he has these kind of first halves often, not against elite defenses.

That Elite defense is not looking that elite right now

[HBMC]

I try to maintain a standard regarding QB play, if a QB can threaten every part of the field from the pocket, they are hard to beat. If they're dependent on pocket movement, roll outs or misdirection, they're either uniquely gifted to do that (Rogers, Wilson, Dak [to a very small degree]) or a gimmick QB (a la Colin Kaepernick, RGIII, etc).

It's up to the viewer to parse the differences. I've been harsh on Wilson (at least early in his career) as he had nothing he had to really struggle for. That team was readymade to win, he was the catalyst, now the Defense is crumbling and he cannot do it all on his own without pulling the wizardry that we have all been accustomed to. No running game and no great receivers (outside of Graham) makes his margin of error really small.

The only QB who can put the entire team on their back on a weekly basis is Rogers IMO.

[ninjacookies]

Sigh. Baldwin should have fought for that 1 yard.

And just lol@that manhandling no-call on PRich. Hilarious.

[ninjacookies]

Gotta give credit to the Jags. They are definitely making moves in the right direction headed into the future. I could see them spoiling a team or two in the playoffs.

[titletowncards]

Very typical Wilson game, throw horrible INT's in the first half, make a comeback in the 2nd half to pad the stats. Looks like he's doing it "all". Well he is if you count putting ur team in bad 1st half positions on the scoreboard.

[49erRCCollector]

Never argued against that. It's what his fans have grown accustomed to.


I was, however, unaware that clutch wins and overall numbers were completely negated by what transpires in the first 2 quarters of games. Why not just shrink the game to 30 minutes.

Oh, I like Wilson but was just making the point that these first halves aren't doing his rep any favors.

[ninjacookies]

Very typical Wilson game, throw horrible INT's in the first half, make a comeback in the 2nd half to pad the stats. Looks like he's doing it "all". Well he is if you count putting ur team in bad 1st half positions on the scoreboard.

Yeah. All those 'terrible ints.' Considering he has 53 total in 92 career games.

Look, I get your personal disdain. And if you somehow feel threatened that he's in the MVP discussion this year (which he is) and your boy Arod isn't, then it's probably time to take a breather.

Nobody said he's better than Arod or Brady. Nobody else in the league is. But statistics wise he is still having a great year with the least amount of help he's had during his NFL tenure.

[ninjacookies]

Oh, I like Wilson but was just making the point that these first halves aren't doing his rep any favors.

I hate it. I really do. But as a fan I've just kind of accepted that's who he is. I'd think by now if he could have changed it, he would.

But there is just something inherently lackadaisical about his performances in the first halves. Of games and the season. It's mind boggling.

[thenwhatjk]

Whoops wrong thread

Really would have loved for Russell to pull out a w though

[titletowncards]

Yeah. All those 'terrible ints.' Considering he has 53 total in 92 career games.

Look, I get your personal disdain. And if you somehow feel threatened that he's in the MVP discussion this year (which he is) and your boy Arod isn't, then it's probably time to take a breather.

Nobody said he's better than Arod or Brady. Nobody else in the league is. But statistics wise he is still having a great year with the least amount of help he's had during his NFL tenure.

Well, he's not Elite, he's not even close. Someone makes a thread calling him that and it's a pretty easy argument that he's not. What he is a good QB, a lot of teams would be OK with him, a good person as well from all I hear. You get what you get from him. But imo, Rodgers and Brady are the only 2 Elite QB's in the League right now.

[ninjacookies]

Well, he's not Elite, he's not even close. Someone makes a thread calling him that and it's a pretty easy argument that he's not. What he is a good QB, a lot of teams would be OK with him, a good person as well from all I hear. You get what you get from him. But imo, Rodgers and Brady are the only 2 Elite QB's in the League right now.

Well you're certainly entitled to your own opinion. But your opinion is not law. And there are several ex-players and analysts that now consider him elite.

It's not like this is some arbitrary baseless opinion thrown out of left field, either. He was leading the league in passing yards and second in td's headed into today. And was the league's second leading rushing QB.

[blackbears86]

Well, he's not Elite, he's not even close. Someone makes a thread calling him that and it's a pretty easy argument that he's not. What he is a good QB, a lot of teams would be OK with him, a good person as well from all I hear. You get what you get from him. But imo, Rodgers and Brady are the only 2 Elite QB's in the League right now.


Not understanding the hate titletown. Maybe you are worried he's closing ground on Rogers?

It's clear the kid has talent, is an elite QB and it's not even close. He has clearly separated himself from the pack this year.

He's in the MVP discussion and your saying he's not close to being elite? I usually like your insight, but here, you are way off base.

[titletowncards]

Not understanding the hate titletown. Maybe you are worried he's closing ground on Rogers?

It's clear the kid has talent, is an elite QB and it's not even close. He has clearly separated himself from the pack this year.

He's in the MVP discussion and your saying he's not close to being elite? I usually like your insight, but here, you are way off base.

Closing in on Rodgers? no that's laughable.
Like I said, he's a good QB, with a good defense to back him up he's even better. But Elite is set aside for the very top, Brady and Rodgers.

[broncomanning18]

Closing in on Rodgers? no that's laughable.
Like I said, he's a good QB, with a good defense to back him up he's even better. But Elite is set aside for the very top, Brady and Rodgers.

I guess it just really depends what you consider elite, if you consider elite to be the top 5% of qbs in the league then you are probably right, it would just be brady and rodgers. But if you think elite means the top 10% of qb's in the league, then you might consider wilson in that.

[MFaulkCollector]

Well, he's not Elite, he's not even close. Someone makes a thread calling him that and it's a pretty easy argument that he's not. What he is a good QB, a lot of teams would be OK with him, a good person as well from all I hear. You get what you get from him. But imo, Rodgers and Brady are the only 2 Elite QB's in the League right now.

brady and rodgers aren't really a fair measuring stick...... i mean they are both arguably top 5 qbs of all time

elite qb's are at the top of their position...... brees is one of the best qb's in history; yet he isn't in a class with rodgers or brady

for wilson to be elite among his company he would have to be a top 10 qb of all time.... maybe it's just bad timing for him but i think elite would be a top 5-6 qb in the league at any given time; wilson probably is at that level for me, but i could see why others would say no

[blackbears86]

Closing in on Rodgers? no that's laughable.
Like I said, he's a good QB, with a good defense to back him up he's even better. But Elite is set aside for the very top, Brady and Rodgers.

Give him time....Rogers has been in the league since 2005. Wilson since 2012, and he already has matched Rogers in Superbowl wins and has passed him in Superbowl appearances.


Not saying he's in Rogers class right now, but give him time.

And yes....If everyone's version of "Elite" is Brady/Rodgers, then yes, I agree. Wilson is not "elite"----yet, but to say he's not even close is in your words: laughable.

[bojesphob]

Give him time....Rogers has been in the league since 2005. Wilson since 2012, and he already has matched Rogers in Superbowl wins and has passed him in Superbowl appearances.


Not saying he's in Rogers class right now, but give him time.

And yes....If everyone's version of "Elite" is Brady/Rodgers, then yes, I agree. Wilson is not "elite"----yet, but to say he's not even close is in your words: laughable.

The difference between Rodgers, Brady and Wilson is supporting cast. When has Rodgers been able to say he had a dominant D during his tenure at Green Bay? 2010 (*maybe*)? How about New England? While they have serviceable (at best) defenses, the ONLY reason that the Packers are an annual contender for the playoffs is because of Rodgers. Can you really say that about Wilson? Sure, he has some really good fourth quarter performances, but usually the reason they are so far behind are because of his boneheaded decisions earlier in the game (see the Packers-Seahawks game a few years back where it took the D and Special Teams to keep them in the game while he threw 4 INTs). Put any serviceable QB into the Seahawks with that defense, and you'd probably get approximately the same results... if you put in one less prone for INTs, they wouldn't even be behind most of the games that Russell had to come back and play out of his mind in the 4th to win. The only way to know for certain if Russell is as good as Rodgers or Brady, he needs to have a defense that isn't ranked in the top 10, and we compare it to Rodgers or Brady in a normal year for them.

For comparison, just Packers, Seahawks and Patriots D rankings (according to Pro-Football-reference):
2012
#1 - Seattle
#9 - New England
#11 - Green Bay

2013
#1 - Seattle
#10 - New England
#25 - Green Bay

2014
#1 - Seattle
#8 - New England
#14 - Green Bay

2015
#1 - Seattle
#10 - New England
#12 - Green Bay

2016
#1 - New England
#3 - Seattle
#21 - Green Bay

2017 (so far)
#2 - New England
#8 - Seattle
#20 - Green Bay (Without Rodgers of course)

So, can you honestly say that Wilson is elite, or even remotely elite, when he has worse stats than Rodgers and Brady (basically the elite right now) with THE best defense in football since he started playing? Can you imagine what Rodgers would be able to do with the #1 defense over the past 6 years? He'd be doing what Brady has been doing the past 2. The Pack only had the #7 and #2 defenses in 2009 and 2010, and they won the Super Bowl in 2010. Right now, I'd say that Wilson will carry the stigma of what I would call the "Trent Dilfer Effect", where the defense carries the offense, or makes them a lot better than they ought to be because they don't have to worry that the other team is going to score very many points. Until he can consistently win with a defense that isn't pretty much the best in football, I will continue to say that he's not elite, because that's what the elites are doing in the NFL right now.

[BostonNut]

Why is Roethlisberger not being named in the Brady/Rodgers class?

[blackbears86]

The difference between Rodgers, Brady and Wilson is supporting cast. When has Rodgers been able to say he had a dominant D during his tenure at Green Bay? 2010 (*maybe*)? How about New England? While they have serviceable (at best) defenses, the ONLY reason that the Packers are an annual contender for the playoffs is because of Rodgers. Can you really say that about Wilson? Sure, he has some really good fourth quarter performances, but usually the reason they are so far behind are because of his boneheaded decisions earlier in the game (see the Packers-Seahawks game a few years back where it took the D and Special Teams to keep them in the game while he threw 4 INTs). Put any serviceable QB into the Seahawks with that defense, and you'd probably get approximately the same results... if you put in one less prone for INTs, they wouldn't even be behind most of the games that Russell had to come back and play out of his mind in the 4th to win. The only way to know for certain if Russell is as good as Rodgers or Brady, he needs to have a defense that isn't ranked in the top 10, and we compare it to Rodgers or Brady in a normal year for them.

For comparison, just Packers, Seahawks and Patriots D rankings (according to Pro-Football-reference):
2012
#1 - Seattle
#9 - New England
#11 - Green Bay

2013
#1 - Seattle
#10 - New England
#25 - Green Bay

2014
#1 - Seattle
#8 - New England
#14 - Green Bay

2015
#1 - Seattle
#10 - New England
#12 - Green Bay

2016
#1 - New England
#3 - Seattle
#21 - Green Bay

2017 (so far)
#2 - New England
#8 - Seattle
#20 - Green Bay (Without Rodgers of course)

So, can you honestly say that Wilson is elite, or even remotely elite, when he has worse stats than Rodgers and Brady (basically the elite right now) with THE best defense in football since he started playing? Can you imagine what Rodgers would be able to do with the #1 defense over the past 6 years? He'd be doing what Brady has been doing the past 2. The Pack only had the #7 and #2 defenses in 2009 and 2010, and they won the Super Bowl in 2010. Right now, I'd say that Wilson will carry the stigma of what I would call the "Trent Dilfer Effect", where the defense carries the offense, or makes them a lot better than they ought to be because they don't have to worry that the other team is going to score very many points. Until he can consistently win with a defense that isn't pretty much the best in football, I will continue to say that he's not elite, because that's what the elites are doing in the NFL right now.

which again puts us back to Brady/Rodgers, which is fine with me.

My sticking point was "not even close to elite" which is kind of funny considering the MVP discussion is now down to Wilson and Brady with wentz likely done for the season.

[bojesphob]

which again puts us back to Brady/Rodgers, which is fine with me.

My sticking point was "not even close to elite" which is kind of funny considering the MVP discussion is now down to Wilson and Brady with wentz likely done for the season.

Unless Brady loses every game of the season that's left, Wilson would have to play out of his mind every single game for every quarter to catch up. He might only get a vote or two at this point. Brady only has 4 INT's (so he's on pace to have an almost Rodgers level of TD-INT ratio), and his team is 10-2, and is looking like the playoffs will go through Foxboro (again :rolleyes:). Wilson is 8-5 and Seattle isn't even leading the division. So, at this point, the discussion is whether anybody votes for someone other than Brady, not whether anyone else gets it (and this is coming from someone who can't stand the Patriots as a team or Brady as a QB)

[blackbears86]

Unless Brady loses every game of the season that's left, Wilson would have to play out of his mind every single game for every quarter to catch up. He might only get a vote or two at this point. Brady only has 4 INT's (so he's on pace to have an almost Rodgers level of TD-INT ratio), and his team is 10-2, and is looking like the playoffs will go through Foxboro (again :rolleyes:). Wilson is 8-5 and Seattle isn't even leading the division. So, at this point, the discussion is whether anybody votes for someone other than Brady, not whether anyone else gets it (and this is coming from someone who can't stand the Patriots as a team or Brady as a QB)

which is fine with me, being a Pats/Brady homer.


But I'd rather Brady win Superbowl MVP;)

[MFaulkCollector]

Why is Roethlisberger not being named in the Brady/Rodgers class?

because roethlisberger has 325 td passes to 173 ints..... which is less than 2:1 where rodgers and brady are on the 4:1 level. ben has never made an all pro team and 5 pro bowls in a 14 year career when 8th alternates make it is not impressive either

his efficiency and decision making are questionable on a week to week basis. and for the playoff argument... yes he has made some great throws and had a few great games... but 25 tds to 23 ints is mediocre at best and he has not thrown more tds than picks in a playoffs since 5 playoff seasons ago

ben shouldn't be on the rodgers/brady level in my opinion.... and he shouldn't be on the brees level either.

[MFaulkCollector]

which again puts us back to Brady/Rodgers, which is fine with me.

