But what I believe his point was is that Wilson threw more than 30 passes in 2 games this year and had a passer rating over 100 in both of those games. He finds a way to be just as, if not more efficient when he has to throw more passes which goes against the norm. The guy is great, and the team was an underachieving cellar dweller prior to his arrival. The offense was a complete joke before he took it over. And they are far from loaded with talent on offense.
I agree he's great...but it's sure nice to see them 1 game out of the cellar! Long season to go yet...still.
It is what it is...people say that Wilson runs a simple offense, and can't be a pocket QB. Yet, you look at the few time he's had to do it, and he posts big numbers. It's not Russel's fault that he doesn't have to do that every week. Maybe his numbers would come down if he did...maybe they wouldn't. There's literally no way of knowing.
Of course, Wilson is far, far ahead of where Manning, Rodgers and Brees were less than halfway through their 3rd seasons. Rodgers was on the bench and Brees was en route to a 67.5 passer rating that year. Manning was establishing himself as an excellent QB but still didn't have a rating over 100 and had never been to or won a Super Bowl. Wilson, on the other hand, is well on his way to his 3rd consecutive 100+ rating season and won a Super Bowl. His pass attempts are far below what Manning was doing earlier in his career, but his TDs are about the same and his YPA is much higher. Not to mention the extra 500 or so yards and 3-5 TDs that he gets with his feet. And in less than 2.5 years, he already has 8 4th quarter comebacks and 11 game winning drives. By 6th game of Manning's third year he had 8 4th quarter comebacks and 10 game winning drives -- just a shade behind where Wilson is now. The term "game manager" has become a pejorative term for a QB that can do a good enough job of not screwing up to be able to win on an otherwise stacked team. That is not what Wilson is. He is very much a key piece in that team's success.
Personally, I think the argument about Wilson has morphed into something other than what it was originally. This happens here all the time. The most infamous example is the Philbin doesn't need a #1 receiver argument. That argument actually started about how Philbin's "system" was built around sort of interchangeable WRs where each guy is basically same as the other but they have a slight advantage in one skill set over the other. He would then you use those guys to exploit a given D's weakness and it was all predicated on timing through precise route running. Now because people were livid over the Marshall trade, they argued against the notion of Philbin's system and through the weeks that followed the argument was boiled down by both sides to his offense needs only #2's and #1 talent is pointless. As I said, the same thing is happening again, with Wilson. The original argument was that Wilson isn't asked to do a lot and his coaches have wisely crafted their offense around him, whereas Tannehill is asked to do everything and Sherman is trying to craft Tannehill around the offense. The result being, that if the QBs swapped teams, Tannehill would be considered the next great QB and Wilson would still be considered a prospect with potential but hasn't showed it yet. There is some validity to that argument and its not entirely unreasonable. Sure, there could be differences, like Tannehill not being as good as Wilson on the move, but I think its likely Seattle adapts to that. Also, I don't think it means neither player isn't talented and that ANY QB could win there or anything like that. But, the argument morphed anyway because people had to choose sides. Its absurd at this point to think Wilson isn't an excellent QB, but it is also absurd to think Tannehill hasn't been significantly handicapped by factors outside of his control. Wilson doesn't have to be bad for Tannehill to be good but Wilson also landed in a fluffy bed of pillows and virgins while Tannehill had to wade through hell to fight a chainsaw.
That bolded part is kinda silly. Wilson came to a 7-9 team that was 28th in the NFL in yards and 23rd in points the year before. The leading receiver on that team, by a wide margin, was undrafted Doug Baldwin, who is a nice player but nobody's idea of the proverbial "No. 1 receiver." And the OL wasn't especially good either, giving up 50 sacks. Not sure how any of that qualifies as a "fluffy bed fo pillows and virgins" for a rookie QB. But he nonetheless proceeded to post a 100+ rating and get the team to 11-5 as a rookie before a 13-3 super Bowl winning team his second year. Yeah, Lynch is a good back, but it is pretty well established that he doesn't make a QB. He didn't do it in Seattle before Wilson got there and he certainly didn't do it in Buffalo before that. Wilson still doesn't have great receivers and he still has a well below-average pass blocking OL.
He landed on a team that was willing to adapt to his strengths. They were willing to make things easy for him. Tannehill landed on a team that did not do those things and forced him to adapt to a system and had him throwing a lot. I mentioned that stuff in my post. I did not mention surrounding talent. It was clear I was talking about scheme and not talent. I'm not sure how or why you missed that.
Quote of the week.. " he looks like Aaron Rogers out there, going thru his reads and all like that." Brandon Marshall.