My sticking point was "not even close to elite" which is kind of funny considering the MVP discussion is now down to Wilson and Brady with wentz likely done for the season.

this gets back to the "value" question for how a team is constructed. seattle needs a qb like wilson who can run a mile to scramble during a game. their line blows and it's a sandlot type offense a lot of the time. they pissed away a good line most likely because wilson was mobile and figured they could get away with less

a standard drop back qb wouldn't be worth anything to seattle.... peyton manning or brady would possibly get sacked 80 times. wilson is probably worth more wins to seattle this particular season than brady to new england

but brady is clearly the better nfl qb........ he is among the best passers in nfl history and leads the greatest dynasty in sports history (in my opinion) with top level play and leadership skills

wilson may add a lot of value to seattle, but he is not "elite" in the sense of rodgers/brady as far as straight up qb play. people need to see the difference. it would be absolutely nuts for someone to actually classify wilson anywhere near brady as far as qb talent (when you consider that list is actually only a few names long rodgers/montana/manning/unitas/elway) it's pretty clear wilson shouldn't be mentioned anywhere near it

[blackbears86]

this gets back to the "value" question for how a team is constructed. seattle needs a qb like wilson who can run a mile to scramble during a game. their line blows and it's a sandlot type offense a lot of the time. they pissed away a good line most likely because wilson was mobile and figured they could get away with less

a standard drop back qb wouldn't be worth anything to seattle.... peyton manning or brady would possibly get sacked 80 times. wilson is probably worth more wins to seattle this particular season than brady to new england

but brady is clearly the better nfl qb........ he is among the best passers in nfl history and leads the greatest dynasty in sports history (in my opinion) with top level play and leadership skills

wilson may add a lot of value to seattle, but he is not "elite" in the sense of rodgers/brady as far as straight up qb play. people need to see the difference. it would be absolutely nuts for someone to actually classify wilson anywhere near brady as far as qb talent (when you consider that list is actually only a few names long rodgers/montana/manning/unitas/elway) it's pretty clear wilson shouldn't be mentioned anywhere near it

100% agree with you, as far as Brady, etc....

But again, give him time. To be continued in 10+ years.....

[MFaulkCollector]

100% agree with you, as far as Brady, etc....

But again, give him time. To be continued in 10+ years.....

i unfortunately don't think time will do anything except make people realize just how great the qb play has been over the past decade.... i mean we are talking brady, manning, rodgers, brees, roethlisberger in their prime... we are talking eli manning and philip rivers who are possible hof's.... for anyone interested in the true pocket passer this era will represent the greatest time in nfl history. it has been a real treat to watch these guys play

i feel like everyone moving forward will be held up against a standard that cannot be reached. brady, manning, rodgers...... probably 3 of the 5 best in history... good luck to everyone

[blackbears86]

i unfortunately don't think time will do anything except make people realize just how great the qb play has been over the past decade.... i mean we are talking brady, manning, rodgers, brees, roethlisberger in their prime... we are talking eli manning and philip rivers who are possible hof's.... for anyone interested in the true pocket passer this era will represent the greatest time in nfl history. it has been a real treat to watch these guys play
i feel like everyone moving forward will be held up against a standard that cannot be reached. brady, manning, rodgers...... probably 3 of the 5 best in history... good luck to everyone


Right you are sir.....

[broncomanning18]

Now I know what Tom Brady would look like if he played for the Seahawks, thanks Miami. He is getting killed and just throwing the ball into the ground and turning away to avoid a hit peyton manning style. He wouldnt stand a chance to last the season if he played for the seahawks.

[ninjacookies]

Now I know what Tom Brady would look like if he played for the Seahawks, thanks Miami. He is getting killed and just throwing the ball into the ground and turning away to avoid a hit peyton manning style. He wouldnt stand a chance to last the season if he played for the seahawks.

Apparently through the brilliance of BO logic, elite MVP's cannot lose to 1st ranked defenses and Blake Bortles but it is completely permissable to look mediocre against a mid tier defense and Jay Cutler.

[MFaulkCollector]

Apparently through the brilliance of BO logic, elite MVP's cannot lose to 1st ranked defenses and Blake Bortles but it is completely permissable to look mediocre against a mid tier defense and Jay Cutler.

dolphins front is built to give new england problems.... it's really the only style that can beat brady on a regular basis

giants super bowl teams weren't great teams... but their front d lines were awesome

[ninjacookies]

dolphins front is built to give new england problems.... it's really the only style that can beat brady on a regular basis

giants super bowl teams weren't great teams... but their front d lines were awesome

Oh, I know. And the Seahawks line has been constructed to make every single defensive front look like the '84 Bears.

[MFaulkCollector]

Oh, I know. And the Seahawks line has been constructed to make every single defensive front look like the '84 Bears.

they went on the cheap because wilson can scramble.... yet they still play good d and score enough to win 10-11 games

its a dangerous place to be..... always good enough to be in the playoff race, yet its clear they are not a super bowl threat due to lack of consistency at the highest level

[Rjk214]

So we established the 2 leading MVP candidates can struggle in a game here and there and still be elite. Crazy.

Wilson and Brady

[Rjk214]

Very typical Wilson game, throw horrible INT's in the first half, make a comeback in the 2nd half to pad the stats. Looks like he's doing it "all". Well he is if you count putting ur team in bad 1st half positions on the scoreboard.

Make a comeback in the 2nd half to pad the stats is the most laughable statement I have ever heard in my life...

[Rjk214]

Well, he's not Elite, he's not even close. Someone makes a thread calling him that and it's a pretty easy argument that he's not. What he is a good QB, a lot of teams would be OK with him, a good person as well from all I hear. You get what you get from him. But imo, Rodgers and Brady are the only 2 Elite QB's in the League right now.

Take Wilsons stats from his first 5 years against Brady and Rodgers.

Not sure how you define elite but you are trying to use years and years to go off of.. Yes you can do it that way. But comparing Brady's SBs to Wilsons and being like he isn't anywhere close is retarded for anyone to say. Brady didn't have 5 in 5 years.

How do you define elite? Is Brady is not elite bc he had INTs tonight and lost the game and his team didn't stance a chance even in the 4th quarter?

Also teams would be OK with him? That's laughable. You might want to recheck Wilsons ability to get the ball downfield. Wilson is the type of QB to elevate any team in the NFL whereas if you put other QBs on the Hawks team with 0 run game and no O-Line they might win 3-4 games. MIGHT.

To make your team better and to elevate a team is what most consider elite.. Now yes some define elite as pure pocket QBs and staying tall and throwing the ball downfield. But history defines elite as getting the job done and winning. That's simple what defines elite in all sports as history goes on.

In the first 5 years of their NFL careers I'd take 1 guy currently over Wilson. That's a big thing to process for most people...

[Rjk214]

The difference between Rodgers, Brady and Wilson is supporting cast. When has Rodgers been able to say he had a dominant D during his tenure at Green Bay? 2010 (*maybe*)? How about New England? While they have serviceable (at best) defenses, the ONLY reason that the Packers are an annual contender for the playoffs is because of Rodgers. Can you really say that about Wilson? Sure, he has some really good fourth quarter performances, but usually the reason they are so far behind are because of his boneheaded decisions earlier in the game (see the Packers-Seahawks game a few years back where it took the D and Special Teams to keep them in the game while he threw 4 INTs). Put any serviceable QB into the Seahawks with that defense, and you'd probably get approximately the same results... if you put in one less prone for INTs, they wouldn't even be behind most of the games that Russell had to come back and play out of his mind in the 4th to win. The only way to know for certain if Russell is as good as Rodgers or Brady, he needs to have a defense that isn't ranked in the top 10, and we compare it to Rodgers or Brady in a normal year for them.

For comparison, just Packers, Seahawks and Patriots D rankings (according to Pro-Football-reference):
2012
#1 - Seattle
#9 - New England
#11 - Green Bay

2013
#1 - Seattle
#10 - New England
#25 - Green Bay

2014
#1 - Seattle
#8 - New England
#14 - Green Bay

2015
#1 - Seattle
#10 - New England
#12 - Green Bay

2016
#1 - New England
#3 - Seattle
#21 - Green Bay

2017 (so far)
#2 - New England
#8 - Seattle
#20 - Green Bay (Without Rodgers of course)

So, can you honestly say that Wilson is elite, or even remotely elite, when he has worse stats than Rodgers and Brady (basically the elite right now) with THE best defense in football since he started playing? Can you imagine what Rodgers would be able to do with the #1 defense over the past 6 years? He'd be doing what Brady has been doing the past 2. The Pack only had the #7 and #2 defenses in 2009 and 2010, and they won the Super Bowl in 2010. Right now, I'd say that Wilson will carry the stigma of what I would call the "Trent Dilfer Effect", where the defense carries the offense, or makes them a lot better than they ought to be because they don't have to worry that the other team is going to score very many points. Until he can consistently win with a defense that isn't pretty much the best in football, I will continue to say that he's not elite, because that's what the elites are doing in the NFL right now.

So New Englands D has been top tier. Awesome. Everyone knows the Pats D has been quite good.

You also have to factor in O-Line. Which no one ever does. Weird. Brady would get crushed behind the Hawks by the way bc he legit would have .5 seconds to dump the ball. Impossible behind that line. Maybe Rodgers could get it done but he can't be that elusive every single down.

You want to say it's the D but the O-Line is statistically one of the worst in the league since Wilson entered. That plays a huge part against in your argument...

But all teams are built differently as well. That's why you have to actually factor in every aspect and not compare careers and use only relevant information.

[Rjk214]

Unless Brady loses every game of the season that's left, Wilson would have to play out of his mind every single game for every quarter to catch up. He might only get a vote or two at this point. Brady only has 4 INT's (so he's on pace to have an almost Rodgers level of TD-INT ratio), and his team is 10-2, and is looking like the playoffs will go through Foxboro (again :rolleyes:). Wilson is 8-5 and Seattle isn't even leading the division. So, at this point, the discussion is whether anybody votes for someone other than Brady, not whether anyone else gets it (and this is coming from someone who can't stand the Patriots as a team or Brady as a QB)

6 INTs now..

Does Brady account for both running and passing offense? Has he accounted for every TD except 1? How is his run game? O-Line? Defenses are roughly the same.

It's amazing how blind some people are to reality.

Brady has been stellar but the Pats are the same record with Alex Smith at QB. The Hawks are a 3-4 win team with anyone outside of maybe Cam. That defines most valuable player in most people's eyes.

[MFaulkCollector]

Take Wilsons stats from his first 5 years against Brady and Rodgers.

Not sure how you define elite but you are trying to use years and years to go off of.. Yes you can do it that way. But comparing Brady's SBs to Wilsons and being like he isn't anywhere close is retarded for anyone to say. Brady didn't have 5 in 5 years.

How do you elite? Is Brady is not elite bc he had INTs tonight and lost the game and his team didn't stance a chance even in the 4th quarter?

Also teams would be OK with him? That's laughable. You might to recheck Wilsons abaility to get the ball downfield. Wilson is the type of QB to elevate any team in the NFL whereas if you put other QBs on the Hawks team with 0 run game and no O-Line they might win 3-4 games. MIGHT.

To make your team better and to elevate a team is what most consider elite..

In the first 5 years of their NFL careers I'd take 1 guy currently over Wilson. That's a big thing to process for most people...

the simple eye test tells you wilson is not on the top level of elite nfl qb's....... his passing skills are not good enough

brady and rodgers are multi time league mvps and multi time first team all pros
brees is a first team all pro and outplayed peyton manning in his super bowl overcoming a 10 point deficit.

wilson has never been an all pro, has never been an mvp.......... he facilitated an all time great defense and superior running game to win his super bowl. in that post season he was putrid against san francisco in the nfc championship game and a good high school qb could have won that super bowl (literally any competent qb who could hand the ball off would have sufficed)

for better or worse he is seen as the face who lost a super bowl by throwing a pick to end the game

since then he has become the face of the franchise and the main offensive weapon.... he is a better passer and makes more demanding throws. he has to work a lot harder for those same stats that were achieved by leaning on play action and heavy protection detailed 2 man routes... now it's 5 wide, deep outs, throws that good passers have to make

rodgers did that from day 1 and so did brees..... brady evolved some over the years..... but the finished products of rodgers and brady are significantly better than wilson today. i believe brees is better as well, by a good amount

if you are projecting wilson will eventually be that good.... that's fine........ but today he isn't

[MFaulkCollector]

6 INTs now..

Does Brady account for both running and passing offense? Has he accounted for every TD except 1? How is his run game? O-Line? Defenses are roughly the same.

It's amazing how blind some people are to reality.

Brady has been stellar but the Pats are the same record with Alex Smith at QB. The Hawks are a 3-4 win team with anyone outside of maybe Cam. That defines most valuable player in most people's eyes.

this lends to the idea of "value" to a team... with the way the seahawks have constructed their offense; wilson is it....... they lean on his scrambling ability and went on the cheap for their line. so wilson scrambles all over and makes sandlot plays more often than he should have to. he is also a smart runner

wilson is worth more wins to seattle this year than brady is to new england in my opinion; but that doesn't make him a better qb necessarily. i could go for wilson as mvp this year, the way the team is built he is extremely valuable... but i don't think his pocket passing would translate to other teams as well as people think... the chaos that is the seattle passing game is something wilson thrives on; he uses his legs often time to create time for receivers to get open..... he doesn't throw guys open like top of the line nfl qbs

[Rjk214]

the simple eye test tells you wilson is not on the top level of elite nfl qb's....... his passing skills are not good enough

brady and rodgers are multi time league mvps and multi time first team all pros
brees is a first team all pro and outplayed peyton manning in his super bowl overcoming a 10 point deficit.

wilson has never been an all pro, has never been an mvp.......... he facilitated an all time great defense and superior running game to win his super bowl. in that post season he was putrid against san francisco in the nfc championship game and a good high school qb could have won that super bowl (literally any competent qb who could hand the ball off would have sufficed)

for better or worse he is seen as the face who lost a super bowl by throwing a pick to end the game

since then he has become the face of the franchise and the main offensive weapon.... he is a better passer and makes more demanding throws. he has to work a lot harder for those same stats that were achieved by leaning on play action and heavy protection detailed 2 man routes... now it's 5 wide, deep outs, throws that good passers have to make

rodgers did that from day 1 and so did brees..... brady evolved some over the years..... but the finished products of rodgers and brady are significantly better than wilson today. i believe brees is better as well, by a good amount

if you are projecting wilson will eventually be that good.... that's fine........ but today he isn't

Wilson has 5 years vs guys that have 10+. Not sure you can use pro bowls and all pros in that timeframe..