What's silly is that you and others continue to credit one player with the greatness of an entire TEAM. The Seahawks went 11-5 & 13-3 not Wilson. Seattle won the Super Bowl not the QB. Passer rating measures the overall effectiveness of the pass game, not any one player. If you want to call him elite tell us what's elite about him. Arm strength, accuracy, reading defenses, manipilulating coverages, etc. Right now the only aspect of his game that is elite is avoiding pressure and extending plays. He scrambles better than any QB in the league but that's somewhat balanced out by his propensity to leave plays on the field because he's too short to see/make the throws & often too busy looking to escape the pocket. But theres no stat for any of that and they don't show it on the highlight packages so it kinda flies under the radar.
Is he talking about Tannehill? Lol. That sounds more like a shot at Cutler than anything else. He spent most of his post game interview taking not so subtle shots at his QB, can't think of any other reason he'd compare RT to AR. It's like comparing Wilson to Brees lol.
.I guess you missed the part where he's still only in is third year, and your not accounting for that type of relative analysis.and that he was drafted in the 3rd round. why don't you go watch the game the seahawks just lost and come back here with that nonsense. so his team lost the last two games..in one he makes history for production, in the other his unit had the ball for 18 mins of the game..thts 42 for the other team if your doing the math. no more needs to be said really..its not worth it anymore..gonna let some time play out again..
Tannehill has made Mike Wallace into this yr's Brian Hartline For ****'s sake THill, you have a elite WR do not make him into a plowhorse, what are you doing Brother?
Dude your whole stance is drowning in weak sauce. Only in his 3rd year, 3rd round pick, so? Number one that's common knowledge and two it's irrelevant. You're claiming he's elite right now in 2014, not that he will be elite eventually, and you're insulting anyone with a differing opinion. It's ultra weak. I asked what aspect of his game was elite outside of evading pressure, are you going to answer the question? Yeah they only had it for 18 minutes, what's your point? They had a good drive to start the game then did pretty much nothing the rest of the day. Blocked punt for a TD, fumbled snap by Romo in his own red zone, muffed punt by Harris in his own red zone, that's the only way Seattle sniffed any points all day long. Their defense and ST was setting the offense up with ridiculous field position time after time. Other than that it was a series of 3 and outs, and with two chances to come from behind late in the forth they couldn't even get a first down much less drive for a score. Of course you want to make it seem like poor Russell just didn't have enough time with the ball, pointing the finger at the defense/ST when theyre the only reason Seattle was even in the game. Youre right he had a great 2nd half vs StL, but he got out Wilson'd by Austin Davis who was 18-21 152 yds 2TDs and Seattle lost mainly due to miscues on special teams. Ish happens. And if Tannehill lost to the Rams no excuse would be accepted. He lost to Rodgers and half the forum wanted him cut, traded or replaced. You are incredibly biased on this subject so yeah maybe it isn't worth discussing.
Deej....I know how much you like Wilson...I watched the guy ball for 5 years in college and DID want the Fins to draft OL round one..LB round two..Wilson round three...but we drafted Tanny and the fact is he is really starting to grow this year with Lazor and he can read option with the best of them..you are falling into the trap my friend..let's continue to talk about OUR QB and how really good he is starting to look.
This. The thread is 8 pages long, and Wilson was brought up in the 2nd page.. 6 pages of Russell Wilson I think is enough, let's talk more about the DOLPHINS starting QB, rather than Wilson, since this is a thread about him after all.
if you want breakdowns of what he does well, I'm sure you can find it, I've been writing about them since predraft, so imo I don't need to rehash his game to anybody because the guy has done everything that i thought he could do, and more, so you trying to shoot down what he has accomplished comes across as bias on behalf of ryan tannehill. stop, none is comparing him to ryan..you don't need to bring one prospect down to boost our own up. theres a thread in the club for this very subject, I'm tired of writing about how russell wilson has proved everyone wrong..and I suppose theres a few of you left that he will continue to do so. his completion % is the highest in his 3rd year. his int ratio is the lowest in his third year his rushing average is the highest in his third year. with doug baldwin and Jermome kearse and Luke wilson...lol
re read the thread i didn't start this bs...when it comes to wilson and the negative, its about jealousy and envy and misevaluation.
Gotta say, when I watch Wilson play, he looks like he's in a different game than Tannehill. The way he moves under pressure, he's Barry Sander's like when he dances around guys. Dude is an elite talent, no doubt.
I guess what bothers me...you hit right on the head. I've never said he can't become elite. When asked why I don't consider him elite I've given very detailed and thorough description of what I see. Of course I can be wrong and aknowledged that...but to act like someone is dumb for thinking he still needs to grow to reach that level isn't fair.