Of course you will always give the oldest person the elite tag. That's common sense. But it's retarded for an argument.

No one views Wilson as the face that lost that SB. That isn't even on him and to even say that shows your lack of understanding in football.

Wilson is actually better is he not or was in his first couple seasons over Brady and Rodgers.. Just an FYI... But sure we can argue it all day long. Lots of different reasons for success. Defense was too good, run game was too good, O-Line was horrendous. At the end of the day you still gotta win. That's what the game is about and that's what goes down as top elites.

Tiger after 5 years wasn't elite and was nowhere as good as Jack lifetime. No #@#@#@#@.

[MFaulkCollector]

6 INTs now..

Does Brady account for both running and passing offense? Has he accounted for every TD except 1? How is his run game? O-Line? Defenses are roughly the same.

It's amazing how blind some people are to reality.

Brady has been stellar but the Pats are the same record with Alex Smith at QB. The Hawks are a 3-4 win team with anyone outside of maybe Cam. That defines most valuable player in most people's eyes.

also, when your team is constructed in a way where cam newton would be more valuable than aaron rodgers or tom brady... well then your gm should be fired

[Rjk214]

this lends to the idea of "value" to a team... with the way the seahawks have constructed their offense; wilson is it....... they lean on his scrambling ability and went on the cheap for their line. so wilson scrambles all over and makes sandlot plays more often than he should have to. he is also a smart runner

wilson is worth more wins to seattle this year than brady is to new england in my opinion; but that doesn't make him a better qb necessarily. i could go for wilson as mvp this year, the way the team is built he is extremely valuable... but i don't think his pocket passing would translate to other teams as well as people think... the chaos that is the seattle passing game is something wilson thrives on; he uses his legs often time to create time for receivers to get open..... he doesn't throw guys open like top of the line nfl qbs

How do you know that end statement though? You don't. You are assuming that... When you have .5 seconds to run for your life of course it's tough to throw guys open. Even if he had a line that doesn't mean you HAVE to do that. What matters is moving the ball and driving downfield and scoring TDs and setting up a team to win.

It's weird when people argue what football is actually about.

[MFaulkCollector]

Wilson has 5 years vs guys that have 10+. Not sure you can use pro bowls and all pros in that timeframe..

Of course you will always give the oldest person the elite tag. That's common sense. But it's retarded for an argument.

Tiger after 5 years wasn't elite and was nowhere as good as Jack lifetime. No #@#@#@#@.

you just use pure stats with no context....... stats mostly accumulated when he was a second rate offensive option behind lynch and the running game... and their offense played second fiddle to an all time great defense... a defense which was number 1 in the league for 4 straight years

i can tell you that since wilson has been in the league rodgers has an mvp.... 5 year window. i can also tell you since 2012 brady has 180 td passes to 45 picks. each guy has been the face of the franchise for those 5 years and have significantly outplayed wilson in that 5 year window

so........ you want 5 years.... yea.... from 2012 to now brady and rodgers are head and shoulders above wilson. brees also was the face of his team for 5 years and has 190 td passes, leading the league in passing multiple times

so just take your longevity argument elsewhere... it's a farce

today.. wilson is not on that level..... if you want to say he will be, that's fine. only time will tell but he has done little to show he will ever be a top flight pocket passer when the full load is on his shoulders. he will always have to rely on 7 second patterns because he needs to scramble guys open. it is what it is

[Rjk214]

you just use pure stats with no context....... stats mostly accumulated when he was a second rate offensive option behind lynch and the running game... and their offense played second fiddle to an all time great defense... a defense which was number 1 in the league for 4 straight years

i can tell you that since wilson has been in the league rodgers has an mvp.... 5 year window. i can also tell you since 2012 brady has 180 td passes to 45 picks. each guy has been the face of the franchise for those 5 years and have significantly outplayed wilson in that 5 year window

so........ you want 5 years.... yea.... from 2012 to now brady and rodgers are head and shoulders above wilson. brees also was the face of his team for 5 years and has 190 td passes, leading the league in passing multiple times

so just take your longevity argument elsewhere... it's a farce

today.. wilson is not on that level..... if you want to say he will be, that's fine. only time will tell but he has done little to show he will ever be a top flight pocket passer when the full load is on his shoulders. he will always have to rely on 7 second patterns because he needs to scramble guys open. it is what it is

Once again you prove your ineptitude to have an educated argument. As you play more years in the league you will become better. #ExperienceMatters

So to better argue let's debate the first 5 years of their careers. That's pretty much the only way to argue it. I know. Weird right?

[MFaulkCollector]

How do you know that end statement though? You don't. You are assuming that... When you have .5 seconds to run for your life of course it's tough to throw guys open. Even if he had a line that doesn't mean you HAVE to do that. What matters is moving the ball and driving downfield and scoring TDs and setting up a team to win.

It's weird when people argue what football is actually about.

i watch games...... i have eyes..... he doesn't show top flight accuracy and anticipation. he doesn't throw the precision timing passes that great pocket passers do on a regular basis.

don't get me wrong, wilson is very good... he has improved a ton as a passer; but being a pocket passer is not his pedigree. it's not likely he will ever evolve into a brady/brees/rodgers drop it on a dime type of timing qb........ he uses his legs and likes to scramble guys open, that's fine. at 34 he won't be scrambling guys open for 6 seconds.... so either he continues to get better or he will hit a wall at some point.

[Rjk214]

This is where they stand so far:

Competition % Rodgers. Wilson. Brady.
YDs Rodgers. Wilson. Brady.
TDs Rodgers. Wilson. Brady.
INTs Wilson/Rodgers. Brady.
YDs/A Rodgers. Wilson. Brady.
QB Rate Rodgers. Wilson. Brady.
Wins Brady. Wilson. Rodgers.

Rushing Yards Wilson. Rodgers. Brady
Rushing TDs Rodgers. Wilson. Brady


By most metrics in their first 5 seasons. Rodgers is the CLEAR #1 followed by Wilson and then Brady (The GOAT). That's weird that Wilson would be statistically better that early on.

[Rjk214]

i watch games...... i have eyes..... he doesn't show top flight accuracy and anticipation. he doesn't throw the precision timing passes that great pocket passers do on a regular basis.

don't get me wrong, wilson is very good... he has improved a ton as a passer; but being a pocket passer is not his pedigree. it's not likely he will ever evolve into a brady/brees/rodgers drop it on a dime type of timing qb........ he uses his legs and likes to scramble guys open, that's fine. at 34 he won't be scrambling guys open for 6 seconds.... so either he continues to get better or he will hit a wall at some point.

You define elite as being a pocket passer. That's fine.

That's not how history defines the greatest QBs though. Otherwise Scramblin Fran wouldn't be there... You don't have to be a pure pocket passer to be elite.

I think you need to redefine how you think about it.

I'm not saying Wilson is as good a pure pocket passer as Brady or Rodgers. No one would. But is he elite according to the argument that you want to make (That those guys are the elites) according to stats in their first 5 seasons.. Yes. Absolutely.

[MFaulkCollector]

Once again you prove your ineptitude to have an educated argument. As you play more years in the league you will become better. #ExperienceMatters

So to better argue let's debate the first 5 years of their careers. That's pretty much the only way to argue it. I know. Weird right?

that is one of the stupidest things ive ever seen on here

the question is.... is wilson elite on the level or rodgers/brady?

your answer... let's compare wilson 2012-2017 to rodgers 2008-2013(drafted in 05 sat 3 years) and brady 2000-2005

well, ill play your stupid game then

by rodgers 4th year he was the face of the franchise, an nfl mvp, first team all pro, and super bowl mvp... had led the league in qb efficiency multiple times

by year 4 brady had won 3 super bowls and was already being talked about as one of the best to ever play the position and cemented the 2000-2010 dynasty. he led the nfl in td passes once as well

wilson.... led league in rating once, and in the super bowl season he threw 3 td's in 3 games for 500 yards. he blew a 10 point lead in a super bowl and threw the game defining pick

if you think those 3 match up that's fine... im done here

[Rjk214]

that is one of the stupidest things ive ever seen on here

the question is.... is wilson elite on the level or rodgers/brady?

your answer... let's compare wilson 2012-2017 to rodgers 2008-2013(drafted in 05 sat 3 years) and brady 2000-2005

well, ill play your stupid game then

by rodgers 4th year he was the face of the franchise, an nfl mvp, first team all pro, and super bowl mvp... had led the league in qb efficiency multiple times

by year 4 brady had won 3 super bowls and was already being talked about as one of the best to ever play the position and cemented the 2000-2010 dynasty. he led the nfl in td passes once as well

wilson.... led league in rating once, and in the super bowl season he threw 3 td's in 3 games for 500 yards. he blew a 10 point lead in a super bowl and threw the game defining pick

if you think those 3 match up that's fine... im done here

That's what you use to compare careers while they are still competing. Lol. Definitely showed you clearly lack understanding in comparisons of athletes.

I'm giving you your stats you wanted to use.. Sorry it blew up on you

[MFaulkCollector]

You define elite as being a pocket passer. That's fine.

That's not how history defines the greatest QBs though. Otherwise Scramblin Fran wouldn't be there... You don't have to be a pure pocket passer to be elite.

I think you need to redefine how you think about it.

I'm not saying Wilson is as good a pure pocket passer as Brady or Rodgers. No one would. But is he elite according to the argument that you want to make (That those guys are the elites) according to stats in their first 5 seasons.. Yes. Absolutely.

the question is.... is wilson elite on the level of brady/rodgers....... the answer is no

the question wasn't... well, was wilson as good as the elite guys now during their first 5 seasons. that has nothing to do with anything

why am i comparing wilson's first 5 years to anyone else's first 5..... im comparing 2012 to 2017 for each guy and rodgers/brady/brees are much better than wilson in that 5 year span.. period

i explained why rodgers and brady were much better than wilson in their first 5 years

your argument has no basis except that you expect wilson to improve and get to the level of today's elite qb's. that opinion is fine, but no facts back that up. only time will tell. i strongly disagree with it

[MFaulkCollector]

That's what you use to compare careers while they are still competing. Lol. Definitely showed you clearly lack understanding in comparisons of athletes.

I'm giving you your stats you wanted to use.. Sorry it blew up on you

you lack understanding of basic common knowledge

from 2012 -2017 wilson has not been as good as brady/rodgers/brees.... therefore TODAY he cannot be considered elite on their level. THAT WAS THE ORGINAL QUESTION

you only want to extrapolate wilson out like rodgers and brady...... phantom improvement

through 08-13 rodgers, and 01-06 brady..... were significantly better than wilson from 12-17

so you lose on both fronts....... but im sure you wont comprehend that either so ill stop wasting my time

[Rjk214]

the question is.... is wilson elite on the level of brady/rodgers....... the answer is no

the question wasn't... well, was wilson as good as the elite guys now during their first 5 seasons. that has nothing to do with anything

why am i comparing wilson's first 5 years to anyone else's first 5..... im comparing 2012 to 2017 for each guy and rodgers/brady/brees are much better than wilson in that 5 year span.. period

i explained why rodgers and brady were much better than wilson in their first 5 years

your argument has no basis except that you expect wilson to improve and get to the level of today's elite qb's. that opinion is fine, but no facts back that up. only time will tell. i strongly disagree with it

The argument to define a QB or compare any athlete is relevant years against years. That's what I use. That's what any educated sports fan uses.

Now yes you can say Steve Young is better than Deshaun Watson. Of course he is today (But in year 1 maybe not)

No one would compare a guy who has 10+ years and is considered the GOAT against a rookie in a single season. That's laughable.

In their first 5 seasons I gave you the real stats. Rodgers is hands down the best. Wilson is second. Brady is 3rd through their first 5 seasons. They have all won SBs already in their first 5 seasons.

As of right now Wilson ranks with those guys. Sorry to burst your bubble. But that's what the data shows. Now any argument outside of that is fine. Maybe if on different teams none of them succeed. That's why elite isn't defined by just throwing passes from behind a line.

[Rjk214]

you lack understanding of basic common knowledge

from 2012 -2017 wilson has not been as good as brady/rodgers/brees.... therefore TODAY he cannot be considered elite on their level. THAT WAS THE ORGINAL QUESTION

you only want to extrapolate wilson out like rodgers and brady...... phantom improvement

through 08-13 rodgers, and 01-06 brady..... were significantly better than wilson from 12-17

so you lose on both fronts....... but im sure you wont comprehend that either so ill stop wasting my time

Maybe in your mind that was the question. It's understandable if you didn't get it and don't know how to compare athletes. And Brady was actually worse than both in almost all categories just an FYI. But Brady got the job done. That's what makes him elite today (Not his ability to throw the ball from behind a line. Lol)

[broncomanning18]

Lets just say Wilson is really good, but not yet Rodgers Brady good. I think we are looking more at Drew Brees good, which is pretty dang good. Did that about cover it ?

[Rjk214]

Lets just say Wilson is really good, but not yet Rodgers Brady good. I think we are looking more at Drew Brees good, which is pretty dang good. Did that about cover it ?

Through their first 5 seasons they are all very close.. All 3 had 3 pro bowls (Rodgers was the only one to be a 1st Team All Pro). Rodgers outranked both of them in a majority of categories.

What makes Wilson top notch is his ability to scramble, create plays while keeping his head up looking for the deep ball, and his outright rushing attack (Rodgers does pretty good also). You have to have an O-Line to be able to throw passes accurately from the pocket and Seattles has been one of the worst since Wilson entered the league (I do think GB has had some bad years as well)

When people make arguments they forgot to take into account everything...

It's all relevant to how your team is built also. If any one of these guys ended up in Cleveland or Jacksonville or some other random team would they have been any good? Who knows. They all have the ability to get it done as they've shown in different ways. It's easy to sit there and say today well obviously Brady is the best ever. But early on would you have taken him over Wilson or Rodgers stat wise through 5 seasons? Who knows bc his stats weren't even close to the other 2 guys but he had 3 SBs by then. Tough call to make.

[MFaulkCollector]

Lets just say Wilson is really good, but not yet Rodgers Brady good. I think we are looking more at Drew Brees good, which is pretty dang good. Did that about cover it ?

brees threw 40 td's a year for a 3 year span..... he is one of the finest passers in nfl history.. he led the league in passing yards like 7 times..... so no, i don't think that covers it

the whole talk about wilson is projecting outward... because wilson did x,y,z in his first 5 years... he will stay on the same career path and match a,b,c players because that is what they did in their first 5

brady absolutely EXPLODED after his first 5 years..... brees did as well..... rodgers is better off what was never seen early greatness... manning the same

so if wilson doesn't exponentially increase his passing..... then what? then after 10 years he is dwarfed by the true greats in statistical measures and we have to hear another reason why wilson is an all time great

[MFaulkCollector]

Through their first 5 seasons they are all very close.. All 3 had 3 pro bowls (Rodgers was the only one to be a 1st Team All Pro). Rodgers outranked both of them in a majority of categories.

What makes Wilson top notch is his ability to scramble, create plays while keeping his head up looking for the deep ball, and his outright rushing attack (Rodgers does pretty good also). You have to have an O-Line to be able to throw passes accurately from the pocket and Seattles has been one of the worst since Wilson entered the league (I do think GB has had some bad years as well)

When people make arguments they forgot to take into account everything...

It's all relevant to how your team is built also. If any one of these guys ended up in Cleveland or Jacksonville or some other random team would they have been any good? Who knows. They all have the ability to get it done as they've shown in different ways. It's easy to sit there and say today well obviously Brady is the best ever. But early on would you have taken him over Wilson or Rodgers stat wise through 5 seasons? Who knows bc his stats weren't even close to the other 2 guys but he had 3 SBs by then. Tough call to make.

i 100 percent disagree with your first 5 years premise.... but ill play along just to do so

brady, manning, brees, rodgers..... all exploded after their first 5 years....... so you must be assuming wilson will have the same exponential increase in passing polish and statistical greatness?

otherwise the whole first 5 year thing is meaningless.... because in the end a career is a career and will be matched up in full

and tarkenton....... yea he's a hof'er.... but i have never once seen him in a convo with elway/marino/montana/unitas/brady/rodgers/manning when talking about the best ever

wilson may very well end up a hofer....... but that doesn't mean he was on the level of brady/rodgers

aikman, fouts, kelly... they are in the hall......... but that doesn't mean they were elite on an all time top 5 level

[Rjk214]

i 100 percent disagree with your first 5 years premise.... but ill play along just to do so

brady, manning, brees, rodgers..... all exploded after their first 5 years....... so you must be assuming wilson will have the same exponential increase in passing polish and statistical greatness?

otherwise the whole first 5 year thing is meaningless.... because in the end a career is a career and will be matched up in full

and tarkenton....... yea he's a hof'er.... but i have never once seen him in a convo with elway/marino/montana/unitas/brady/rodgers/manning when talking about the best ever

wilson may very well end up a hofer....... but that doesn't mean he was on the level of brady/rodgers

aikman, fouts, kelly... they are in the hall......... but that doesn't mean they were elite on an all time top 5 level

Once again it must be getting hard for you to stick to one thing b/c you try for 1 sentence and then immediately revert back.

Through 5 years. Simply put. Wilson matches up with Brady and Rodgers. You can argue that people exponentially got better. That's great for them. They have a longer career to base things off in an overall workload. Yes.

But when an athlete is young and an athlete is old you compare their success to what they each did during the relevant timeframes. I have done that. I know its tough to understand though.

Time will tell if Wilson can get better throughout (Which seems to be holding up so far b/c he is now in the MVP race against the GOAT in only year 6 now)

[bojesphob]

Once again it must be getting hard for you to stick to one thing b/c you try for 1 sentence and then immediately revert back.

Through 5 years. Simply put. Wilson matches up with Brady and Rodgers. You can argue that people exponentially got better. That's great for them. They have a longer career to base things off in an overall workload. Yes.

But when an athlete is young and an athlete is old you compare their success to what they each did during the relevant timeframes. I have done that. I know its tough to understand though.

Time will tell if Wilson can get better throughout (Which seems to be holding up so far b/c he is now in the MVP race against the GOAT in only year 6 now)

He matches up ok versus Brady in Brady's first 5 years in most stats, but not Rodgers by any stretch. Here you go:

Aaron Rodgers (2008-2012)
2008 - 4038 yards - 28 TDs - 13 INT - 34 sacks - 6-10
2009 - 4434 yards - 30 TDs - 7 INT - 50 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
2010 - 3922 yards - 28 TDs - 11 INT - 31 sacks - 10-5 Super Bowl MVP
2011 - 4643 yards - 45 TDs - 6 INT - 36 sacks - 14-1 MVP Pro Bowl First Team All-Pro
2012 - 4295 yards - 39 TDs - 8 INT - 51 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
Total - 21,332 yards - 170 TDs - 45 INT - 202 sacks - 52-26 - 3 Pro Bowls, 1 First Team All-Pro, MVP, Super Bowl MVP

Russell Wilson (2012-2016)
2012 - 3118 yards - 26 TDs - 10 INT - 33 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
2013 - 3357 yards - 26 TDs - 9 INT - 44 sacks - 13-3 Pro Bowl Super Bowl (not MVP) W
2014 - 3475 yards - 20 TDs - 7 INT - 42 sacks - 12-4 Super Bowl (not MVP) L
2015 - 4024 yards - 34 TDs - 8 INT - 45 sacks - 10-6 Pro Bowl
2016 - 4219 yards - 21 TDs - 11 INT - 41 sacks - 10-5-1
Totals - 18,193 yards - 127 TDs - 45 INT - 205 sacks - 56-23-1 - 2 Super Bowl Appearances, 3 Pro Bowls

Tom Brady (2001-2005)
2001 - 2843 yards - 18 TDs - 12 INT - 41 sacks - 11-3 Pro Bowl Super Bowl MVP
2002 - 3764 yards - 28 TDs - 14 INT - 31 sacks - 9-7
2003 - 3620 yards - 23 TDs - 12 INT - 32 sacks - 14-2 Super Bowl MVP
2004 - 3692 yards - 28 TDs - 14 INT - 26 sacks - 14-2 Pro Bowl
2005 - 4110 yards - 26 TDs - 14 INT - 26 sacks - 10-6 Pro Bowl
Totals - 18,029 yards - 123 TDs - 66 INT - 156 sacks - 58-20 - 3 Pro Bowls, 2 Super Bowl MVPs

Same INTs for Rodgers and Wilson for first 5 years, and other than the extra Super Bowl that Wilson has (which I still say is because of his defense and less because of him), Rodgers had nearly an entire Russell season of yards and TDs more than Russell in his first 5 years starting (that's 3139 yards and 43 TDs, so you don't have to do the math). And, just because it needs being said, Russell had only 3 more sacks in those 5 years than Rodgers had in his 5 years, so the line had nothing to do with the difference. And couple the fact that Rodgers had running backs like James Starks and Ryan Grant as his running back through most of those years, and Russell had Marshawn Lynch also plays into that (Rodgers has done more with less, in other words).

Now, back to Brady, if Russell has around 4800 yards and 50 TDs next year, than we'll say he'll continue that being able to be compared to Brady. He's looking to keep pace with Brady for their 6th year (a bit better if he ends up doing his average for the year so far the last 3 games). But, next year will be the telling year for him compared to Brady at the same point.

[bojesphob]

Oh, and if you want to bring up 2012-2016, here are the differences between Rodgers and Wilson:
Aaron Rodgers (2008-2012)
2012 - 4295 yards - 39 TDs - 8 INT - 51 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
2013 - 2536 yards - 17 TDs - 6 INT - 21 sacks - 6-3
2014 - 4381 yards - 38 TDs - 5 INT - 28 sacks - 12-4 Pro Bowl MVP First Team All Pro
2015 - 3821 yards - 31 TDs - 8 INT - 46 sacks - 10-6 Pro Bowl
2016 - 4428 yards - 40 TDs - 7 INT - 35 sacks - 10-6 Pro Bowl
Total - 19,461 yards - 165 TDs - 34 INT - 181 sacks - 49-24 - 4 Pro Bowls, 1 First Team All-Pro, MVP

Russell Wilson (2012-2016)
2012 - 3118 yards - 26 TDs - 10 INT - 33 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
2013 - 3357 yards - 26 TDs - 9 INT - 44 sacks - 13-3 Pro Bowl Super Bowl (not MVP) W
2014 - 3475 yards - 20 TDs - 7 INT - 42 sacks - 12-4 Super Bowl (not MVP) L
2015 - 4024 yards - 34 TDs - 8 INT - 45 sacks - 10-6 Pro Bowl
2016 - 4219 yards - 21 TDs - 11 INT - 41 sacks - 10-5-1
Totals - 18,193 yards - 127 TDs - 45 INT - 205 sacks - 56-23-1 - 2 Super Bowl Appearances, 3 Pro Bowls

So, with 7 less games in 2013, Rodgers had 1,268 more yards and 38 more TDs, with 7 less INTs, and only about 20 less sacks - which he would have probably gotten had he played the rest of the season in 13. He also had 4 Pro Bowls (one more than Russell) an MVP and another first team all pro.

Also, Brady's numbers 12-16 are:
yards TDs INTs Sacks
21603 156 37 141

[titletowncards]

Let me simplify this for you with something I call the "eyeball" test.
Brady, Rodgers.......................................................................Everyone else.

[Rjk214]

He matches up ok versus Brady in Brady's first 5 years in most stats, but not Rodgers by any stretch. Here you go:

Aaron Rodgers (2008-2012)
2008 - 4038 yards - 28 TDs - 13 INT - 34 sacks - 6-10
2009 - 4434 yards - 30 TDs - 7 INT - 50 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
2010 - 3922 yards - 28 TDs - 11 INT - 31 sacks - 10-5 Super Bowl MVP
2011 - 4643 yards - 45 TDs - 6 INT - 36 sacks - 14-1 MVP Pro Bowl First Team All-Pro
2012 - 4295 yards - 39 TDs - 8 INT - 51 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
Total - 21,332 yards - 170 TDs - 45 INT - 202 sacks - 52-26 - 3 Pro Bowls, 1 First Team All-Pro, MVP, Super Bowl MVP

Russell Wilson (2012-2016)
2012 - 3118 yards - 26 TDs - 10 INT - 33 sacks - 11-5 Pro Bowl
2013 - 3357 yards - 26 TDs - 9 INT - 44 sacks - 13-3 Pro Bowl Super Bowl (not MVP) W
2014 - 3475 yards - 20 TDs - 7 INT - 42 sacks - 12-4 Super Bowl (not MVP) L
2015 - 4024 yards - 34 TDs - 8 INT - 45 sacks - 10-6 Pro Bowl
2016 - 4219 yards - 21 TDs - 11 INT - 41 sacks - 10-5-1
Totals - 18,193 yards - 127 TDs - 45 INT - 205 sacks - 56-23-1 - 2 Super Bowl Appearances, 3 Pro Bowls

Tom Brady (2001-2005)
2001 - 2843 yards - 18 TDs - 12 INT - 41 sacks - 11-3 Pro Bowl Super Bowl MVP
2002 - 3764 yards - 28 TDs - 14 INT - 31 sacks - 9-7
2003 - 3620 yards - 23 TDs - 12 INT - 32 sacks - 14-2 Super Bowl MVP
2004 - 3692 yards - 28 TDs - 14 INT - 26 sacks - 14-2 Pro Bowl
2005 - 4110 yards - 26 TDs - 14 INT - 26 sacks - 10-6 Pro Bowl
Totals - 18,029 yards - 123 TDs - 66 INT - 156 sacks - 58-20 - 3 Pro Bowls, 2 Super Bowl MVPs

Same INTs for Rodgers and Wilson for first 5 years, and other than the extra Super Bowl that Wilson has (which I still say is because of his defense and less because of him), Rodgers had nearly an entire Russell season of yards and TDs more than Russell in his first 5 years starting (that's 3139 yards and 43 TDs, so you don't have to do the math). And, just because it needs being said, Russell had only 3 more sacks in those 5 years than Rodgers had in his 5 years, so the line had nothing to do with the difference. And couple the fact that Rodgers had running backs like James Starks and Ryan Grant as his running back through most of those years, and Russell had Marshawn Lynch also plays into that (Rodgers has done more with less, in other words).

Now, back to Brady, if Russell has around 4800 yards and 50 TDs next year, than we'll say he'll continue that being able to be compared to Brady. He's looking to keep pace with Brady for their 6th year (a bit better if he ends up doing his average for the year so far the last 3 games). But, next year will be the telling year for him compared to Brady at the same point.

If you look back and READ I clearly said Rodgers is ahead in most categories... Wilson outpaces Rodgers in Wins and Rushing (Which is a very useful stat people seem to gladly ignore.. Most people would agree rushing yards are MUCH harder to get in the NFL but I don't need to use that in an argument like people try to take away his ability by saying oh they have a good D... Not too mention Wilson has greater than 2x yards rushing than any other RB on his team and one of the worst O-Lines in history of football this year when they can't even protect against a 3man rush. NEVER EVER EVER would Rodgers or Brady survive like that and having a winning season. EVER. But hey they have a good D AM I RIGHT?)...

Also you do know Rodgers had much better WRs than Wilson has ever seen. But arguments can be made many different ways. Best Defense (Seattle). Weakest O-Line (Seattle). Best WR core (Ehh probably GB. I don't recall who NE had those early years). At the end of the day its about winning football games (You need a team to do that. Whether it be great defense, a great O-Line (Which basically equate to the same value), or a strong offense, or even coach).