Dj..u know I love ya..but gotta disagree. Theres alot of people who dont put him at elite yet...its all based on perception. You place a high value on mobility..some may place a high value on being pocket passers. Elite..is something you give to someone at the end of their career anyways. Whether hes playing at an elite level now..is subjective. Just be happy that hes in that discussion.
I agree...we are really starting to look and play like a playoff caliber team and it starts and hopefully continues with the growth.of OUR QB and the growth of the rest of the offense in Lazor's system...I for one am looking forward to each game and Tanny's continued growth.
Going to a team willing to adapt to one's strengths is hardly unique or atypical. All teams do that. And Wilson's strengths are pretty typical -- passing, field vision, leadership, etc. And he can run, which isn't that unusual these days either. Seattle didn't do anything special to adapt to Wilson. The "system" that Tannehill was forced to adapt to is the same one he played in college. It is the only system he played in since high school. That's hardly a difficult adaptation. In fact, it might be the easiest adaptation for any rookie QB in NFL history.
I really feel like you're just trying to be argumentative. I didn't say Wilson's situation was unique. I didn't even imply it. I simply said that Wilson went somewhere that was willing to make it easier on him and Tannehill went somewhere that made it hard on him. This is EXACTLY how these arguments morph into something else. And yes, same system he didn't have to learn a new playbook, but he was forced to play the game differently than he was in college. He was forced to adapt to an offense while Seattle adapted their offense to Wilson. Its the major freaking gripe about Philbin, but now all of a sudden that didn't happen?? Tannehill is a read option QB, forcing him to be a pocket QB is as bad as forcing Marino to be a read option QB. I get why they did it year one, but not after that.
Nobody is crediting Wilson for the greatness fo the whole team. He has been great. His numbers show that. And the team success has come too, and on a team that hadn't had any success in a while before he got there. Almost every aspect of his game is pretty darn good for a 3rd year QB. Certainly much further along and more developed than greats like Rodgers, Brees and Brady at the same stages of their careers. And the notion that he leaves so many plays on the field is nonsense. If anything, his scrambling and play extension adds plays to the field. His career ypa of 8.0 is excellent -- far, far better than Brady, Brees, Manning, Marino, Montana, etc. His career TD% of 6.4% is also much better than any of those guys. But I guess you believe that if he wasn't so terrible about leaving plays on the field his numbers in those categories would not only be much better than those all-time greats, but he would be in a whole 'nother class altogether. In any event, to whatever extent he leaves plays on the field (and all QBs do to some extent), it obviously hasn't been hurting his team much.
and thats where the argument should end..the talent level...being called a game manager is so far from reality with his talent level, its quite disappointing if the poster is who i think he is...being called average or mediocre or a product of his surroundings, its all bologna sandwiches.The guys talent is off the charts from head to toe..he's small..thats about all you can say.
Uhm, yeah you did say/imply that his situation was unique. Unless, of course, all or most rookie QBs "land in a fluffy bed of pillows and virgins," as you said about Wilson. Since I have never heard anyone ever suggest that rookie QBs have it so easy and because I am fairly certain that you are nowhere close to stupid enough to actually believe that most rookie QBs have it so easy, you did say his situation was pretty unique. Not sure what the evidence is that Tannehill was forced to do anything that was against his will or inclinations. As a senior in college he ran 58 times compared to 531 pass attempts. As an NFL rookie, he ran 49 times compared to 484 pass attempts. There was no major change in how much he ran. In fact, I don't even think the difference is statistically significant.
you think I'm evaluating his just because he's an elite evader of the rush?..thats just the beginning, this is a player who's mind you must evaluate and put a value on.this is a player where the nerve of the player must have a value put on it..it all translates to this, when the game is on the line, and the next play is critical to the outcome, he will always be calm in the moment and do whats necessary to make the play..whether it be from a schematic angle or an individual one, a mental win, or an athletic one,..the young history has shown that this discussion is an exercise in futility..the numbers from every angle back up everything i have seen with my eyes..and on top of it, his weapons are average..below average after having percy and golden leave.
and noone has said that if you had tannehill play the game with his legs from the get he wouldn't be a better qb and we wouldn't be a better team, I'm pretty sure his numbers would look better if sherman embraced the legs..you know I've been lobbying for him to learn the game and game plan against teams using his legs, he didn't, they didn't, we really don't know why, this has never been a comparison for ryan.. so if you wanna say thats your case, i will agree in that sense...but wilson is not average, not mediocre, not a game manager, not overrated, all words that i have seen my friends on the board use when trying to evaluate wilson..