I could also mention in 2010 GB had what kind of D? How about 2004 for NE (Rushing and Defense)? Interesting right... Anyone can try to justify things using other examples. I kept that out of the equation. If any one of these played for a different organization would they be just as good? Who knows. My guess is probably not...

I was simply pointing out in the first 5 seasons (The data we have to go off of) they closely relate to one another especially when you factor it all in...

And then you make yourself look foolish showing data from guys who have 5-10+ years more experience than someone else. Again. Not a true valid usage for comparisons at all!


Anyways.

[Rjk214]

Let me simplify this for you with something I call the "eyeball" test.
Brady, Rodgers.......................................................................Everyone else.

Yes the eyeball test. I have heard of it. Such a good thing to go off of. True newbies use that metric!

I am sure you could use it to compare the all time greats to the current regime :confused::doh:

[bojesphob]

If you look back and READ I clearly said Rodgers is ahead in most categories... Wilson outpaces Rodgers in Wins and Rushing (Which is a very useful stat people seem to gladly ignore.. Most people would agree rushing yards are MUCH harder to get in the NFL but I don't need to use that in an argument like people try to take away his ability by saying oh they have a good D... Not too mention Wilson has greater than 2x yards rushing than any other RB on his team and one of the worst O-Lines in history of football this year when they can't even protect against a 3man rush. NEVER EVER EVER would Rodgers or Brady survive like that and having a winning season. EVER. But hey they have a good D AM I RIGHT?)...

Also you do know Rodgers had much better WRs than Wilson has ever seen. But arguments can be made many different ways. Best Defense (Seattle). Weakest O-Line (Seattle). Best WR core (Ehh probably GB. I don't recall who NE had those early years). At the end of the day its about winning football games (You need a team to do that. Whether it be great defense, a great O-Line (Which basically equate to the same value), or a strong offense, or even coach).

I could also mention in 2010 GB had what kind of D? How about 2004 for NE (Rushing and Defense)? Interesting right... Anyone can try to justify things using other examples. I kept that out of the equation. If any one of these played for a different organization would they be just as good? Who knows. My guess is probably not...

I was simply pointing out in the first 5 seasons (The data we have to go off of) they closely relate to one another especially when you factor it all in...

And then you make yourself look foolish showing data from guys who have 5-10+ years more experience than someone else. Again. Not a true valid usage for comparisons at all!


Anyways.

Ok, I'll make myself look more like a fool.

Russell Wilson has been sacked 30 times this year. 15 less than his highest mark, so saying he has the worst line in the history of football is poetic license overkill. It isn't even the worst it's been for Russell yet, so not sure how it's the worst ever. Throw in that not once but twice Rodgers has been sacked 50 times or more.... That being said, they were within 3 sacks of each other in their first 5 years of starting, so the Oline argument is a wash. You say Rodgers wouldn't survive? He THRIVES with worse. Brady, I will agree though that if you sack him a lot, that's when he starts sucking.

Funny that you mention rushing. Sure, Wilson has almost 2x yards as Rodgers had in his first 5 years starting, but Rodgers had 5 more rushing TDs in the same time frame. I'd call that a wash as well since it can be argued either way whether TDs or yards are more important as a stat for rushing as a QB.

So, they have about the same stats rushing, and OLine. While, yes, the 2010 Packers D was #2 (behind Pittsburg), the highest it was in the first 5 years for Rodgers aside from that was 2009, which was 7th. They haven't ranked much above 10 in any year of Rodgers career aside from that. So, the Seahawks D has carried that team pretty much every year. Wilson doesn't NEED to do great to win, he just needs to do OK and there's a high chance they'll win, and that's a LOT less pressure. Again, I'll stick with my comment that Wilson is still in the Trent Dilfer Effect for QBs until he plays on a team that doesn't have a top 10 ranked D, and then we'll see how well he does when the game is entirely on his shoulders.

[Rjk214]

Ok, I'll make myself look more like a fool.

Russell Wilson has been sacked 30 times this year. 15 less than his highest mark, so saying he has the worst line in the history of football is poetic license overkill. It isn't even the worst it's been for Russell yet, so not sure how it's the worst ever. Throw in that not once but twice Rodgers has been sacked 50 times or more.... That being said, they were within 3 sacks of each other in their first 5 years of starting, so the Oline argument is a wash. You say Rodgers wouldn't survive? He THRIVES with worse. Brady, I will agree though that if you sack him a lot, that's when he starts sucking.

Funny that you mention rushing. Sure, Wilson has almost 2x yards as Rodgers had in his first 5 years starting, but Rodgers had 5 more rushing TDs in the same time frame. I'd call that a wash as well since it can be argued either way whether TDs or yards are more important as a stat for rushing as a QB.

So, they have about the same stats rushing, and OLine. While, yes, the 2010 Packers D was #2 (behind Pittsburg), the highest it was in the first 5 years for Rodgers aside from that was 2009, which was 7th. They haven't ranked much above 10 in any year of Rodgers career aside from that. So, the Seahawks D has carried that team pretty much every year. Wilson doesn't NEED to do great to win, he just needs to do OK and there's a high chance they'll win, and that's a LOT less pressure. Again, I'll stick with my comment that Wilson is still in the Trent Dilfer Effect for QBs until he plays on a team that doesn't have a top 10 ranked D, and then we'll see how well he does when the game is entirely on his shoulders.

He is sacked less b/c he HAS to rush... So yeah that would make sense as he is scrambling for his life... I get it. That's tough to understand if you don't watch or understand football. Sacks don't dictate O-Line success or failure either (Check my previous sentence)

You do understand I laid out what you are saying already right? Nothing you are saying is new to me or this thread...

Also feel free to check out how many of Rodgers TDs are from inside the 3 yard line.. Not taking that away from him as I never brought it up until you decided you wanted to continue to bring new things to argue (Which I already said lots of different things could be interjected)

So Wilson this year doesn't have the team on his shoulders? Yeah I mean its tough when you are the leading rusher as the QB by 2x any RB... HAHAHA (I would love to see how many QBs survive half a season doing that). Do you not understand WHY you actually would have to do that.... Your comparison is cute I will give you that. But unrealistic. I understand you are a Rodgers fan and I gave my due to Rodgers. But I am not blind to reality and actually watch all football games!

Could Wilson do what Rodgers has done in GB? More than likely. Could Rodgers do what Wilson does in Seattle? Probably with slightly less success rushing.

I love the argument b/c a defense is good that means a QB isn't as good. Lol. Do you football? Clearly not.... OMG. The defense allowed 10 points so the offense doesn't need to go throw for 400 yards. Does it mean they can't do it? Nope... But lets blame the QB and say he isn't good b/c he is a part of that team. Good argument. On the flip side a bad defense creates inflated stats for a QB (Brees)... I mean common sense tells you that... Sometimes its hard to live in the real world

When you actually make the argument for his Defense being great that actually HELPS my argument by the way.... With such a great defense he is actually relatively close to those 2 guys statistically through his first 5 1/2 seasons. Imagine if he actually had to do even more? He would clearly be outpacing them... Lol. Imagine if they weaken the defense and make the O-Line stronger and got him more WR weapons. Wow. He would be better which is crazy to fathom.

So yes. Unfortunately you continue to make yourself look foolish... You can keep your Trent Dilfer comparison. Its laughable when you face reality

[ninjacookies]

Ok, I'll make myself look more like a fool.

Russell Wilson has been sacked 30 times this year. 15 less than his highest mark, so saying he has the worst line in the history of football is poetic license overkill. It isn't even the worst it's been for Russell yet, so not sure how it's the worst ever. Throw in that not once but twice Rodgers has been sacked 50 times or more.... That being said, they were within 3 sacks of each other in their first 5 years of starting, so the Oline argument is a wash. You say Rodgers wouldn't survive? He THRIVES with worse. Brady, I will agree though that if you sack him a lot, that's when he starts sucking.

Funny that you mention rushing. Sure, Wilson has almost 2x yards as Rodgers had in his first 5 years starting, but Rodgers had 5 more rushing TDs in the same time frame. I'd call that a wash as well since it can be argued either way whether TDs or yards are more important as a stat for rushing as a QB.

So, they have about the same stats rushing, and OLine. While, yes, the 2010 Packers D was #2 (behind Pittsburg), the highest it was in the first 5 years for Rodgers aside from that was 2009, which was 7th. They haven't ranked much above 10 in any year of Rodgers career aside from that. So, the Seahawks D has carried that team pretty much every year. Wilson doesn't NEED to do great to win, he just needs to do OK and there's a high chance they'll win, and that's a LOT less pressure. Again, I'll stick with my comment that Wilson is still in the Trent Dilfer Effect for QBs until he plays on a team that doesn't have a top 10 ranked D, and then we'll see how well he does when the game is entirely on his shoulders.

Trent Dilfer.

Lol.

I think I'll just skip over the rest of your nonsense in the future.

[titletowncards]

Could Wilson do what Rodgers has done in GB? More than likely.

Now that's funny! :doh:

[Rjk214]

Now that's funny! :doh:

It's pretty realistic.

Considering the entire argument is Wilson isn't as good as Rodgers or Brady bc he has a good defense.

But in reality his offensive numbers compare to those guys with his good defense through his first 5-5.5 seasons.

So give him a worse defense with higher caliber WRs and a slightly better O-Line and the need to put up more yards and more points to win. Seems like he would have more yards, more TDs, and probably more INTs in that scenario. That would bring him even closer to Rodgers numbers all around except INTs.

Definitely seems even more realistic when you lay it out logically... Hmm

I'm glad you guys are making this argument easier the more you try to knock him. Keep going if you want. It's getting better for me the more replies you guys give

Thanks for that.

[bojesphob]

Trent Dilfer.

Lol.

I think I'll just skip over the rest of your nonsense in the future.

That's fine. Trent Dilfer won the Super Bowl because his defense was dominant for a number of years, and they didn't need a top notch QB to win games, they just needed a guy that was able to minimize mistakes and do reasonably well. Except for this year so far (where the Seahawks aren't in the top 5 for D), Wilson has had the exact same type of dominant D. Doesn't matter if Wilson throws 4 picks in the first 3 quarters and no TDs when the D and special teams keep the opponent to 16 points to the fourth quarter. If Wilson doesn't have a D that could keep a potent offense to 16 points through the first 3 quarters, he doesn't have a chance to have an onside kick go the Hawk's way then the opposing D basically collapsing and not doing anything like they did the entire game up till that point. But, sure, Wilson isn't better than he looks because his D basically hands him games, even when he's worse than Dilfer was at times.

[Drdduet]

Let me simplify this for you with something I call the "eyeball" test.
Brady, Rodgers.......................................................................Everyone else.

Except of course you are referring to the 5 year stats comparisons of greatness previously mentioned then there's Brees, Manning..................Rodgers, Brady.........everyone else. In fact you can pick any 5 year span from 2006 to present for Brees and he rolls everyone else. But of course stats don't equate to greatness pending on the discussion.

[Rjk214]

That's fine. Trent Dilfer won the Super Bowl because his defense was dominant for a number of years, and they didn't need a top notch QB to win games, they just needed a guy that was able to minimize mistakes and do reasonably well. Except for this year so far (where the Seahawks aren't in the top 5 for D), Wilson has had the exact same type of dominant D. Doesn't matter if Wilson throws 4 picks in the first 3 quarters and no TDs when the D and special teams keep the opponent to 16 points to the fourth quarter. If Wilson doesn't have a D that could keep a potent offense to 16 points through the first 3 quarters, he doesn't have a chance to have an onside kick go the Hawk's way then the opposing D basically collapsing and not doing anything like they did the entire game up till that point. But, sure, Wilson isn't better than he looks because his D basically hands him games, even when he's worse than Dilfer was at times.

This guy clearly doesn't know Football...

Dilfer stat line is 2000 (Regular Season. He did play less games but you can extrapolate the stats if need be) -- 59.3% completion rate, 1502 yards, 12 TDs, 11 INTs, QB Rating 76. (Playoffs) -- 47.9% completion rate

Dilfer has 1 Pro Bowl as well lifetime. You can clearly see the similarities :confused::doh:

But teams do have good defenses. That's the entirety of the argument. :coffee:. Once again how could Wilson have such numbers that could put him between Rodgers and Brady with such an amazing Defense? He should have horrendous numbers that wouldn't even sniff those guys all b/c of the defense. Weird how the story isn't telling that

The more he decides to comment the worse his arguments look.

[bojesphob]

This guy clearly doesn't know Football...

Dilfer stat line is 2000 (Regular Season. He did play less games but you can extrapolate the stats if need be) -- 59.3% completion rate, 1502 yards, 12 TDs, 11 INTs, QB Rating 76. (Playoffs) -- 47.9% completion rate

Dilfer has 1 Pro Bowl as well lifetime. You can clearly see the similarities :confused::doh:

But teams do have good defenses. That's the entirety of the argument. :coffee:. Once again how could Wilson have such numbers that could put him between Rodgers and Brady with such an amazing Defense? He should have horrendous numbers that wouldn't even sniff those guys all b/c of the defense. Weird how the story isn't telling that

The more he decides to comment the worse his arguments look.

Did I say anything about Dilfer's overall stats? I said that the Ravens' Defense carried Dilfer, allowing him to be a not so great QB be a Super Bowl winning QB. Sure, Wilson is better than Dilfer, but he's also boosted because he can make HUGE mistakes and still have the ability to come back at the end of the game because the opposing team only has 15-20 points thereby making it a not so insurmountable hill to climb. You take away that top 5 ranked defense for Wilson, and what do you get? An 8-5 year where they could easily not make the playoffs. Rodgers had a 21st ranked D last year, and did they not make the playoffs? Oh, no, they actually went to the NFC Championship game (where the defense stunk it up AGAIN in the playoffs for him). That's the entire argument right there, that the defense makes more of a difference for Wilson. I'll repeat, until he can not only win, but win easily, on a team without a top 10 ranked defense, then my original statement stands. If he can do that, then I will GLADLY change my mind it not being the defense that makes him look good. Right now, I have no evidence to show that's not the case.

[Drdduet]

Drew Brees (2009-2013)

2009 - 4388 yds - 34 TD - 11 INT - 20 Sacks - Pro Bowl, Super Bowl MVP
2010 - 4620 yds - 33 TD - 22 INT - 25 Sacks - Pro Bowl
2011 - 5476 yds - 46 TD - 14 INT - 24 Sacks - Pro Bowl
2012 - 5177 yds - 43 TD - 19 INT - 26 Sacks - Pro Bowl
2013 - 5162 yds - 39 TD - 12 INT - 37 Sacks - Pro Bowl
Totals- 24823yds- 195TD- 78 INT - 132Sacks- 5 Pro Bowls, 1 SB MVP, 51-24 QB W-L record

[bojesphob]

Drew Brees (2009-2013)

2009 - 4388 yds - 34 TD - 11 INT - 20 Sacks - Pro Bowl, Super Bowl MVP
2010 - 4620 yds - 33 TD - 22 INT - 25 Sacks - Pro Bowl
2011 - 5476 yds - 46 TD - 14 INT - 24 Sacks - Pro Bowl
2012 - 5177 yds - 43 TD - 19 INT - 26 Sacks - Pro Bowl
2013 - 5162 yds - 39 TD - 12 INT - 37 Sacks - Pro Bowl
Totals- 24823yds- 195TD- 78 INT - 132Sacks- 5 Pro Bowls, 1 SB MVP, 51-24 QB W-L record

Thanks for looking those up, and posting them. I was going to include Brees, but it took less time to leave him out.

[Rjk214]

Did I say anything about Dilfer's overall stats? I said that the Ravens' Defense carried Dilfer, allowing him to be a not so great QB be a Super Bowl winning QB. Sure, Wilson is better than Dilfer, but he's also boosted because he can make HUGE mistakes and still have the ability to come back at the end of the game because the opposing team only has 15-20 points thereby making it a not so insurmountable hill to climb. You take away that top 5 ranked defense for Wilson, and what do you get? An 8-5 year where they could easily not make the playoffs. Rodgers had a 21st ranked D last year, and did they not make the playoffs? Oh, no, they actually went to the NFC Championship game (where the defense stunk it up AGAIN in the playoffs for him). That's the entire argument right there, that the defense makes more of a difference for Wilson. I'll repeat, until he can not only win, but win easily, on a team without a top 10 ranked defense, then my original statement stands. If he can do that, then I will GLADLY change my mind it not being the defense that makes him look good. Right now, I have no evidence to show that's not the case.

Did he have a run game? Was he the top RB on the team by 2x? No.. Oh ok. Highly unlikely he would survive by having to do that

Your logic is making this too easy to argue against again. If you have a great defense and your stats show you are relatively comparable to Rodgers and Brady what does that tell? Again, with a weaker D and better WRs and a slightly better O-Line his stats would improve! OMG. That's mind boggling to consider. Teams are built differently. Wilson is CLEARLY showing this year he can do what you say he can't do as well as be the LEADING RUSHER by 2x. No other QB can do that, be alive, and still win! But yeah he is Dilfer(esque). Not to mention his HUGE mistakes average roughly .5 INTs per game. Those are HUGE. Lol

I can also simplify it for you (Since you can't grasp reality). If Rodgers had a better D and a weaker WR core would he be as good stat wise? Nope. Simply put.

Anyways. No point in going round and round. Its hard for reality to be seen for some. You have shown your argument can be taken and thrown in the trash as well as putting an absolutely retarded comparison out there.

[bojesphob]

Did he have a run game? Was he the top RB on the team by 2x? No.. Oh ok. Highly unlikely he would survive by having to do that

Your logic is making this too easy to argue against again. If you have a great defense and your stats show you are relatively comparable to Rodgers and Brady what does that tell?

Anyways. No point in going round and round. You have shown your argument can be taken and thrown in the trash as well as putting an absolutely retarded comparison out there.

That's nice, but you haven't really proven anything to the contrary, other than the fact that you really can't argue a point without insults, which means you don't have much ground to stand on. So, please enlighten me on how not being able to perform when your defense isn't helping to carry you comparable to carrying the team when your defense is terrible? Because that's what we're talking about here, not rushing stats. Wilson's defense isn't in the top 3 this year, and he's not doing as well. Coincidence?

[Rjk214]

That's nice, but you haven't really proven anything to the contrary, other than the fact that you really can't argue a point without insults, which means you don't have much ground to stand on. So, please enlighten me on how not being able to perform when your defense isn't helping to carry you comparable to carrying the team when your defense is terrible? Because that's what we're talking about here, not rushing stats. Wilson's defense isn't in the top 3 this year, and he's not doing as well. Coincidence?

Stats are stats. Rushing is part of being a QB. When you have to be the leading rusher on your team by 2x that's a big telling stat. Unless you aren't aware teams have RBs they rely on to run the ball....

Since you can't seem to grasp that there is no need to argue anymore. You really think Tom Brady would be as good if he HAD to be the leading rusher on his team as well as the passing QB? Or would that mean the team is completely one dimensional? Do you know what happens in that scenario...

Its all relative in football. One thing doesn't make the entire picture which you can't seem to think outside of that for a second.

When you factor all of that in his stats are actually BETTER this year not to mention he is the most valuable player on the football field hands down. He accounts for 99% of the TDs they have scored and over 80% of the total offense I believe. But yeah he is worse.....

[Drdduet]

Defense wins championships.....if you are a good QB with a great defense you got a shot...if you are a great quarterback with a great defense you are legendary.

For example the Patriots in their 7 super bowl appearances since 2000 had average team defense rank of 5th overall in the season...In their 5 super bowl wins their average rank was 3.6 with twice being first (2003 & 2016 seasons) and once being 2nd (2004 season). In their non-super bowl appearing years their average defensive rank is 10th (still pretty darn good). Despite this, there is little celebration for the Pats D. I think an objective analysis of any successful franchise and/or super bowl winners will reveal that team defense is perhaps the most important (but not only!) piece of the puzzle for championships.

[bojesphob]

Defense wins championships.....if you are a good QB with a great defense you got a shot...if you are a great quarterback with a great defense you are legendary.

For example the Patriots in their 7 super bowl appearances since 2000 had average team defense rank of 5th overall in the season...In their 5 super bowl wins their average rank was 3.6 with twice being first (2003 & 2016 seasons) and once being 2nd (2004 season). In their non-super bowl appearing years their average defensive rank is 10th (still pretty darn good). Despite this, there is little celebration for the Pats D. I think an objective analysis of any successful franchise and/or super bowl winners will reveal that team defense is perhaps the most important (but not only!) piece of the puzzle for championships.

For the championship argument, yeah, defense is a HUGE part. Hence the entire reason Rodgers hasn't won another Super Bowl, because the QB can't carry the entire team every single game, especially in the playoffs when you're playing other really good teams. But, the entire discussion is whether Wilson is elite, and defense is a big part of that discussions because he's had the top defense for many years he's been playing but DOESN'T have multiple Super Bowl wins. Elite QBs with the #1 defense for 3 straight years would probably have 3. But, you know, I know nothing about football and have retarded comparisons :rolleyes:

[Rjk214]

The argument is what he HAS done in his first 5 years against what others did in their first 5 years b/c that is what we have to go off of...

It was about his stats at first. They aren't good enough. Proved wrong.

Then the defense its too good. But why are his stats comparable to the "true elites" then. Proven wrong

Then he can't carry his team. But he is the LEADING RUSHER and LEADING PASSER (You know most teams have a QB and RBs. They are 2 different people. Sometimes you can have 2 or even 3 RBs). No other QB could do that with any level of success. Proven wrong


As of right now. Wilson is in the same boat and same regard as Brady and Rodgers through 5-5.5 seasons.

Can he continue? Who knows. Give him a weaker D, some better WRs, and a slightly better O-Line where he doesn't HAVE to be the #1 RB on the team and he will put up even better numbers.

But wait. 2015 & 2016 numbers were LEGIT. But it was his defense that did well so he didn't have to do much?

Brady as said above is THE GUY who has shown with a D he could get it done. Wilson should have 2 but that's on coaching. How is his playoff wins so far? Oh wait. Defense right?

AM I RIGHT BRO

[Grza]

The argument is what he HAS done in his first 5 years against what others did in their first 5 years b/c that is what we have to go off of...

It was about his stats at first. They aren't good enough. Proved wrong.

Then the defense its too good. But why are his stats comparable to the "true elites" then. Proven wrong

Then he can't carry his team. But he is the LEADING RUSHER and LEADING PASSER (You know most teams have a QB and RBs. They are 2 different people. Sometimes you can have 2 or even 3 RBs). No other QB could do that with any level of success. Proven wrong


As of right now. Wilson is in the same boat and same regard as Brady and Rodgers through 5-5.5 seasons.

Can he continue? Who knows. Give him a weaker D, some better WRs, and a slightly better O-Line where he doesn't HAVE to be the #1 RB on the team and he will put up even better numbers.

But wait. 2015 & 2016 numbers were LEGIT. But it was his defense that did well so he didn't have to do much?

AM I RIGHT BRO

You are right, bro.

[HBMC]

Defense wins championships.....if you are a good QB with a great defense you got a shot...if you are a great quarterback with a great defense you are legendary.

For example the Patriots in their 7 super bowl appearances since 2000 had average team defense rank of 5th overall in the season...In their 5 super bowl wins their average rank was 3.6 with twice being first (2003 & 2016 seasons) and once being 2nd (2004 season). In their non-super bowl appearing years their average defensive rank is 10th (still pretty darn good). Despite this, there is little celebration for the Pats D. I think an objective analysis of any successful franchise and/or super bowl winners will reveal that team defense is perhaps the most important (but not only!) piece of the puzzle for championships.

How dare you add context to an extended version of begging the question.

OP, your need of validation is truly remarkable.

[bojesphob]

The argument is what he HAS done in his first 5 years against what others did in their first 5 years b/c that is what we have to go off of...

It was about his stats at first. They aren't good enough. Proved wrong.

Then the defense its too good. But why are his stats comparable to the "true elites" then. Proven wrong

Then he can't carry his team. But he is the LEADING RUSHER and LEADING PASSER (You know most teams have a QB and RBs. They are 2 different people. Sometimes you can have 2 or even 3 RBs). No other QB could do that with any level of success. Proven wrong


As of right now. Wilson is in the same boat and same regard as Brady and Rodgers through 5-5.5 seasons.

Can he continue? Who knows. Give him a weaker D, some better WRs, and a slightly better O-Line where he doesn't HAVE to be the #1 RB on the team and he will put up even better numbers.

But wait. 2015 & 2016 numbers were LEGIT. But it was his defense that did well so he didn't have to do much?

Brady as said above is THE GUY who has shown with a D he could get it done. Wilson should have 2 but that's on coaching. How is his playoff wins so far? Oh wait. Defense right?

AM I RIGHT BRO

His stats weren't good enough for what? Being elite? No, they aren't good enough for being elite, even with rushing yards and TDs included. Are they good? Sure, they're good, I don't think anyone is saying Russell Wilson sucks. But is he on the "elite" level when the elite level is either Brady (with his multiple Super Bowl wins and MVPs), Rodgers (with his MVPs, Super Bowl MVP, and almost insane accuracy/TD-INT ratio/etc) or Brees (who isn't far behind Rodgers in most stats)? I will respectfully say, no, he's not on the same level. And, if 34 and 21 TDs and 4k yards is considered LEGIT, I really must not understand today's football because Andy Dalton has had a few seasons that match those numbers...

[Rjk214]

You're right in your simple mind. The one where again comparing careers to 5 seasons is not a true indicator. But it works for you and you resort back to it every single other comment b/c its truthfully the only way you can make any argument at all. Even though no one would ever do that to compare athletes still playing and in different levels of their careers.

Its funny you can't even stay on 1 topic line to have a discussion. Its b/c of Ds, Its b/c of Os, Its b/c of yards, Its b/c of TDs, Its b/c of careers, Its b/c he doesn't put the team on him (While he plays 2 positions HIMSELF).

I think what you've shown is a clear lack of being able to stay on 1 topic to be able to compare athletes. Not worth it anymore as you have proven you are very simplistic in having an actual conversation.

If you want to call Rodgers and Brady elite then, by stats early on in their careers Wilson is on the same trajectory. Good defense, bad offense, or other.

If you want to call Wilson similar to Dilfer by all means. But you were shown you weren't even remotely accurate.

Nothing you have shown or stated has had any relevant argument to the conversation outside of Brady has a lot of SBs and Rodgers can throw the ball in their entire careers. Ok?

GL

[Rjk214]

How dare you add context to an extended version of begging the question.

OP, your need of validation is truly remarkable.

No need for validation. Just a need to show someone how bad their argument is when they can't think realistically.

[bojesphob]

Apparently you still can't grasp that throwing for yards and TDs doesn't define elite in the real world b/c you have a team around you. 1 team could have a great D, and weak offense. Another team could have a weak D, and a superb offense. That doesn't tell you anything b/c the second example will HAVE to gain more yards and TDs. That's the reality of the football. Not all teams are built equally.

But apparently in your mind you are better b/c you are placed on a team in the second example. You compete in the system you given. The stats don't lie. Not sure what you can't wrap your head around.

You also still can't separate first 5 years and a career. It must be difficult for you to live in the real world b/c you continually bring up the same stuff and have been shown and proven wrong and when you can't reply about something you just ignore it.

Russell Wilson is Trent Dilfer to you. That's ok. The stats which we have laid out numerous times now tell another story. Especially when you have a QB that plays 2 positions. But yeah that doesn't matter I am sure every QB is soooo elite they could basically play without a RB. :doh:. Also AGAIN. It is weird his stats are even remotely close to that of Brady and Rodgers in the first 5 years isn't it seeing how AMAZING his defense was. Why is he even close then? He should be nowhere near close to a similar stat line by your arguments.

Its not realistic. But it works for you.

Anyways. Its childish to continue arguing with you b/c you can't grasp reality of the situation. GL to you

Well, considering you don't even understand what I'm trying to say, I would say yeah, it's childish of you to try and argue against a point you aren't comprehending. I'm saying Wilson has been doing better BECAUSE of his defense, not that he doesn't do well because of the defense doing well. When a QB doesn't have to worry about if their defense is going to hold the other team, they do BETTER. That's proven by the fact that the team that wins the Super Bowl *usually* had a top tier defense that year. Stats and situational awareness of other factors in the game aside from the QB are the only way you can compare them, especially when saying someone is elite versus not elite.

And, all of the stats I posted before, aside from the second one I posted for those that were arguing that Wilson was doing as well as Brady and Rodgers were for the past 5 years (excluding this year as a comparison since Rodgers has been out most of it), I was specifically comparing Wilson's first five starting years to the first five years of Brady and Rodgers because that's what you can compare right now. You can't compare Wilson to Brady or Rodgers career wise because they're not done yet, and Wilson is at the very least 7 seasons behind. But, that's why comparing the first 5 years works. Wilson hasn't had to play for a team that didn't have an elite defense (and that's what he's had), and that makes it harder to separate the opportunities that he had that the defense gave him and the opportunities that he himself made happen. Go back and watch the Cardinals/Packers playoff game from the 2009 season, and you'll see what terrible defenses make elite QBs do. Has the Seahawks D even allowed anywhere near 50 points in a game since Wilson started for the comparison to even begin?

But, then again, I've always said if someone has to ask "is so and so is HoF worthy" or "is so and so elite", if you have to ask the question to get other's opinions, then no, they typically aren't.

[Rjk214]

Well, considering you don't even understand what I'm trying to say, I would say yeah, it's childish of you to try and argue against a point you aren't comprehending. I'm saying Wilson has been doing better BECAUSE of his defense, not that he doesn't do well because of the defense doing well. When a QB doesn't have to worry about if their defense is going to hold the other team, they do BETTER. That's proven by the fact that the team that wins the Super Bowl *usually* had a top tier defense that year. Stats and situational awareness of other factors in the game aside from the QB are the only way you can compare them, especially when saying someone is elite versus not elite.

And, all of the stats I posted before, aside from the second one I posted for those that were arguing that Wilson was doing as well as Brady and Rodgers were for the past 5 years (excluding this year as a comparison since Rodgers has been out most of it), I was specifically comparing Wilson's first five starting years to the first five years of Brady and Rodgers because that's what you can compare right now. You can't compare Wilson to Brady or Rodgers career wise because they're not done yet, and Wilson is at the very least 7 seasons behind. But, that's why comparing the first 5 years works. Wilson hasn't had to play for a team that didn't have an elite defense (and that's what he's had), and that makes it harder to separate the opportunities that he had that the defense gave him and the opportunities that he himself made happen. Go back and watch the Cardinals/Packers playoff game from the 2009 season, and you'll see what terrible defenses make elite QBs do. Has the Seahawks D even allowed anywhere near 50 points in a game since Wilson started for the comparison to even begin?

But, then again, I've always said if someone has to ask "is so and so is HoF worthy" or "is so and so elite", if you have to ask the question to get other's opinions, then no, they typically aren't.

So a good defense allows you to be better. So Tom Brady really isn't that good then? Interesting.

You are basically blaming him for having a good D. Lol. Good argument. But his stats clearly show he is improving YoY.

And yes we all know having a bad D gives you the ball more so you can rack up stats. Yes. We all watch football.

This year he is playing 2 positions. That's QB and RB. Leading both. By large margins. Do you not see how impressive that is? Its nearly IMPOSSIBLE to do.

But hey. He is like Dilfer. That's cool. We get it.

[Rjk214]

The basic of your argument is that to be elite you must have a bad Defense.

Got it.

[bojesphob]

The basic of your argument is that to be elite you must have a bad Defense.

Got it.

No, the basis of my argument is that he hasn't had to play with a bad defense, so the comparison to Brady and Rodgers (both of whom have played with terrible defenses, Rodgers more so) is not a good comparison. And, yes, Brady AND Rodgers play better when their defense is good, but they excel even when the defense is bad. We haven't seen Wilson play with a defense that is bad, so we can't say that he would still be playing at such a high level (although we can't say that he wouldn't play as well, either). We would have to see how he plays on a team that, for instance Rodgers has had to deal with year in and year out since 2010 that's in the bottom half of the league.

And who cares that he's leading rushing on the team? Just means that his running backs are terrible. He has 482 rushing yards this year, hardly impressive, even by his account (he had 849 in 2014, although he didn't lead the team that year since Lynch had 1300 yards). Again, time will tell if he's elite QB or not, but right now NO HE IS NOT. That would be Brady, Brees and Rodgers, and no, it's not close - that's the WHOLE discussion here. The discussion about running backs and defenses is ancillary. Come back if/when he gets some NFL/Super Bowl MVPs or First Team All Pro selections, or leads the league in TDs and Yardage for one or more years, then we'll have this discussions again.

[Rjk214]

No, the basis of my argument is that he hasn't had to play with a bad defense, so the comparison to Brady and Rodgers (both of whom have played with terrible defenses, Rodgers more so) is not a good comparison. And, yes, Brady AND Rodgers play better when their defense is good, but they excel even when the defense is bad. We haven't seen Wilson play with a defense that is bad, so we can't say that he would still be playing at such a high level (although we can't say that he wouldn't play as well, either). We would have to see how he plays on a team that, for instance Rodgers has had to deal with year in and year out since 2010 that's in the bottom half of the league.

And who cares that he's leading rushing on the team? Just means that his running backs are terrible. He has 482 rushing yards this year, hardly impressive, even by his account (he had 849 in 2014, although he didn't lead the team that year since Lynch had 1300 yards). Again, time will tell if he's elite QB or not, but right now NO HE IS NOT. That would be Brady, Brees and Rodgers, and no, it's not close - that's the WHOLE discussion here. The discussion about running backs and defenses is ancillary. Come back if/when he gets some NFL/Super Bowl MVPs or First Team All Pro selections, or leads the league in TDs and Yardage for one or more years, then we'll have this discussions again.

So you went back to the same argument using Brady/Rodgers/Brees careers.

Got it.

Who cares if he is the QB and RB? HAHAHA. Clearly you don't watch enough Football to know you can then zero in on the team b/c they are one dimensional. You aren't talking about having weak RBs. You are talking about having NO RBs. 200 yards for a season is best? That's laughable.

You are really good at saying one thing and trying to spin it and twist it into something that makes sense for you.

Anyways. Your arguments have been very weak and relatively off topic from post to post.

Best wishes

[Rjk214]

Lets not forget these (Dilfer like comparisons):

"His three touchdown passes in each of the last five games (prior to Sunday) made him just the fifth quarterback in NFL history to do so. He joins the likes of Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, Steve Young, and Aaron Rodgers."

**But hey. His defense helped him to do that**

"What was also impressive during this stretch was that he is the first player to throw a league-record 19 touchdowns with no interceptions."

**But hey. His defense helped him to do that as well**


Is Wilson better than Brady, Rodgers, and/or Brees. No certainly not. He is on a pace to compete with them over their careers. Yes absolutely. That puts him in the elite category

[bojesphob]

Lets not forget these (Dilfer like comparisons):

"His three touchdown passes in each of the last five games (prior to Sunday) made him just the fifth quarterback in NFL history to do so. He joins the likes of Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, Steve Young, and Aaron Rodgers."

**But hey. His defense helped him to do that**

"What was also impressive during this stretch was that he is the first player to throw a league-record 19 touchdowns with no interceptions."

**But hey. His defense helped him to do that as well**


Is Wilson better than Brady, Rodgers, and/or Brees. No certainly not. He is on a pace to compete with them over their careers. Yes absolutely. That puts him in the elite category

Ok, so he has 2 impressive things, and yes, having an elite defense gives those opportunities that he might not have if the defense can't get off the field and let him try. Did they do it FOR him, no, and I'm not saying they did, but to discount that they helped make it possible for him to do so is ignoring the fact that if you don't have a defense to stop the other team, you have less opportunities to do impressive things. The better the defense, the better the offense, *usually*.

And, no, potential is not the same as actual production. He could have a career ending injury this weekend and those could be his only impressive accolades, and he'd still be just the guy who had 19 straight TDs with no interceptions and 3 TDs in 5 straight games. Again, if he keeps this up and in a few more years has that same type of production (and increases his TD output and wins some actual awards for being the best player in the league) THEN he'll be elite. So, again, he isn't elite YET. He could be, but then again, he might not be and we won't have an actual answer until he gets further in his career.

[Rjk214]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000889651/article/russell-wilson-deserves-mvp-keenan-allen-deserves-spotlight

Most analysts agree that Wilson is an elite QB.

If he didn't have a top tier defense he would be out there slinging it left and right and rushing like he has PROVED he can get the job done. The defensive argument is so lame! If Rodgers did have a great defense he wouldn't be out there slinging it and his numbers would drop. He would be average then. At best. That would be a shame for that to happen b/c then you would be really upset and his elite status could be seen as the defense was good

Again. Lets wait and see b/c comparing him to others that are elite is an argument that puts Wilson in that category. Ok. Fair enough. Lets wait and see b/c you don't like to acknowledge he is with the likes of Brady, Brees, and Rodgers early on throughout his career when compared to theirs.

This is fun. Over and over and over. Your argument is so lame and reverses to a way you can continue and when continually shown things you don't like its always something.

Meh its a couple impressive things. He could get injured though. So he wouldn't be as good as people with 5-10+ years more than him.

Dude. You are only making yourself look worse the longer you go and keep flip flopping back and forth to try and hold an argument up.

[Rjk214]

So we have established this:

Arguments for:

Wilson is as relatively good as Brady & Rodgers statistically were throughout each of their first 5-5.5 seasons.

Brady and Rodgers are widely regarded as elite today. This put Wilson in the talks of being on the same relative trajectory.

Is he as good as what Brady and Rodgers have accomplished in their careers. No

This is why he is becoming widely regarded as an elite QB though.


This year he only ranks:
6th in yards, 2nd in TDs, 5th in 20+, 1st in 40+. He accounts for 80%+ scrimmage yards and 90%+ TDs. All while playing QB AND RB with the #32 Offensive Line in the league. But he compares to Dilfer. Lol

"In fact, according to Next Gen Stats, he is the best passer on tight-window throws, with an 82.6 passer rating (min. 30 pass attempts)."

"With Wilson also excelling as a deep-ball passer -- as evidenced by his 6:1 touchdown-to-interception ratio and 111.5 passer rating on throws that travel 20-plus air yards"


Arguments against:

- Defense is too good

[Rjk214]

"As noted in the FOX Sports article, many fans attribute the success that Russell Wilson has had to his defense and the emergence of Marshawn Lynch. This isn’t an argument that NFL analysts would use against Joe Montana, even though he had the third-best defense in the league during his 1988 Super Bowl run. That’s also the season San Francisco 49ers running back Roger Craig rushed for 1,502 yards. Montana also threw for fewer yards (2,981) than Wilson has in any of his first three seasons.

During the 1998 NFL season, John Elway led the Denver Broncos to the first of consecutive Super Bowl titles. He had a defense that absolutely dominated the line and allowed only 80 rushing yards per game. Elway and the Broncos also received 2,008 rushing yards from Terrell Davis, who ran the team right through the AFC Playoffs.

With that evidence at hand, should not the argument be made that Russell Wilson is no more overrated than John Elway and Joe Montana? All three Pro Bowl quarterbacks were aided by stellar play on defense and star running backs. There is no question that it helped the Broncos, 49ers, and Seahawks succeed even more than quarterback-play alone. But it doesn’t take away from what they each brought to the field."

[ninjacookies]

"As noted in the FOX Sports article, many fans attribute the success that Russell Wilson has had to his defense and the emergence of Marshawn Lynch. This isn’t an argument that NFL analysts would use against Joe Montana, even though he had the third-best defense in the league during his 1988 Super Bowl run. That’s also the season San Francisco 49ers running back Roger Craig rushed for 1,502 yards. Montana also threw for fewer yards (2,981) than Wilson has in any of his first three seasons.

During the 1998 NFL season, John Elway led the Denver Broncos to the first of consecutive Super Bowl titles. He had a defense that absolutely dominated the line and allowed only 80 rushing yards per game. Elway and the Broncos also received 2,008 rushing yards from Terrell Davis, who ran the team right through the AFC Playoffs.

With that evidence at hand, should not the argument be made that Russell Wilson is no more overrated than John Elway and Joe Montana? All three Pro Bowl quarterbacks were aided by stellar play on defense and star running backs. There is no question that it helped the Broncos, 49ers, and Seahawks succeed even more than quarterback-play alone. But it doesn’t take away from what they each brought to the field."


The Dilfer comparison is the biggest form of hyperbole and shows both laziness and a lack of insight.

It's okay. That's how a great majority of the uninformed think. They watch 'maybe' 2 seahawks games a year and feel they can simply recycle the same scripts to negate his dynamic playmaking ability and ultra efficiency.

And now that they can no longer fall back on the epic defense and run game crutch, all they can do is keep running back to yesteryear references.



I'm not saying Wilson was elite his previous 4 seasons. But this year, he very much deserves any arguments he gets that place him in that upper echelon.


He's still very much a young work in progress, but leading the league in passing yards, td's and rushing yards at your position is anything 'but' a game manager and someone incapable of carrying a team. He no longer has the luxury of being coddled by an overly conservative playbook designed to protect leads, or a bruising back that is all but an automatic for those 4 yards needed on a crucial 3rd down.


It's all on him.

[ninjacookies]

So in closing...he has:

-zero offensive line
-defense that is down pretty much every star worth a damn
-perhaps the worst run support in the league
-turned an UDFA named Douglas Bladwin into a premier receiver
-the highest paid TE with perma-greased catching mitts

Yet he's still leading qb's in most major categories.

Yep. Definitely Trent Dilfer, dudes. Throw Mcmahon Doug Williams in there too for good measure.


Amidoinitrite?

[Rjk214]

Now this is funny (And somewhat true. But does take it out of context of their first 5 seasons):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcajIZzB_gs

[escapegoat]

his autograph isn’t elite, i’ll tell ya that much lol :p

[bojesphob]

-zero offensive line
-defense that is down pretty much every star worth a damn
-perhaps the worst run support in the league
-turned an UDFA named Douglas Bladwin into a premier receiver
-the highest paid TE with perma-greased catching mitts


We'll see how he holds up. Most of the guys on the D that were any good have only been out a short time, right? (IIRC, wasn't the Jaguars game the first one that several of them missed? Not completely sure on that one, but I seem to remember reading that somewhere). If he holds up, and continues doing well, then that means he's closer to being a top QB. Consistency, though, is the mark of an elite anything, so he'll have to be mostly consistent, even when the rest of his team isn't. Time will tell, as it did for Rodgers and Brady.

[ninjacookies]

We'll see how he holds up. Most of the guys on the D that were any good have only been out a short time, right? (IIRC, wasn't the Jaguars game the first one that several of them missed? Not completely sure on that one, but I seem to remember reading that somewhere). If he holds up, and continues doing well, then that means he's closer to being a top QB. Consistency, though, is the mark of an elite anything, so he'll have to be mostly consistent, even when the rest of his team isn't. Time will tell, as it did for Rodgers and Brady.


Sherman has been out for multiple weeks. Kam has been out on IR for awhile. Avril and Earl Thomas have missed a several weeks as well.

Basically the entire core of the Legion of Boom has missed games this year and has had very little time sharing the field at the same time.

I agree with you on consistency, though. But just to make things clear, he has always maintained a super high level of efficiency with a 99 career rating. And, despite the increase in volume this year, he's actually up in rating over last year and nearing a 3:1 TD to Int ratio (which is right near his career average).


And for those that think its laughable that people mention he's in the MVP discussions, Vegas currently has him second at 4:1 behind Brady (2:1). And I think Vegas tends to know a lot more than the general public when it comes to these kind of things.

[jasoncardmonger]

For someone arguing this hard about a topic, you must have a hoard of Wilson RC autos that you want to unload for max dollar.

[Seahawks fan]

No doubt I love me some Wilson and no doubt he's been great but... to use his 1st 5 year comparison to Rodgers and Brady you must ask if Brady and Rodgers were considered "ELITE" in their 1st 5 seasons. Rodgers maybe but I don't remember Brady being crowned Elite for awhile since he always had a great oline/D and kind of inherited their 1st SB win since Bledsoe had to bale him out in that Pittsburgh game and Vinatieri helped seal the deals..

By statistics/records Wilson is on pace to be Elite without question but as many have said he's playing in an era with Manning, Brady, Rodgers, and Brees who have all had the longevity and stats. It's hard to crown Wilson Elite with those other guys fresh in their mind.

[49erRCCollector]

I think Wilson is great. But again, halftime of this game is why people argue against him being elite.

[broncomanning18]

Poor Seahawks are absolutely getting smoked, I guess it is the changing of the guard, it happens to them all

[49erRCCollector]

Poor Seahawks are absolutely getting smoked, I guess it is the changing of the guard, it happens to them all

Too many injuries. But the problem is we've seen Rodgers be competitive with packers teams as beat up as this Hawks team.

[packman80]

Wilson is not elite he's very good but not elite.

[broncomanning18]

Wilson is not elite he's very good but not elite.

well then what is Andrew Luck ? Because his card prices sure are the elite of the elite

[Rjk214]

It's not like Rodgers has never had bad games. It's near impossible to do anything when you have less then 1.5 seconds to even move almost every single snap. The Rams D is showing why the Hawks line is last in the league.

[NeedChapmans]

Wilson MVP! Without him, Hawks are down 54-0 today.

[ninjacookies]

Rams d line just has our number. Every. Year. Wish we could already be officially eliminated from postseason contention today, because this team is going nowhere.

[Rjk214]

Wilson MVP! Without him, Hawks are down 54-0 today.

If he was the QB, RB, AND played D today they'd only be down 24-0. That's definitely MVP status

[broncomanning18]

Wilson MVP! Without him, Hawks are down 54-0 today.

You just love luck :)

[broncomanning18]

Wilson still trying, the defense on the other hand should hand in their paychecks from this week

[titletowncards]

If he was the QB, RB, AND played D today they'd only be down 24-0. That's definitely MVP status

You're not going to convince this guy that Wilson is anything but the best thing since sliced bread, surprised he isn't calling him better than Brady. So why even try?
He's a lost cause.

[Rjk214]

You're not going to convince this guy that Wilson is anything but the best thing since sliced bread, surprised he isn't calling him better than Brady. So why even try?
He's a lost cause.

Hey but Rodgers killed it today with 3 INTs. The most elite there is.

My statement was a simple one. Wilson IS the QB AND RB. Hard to argue that. But you can't fathom someone actually playing 2 positions and having the worst O-Line in the league and a weak defense and still have a chance at 10-6. Contributing what 85% of the offensive yards and 95% of the TDs. That's average at best IF you don't understand football

I know reality is tough to see. Do I think he is the best QB in the league? Nope. Do I know he is one of the only QBs who makes Seattle remotely competitive while playing 2 positions and scrambling for his life every down. Yes.

[bojesphob]

Hey but Rodgers killed it today with 3 INTs. The most elite there is.

I would imagine that any qb that just came back from a broken collar bone and not playing for what, 7 or so weeks, would be rusty no? I would say Rodgers has some leeway in that department considering he had only thrown a total of 3 ints before he got hurt this year.

[MFaulkCollector]

Hey but Rodgers killed it today with 3 INTs. The most elite there is.

My statement was a simple one. Wilson IS the QB AND RB. Hard to argue that. But you can't fathom someone actually playing 2 positions and having the worst O-Line in the league and a weak defense and still have a chance at 10-6. Contributing what 85% of the offensive yards and 95% of the TDs. That's average at best IF you don't understand football

I know reality is tough to see. Do I think he is the best QB in the league? Nope. Do I know he is one of the only QBs who makes Seattle remotely competitive while playing 2 positions and scrambling for his life every down. Yes.

Your first comment is stupid and irrelevant. This game wasn't in Rodgers first 5-6 years so it's irrelevant. Bring it back up in 2024 when you are trying to compare years 11-12 between them. You can't even stay consistent with your own argument

[titletowncards]

Your first comment is stupid and irrelevant. This game wasn't in Rodgers first 5-6 years so it's irrelevant. Bring it back up in 2024 when you are trying to compare years 11-12 between them. You can't even stay consistent with your own argument

You're right, his arguments change by each post. Wilson's a decent (not elite) QB on an OK team, I'd take Newton all day over him if I had the choice.

[MFaulkCollector]

You're right, his arguments change by each post. Wilson's a decent (not elite) QB on an OK team, I'd take Newton all day over him if I had the choice.

for the purpose of this thread i would take kenny powers over wilson too

[bojesphob]

Ok, so, now I'm curious: how should Wilson's performance when most of his defensive stars were out stack up to when they are keeping the game close? Did he still put up elite numbers despite the defense not doing well? Now, a single game a case does not make, so the verdict is still out, but should I change my mind about feeling his defense is making him look better than he might be without them? Will he have a week like against the Jaguars 2 weeks ago this weekend versus the Cowboys, or will the Boyz thump him like the Rams did? Are any of the guys on D supposed to be back this weekend? Will be interesting to see.

And, I'll address the Rodgers games against the Panthers as well: even though he threw 3 INTs, the team only lost by 7 points, AND he also had 3 TDs to counterbalance those INTs. Definitely not his best performance, I'll admit, but they were still in the game despite the fact the D gave up 31.

[rittdk01]

That performance was not elite :p

[Siberian13]

That performance was not elite :p

Nor was Brady's against the Dolphins last week :p

[Rjk214]

My comment was a joke against a packers fan who claims Rodgers to be pretty much the most elite ever.

Anyone who watched the Hawks game saw Russell scrambling for his life on over 80% of the plays. We aren't talking 3-4 seconds behind the line before it collapses (Which Brady, Rodgers, and most QBs get). We are talking roughly 1 second...

But I am sure every QB would be amazing behind a legit non existent line! I am sure they would play QB and RB and be the leader at both.

The Rams D line made the Hawks O-Line look like high school kids. No QB could succeed behind that. At least most teams who have a bad defense have something else on their team. You know an O-Line that is at least competent. Maybe a RB who can get 2 yards once in a rare while? You HAVE to have something. He is showing he can at least do something with ABSOLUTELY NOTHING this year (Yes every QB has bad games. Rodgers just had one (Excuses at to why. Brady had a couple). I don't think any other QB in the league outside of Cam could do better with what Seattle has this year. Actually I am certain of it

We shall see what happens this weekend

[jasoncardmonger]

No player can be classified as an elite player only being in the league for 5 years. No one considered Brady or Rodgers to be elite players after their first five years either so this is a pointless thread. Yes, Wilson is having a pretty incredible season considering the team he is on, but it does propel him to elite status. Wait another 5 years and if he is putting up career big numbers like those considered elite, then maybe this is a valid argument.

[Bowman1951]

No player can be classified as an elite player only being in the league for 5 years. No one considered Brady or Rodgers to be elite players after their first five years either so this is a pointless thread. Yes, Wilson is having a pretty incredible season considering the team he is on, but it does propel him to elite status. Wait another 5 years and if he is putting up career big numbers like those considered elite, then maybe this is a valid argument.
Brady won three Superbowls in his first five years without a top-notch receiver.....you sure about that?

[Seahawks fan]

Brady won three Superbowls in his first five years without a top-notch receiver.....you sure about that?

He had a great D, Bledsoe won the Pittsburgh playoff game, tuck rule, and Adam Vinatieri. He did not put up Elite #s either. so yes we are sure. No one would consider Terry Bradshaw Elite when he won 4 in 6 years.

[jasoncardmonger]

Brady won three Superbowls in his first five years without a top-notch receiver.....you sure about that?

I do not recall ever hearing Brady was an elite quarterback after his first 5 years, so yeah I am pretty sure of that.

Also, in my opinion, put Brady on any other team with any other head coach and his success is no where near what it is. Maybe 2-3 super bowl appearances (not wins, appearances) in his career with 1 maybe 2 wins. Belichek on the other hand, not much would have changed from his side of things. He has created an incredible environment and system that he makes work no matter who is in.

[RogerGodahell]

I do not recall ever hearing Brady was an elite quarterback after his first 5 years, so yeah I am pretty sure of that.

Also, in my opinion, put Brady on any other team with any other head coach and his success is no where near what it is. Maybe 2-3 super bowl appearances (not wins, appearances) in his career with 1 maybe 2 wins. Belichek on the other hand, not much would have changed from his side of things. He has created an incredible environment and system that he makes work no matter who is in.

Yes the Browns were elite when he coached there as well. It was a plug and play system much like today. When he first came to NE he kept the ball rolling even before Brady as well. They were very dominant much like the current Pats era.

[21Pittsburgh58]

I do not recall ever hearing Brady was an elite quarterback after his first 5 years, so yeah I am pretty sure of that.

Also, in my opinion, put Brady on any other team with any other head coach and his success is no where near what it is. Maybe 2-3 super bowl appearances (not wins, appearances) in his career with 1 maybe 2 wins. Belichek on the other hand, not much would have changed from his side of things. He has created an incredible environment and system that he makes work no matter who is in.

Pssssst, don't bother. You're just wasting your time and this thread will stray far, far, far away from the topic at hand, which is about Russell Wilson - not Brady. Stay far, far, far away from posting anything about the Patriots, especially Brady, unless you want a dissertation and constant posts NOT concerning Russell Wilson.

[jasonm2121]

Hahahahahahaha

[jasoncardmonger]

Pssssst, don't bother. You're just wasting your time and this thread will stray far, far, far away from the topic at hand, which is about Russell Wilson - not Brady. Stay far, far, far away from posting anything about the Patriots, especially Brady, unless you want a dissertation and constant posts NOT concerning Russell Wilson.

I know my bad. Was not trying to altar the thread. I will try to use a different elite quarterback for future comparison.

[jasonm2121]

He will have crazy stats now that the defense is crumbling, gonna be like Andrew Luck

[Rjk214]

Just bumping this up just because....

[CapitalPCards]

MVP Elite...

[titletowncards]

Is he still elite if the Rams make that FG? I like Wilson btw. He still needs to win a SB imo to become elite. Yes, I know they won in 2013 but based on his prices that was more of a game manager type role at the time. He's grown in much more than that now.

[MIRRABB]

Is he still elite if the Rams make that FG? I like Wilson btw. He still needs to win a SB imo to become elite. Yes, I know they won in 2013 but based on his prices that was more of a game manager type role at the time. He's grown in much more than that now.

Yes obviously whether he won or lost last night, his performance is his performance.

[ninjacookies]

Having been one of his biggest believers/supporters since the 3rd preseason game in 2012, I will say that Wilson probably couldn't be categorized as elite until the last few years of his career. Now does that mean he didn't always have an elite IQ and skillset? Absolutely not. But he wasn't putting up elite numbers. The system, run game, and stellar defense held him back from an individual standpoint. They've almost always played conservatively to protect games...not go for throats.

But he is absolutely elite now. The only ones who don't see it are the ones who aren't paying attention or simply don't like him. He'll be one of the heads of state once the elder statesmen retire. He's smart and protects his body. He could play at a high level into his late 30's just like Brees.

It is funny though seeing how hard people have been trying to fight it over the years. The 'game manager' references, including some Alex Smith and Dilfer mentions were particularly insightful. Oh...and the 'Luck is definitely going to have a better career' megathreads.

[dfr52]

He had definitely established himself as an elite QB who can raise the talent of the offensive players around him.

[JWBlue]

Cards seem criminally under priced.

[CoolG]

Cards seem criminally under priced.

....and 2012 FB wax as well

[Stifle]

He was a elite QB when he was with Wisconsin. That was like having a Ohio State QB be elite in the NFL. It just didn't happen.