Paul Cumberland Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Where does the myth that Seattle has a great O line come from? probably from marshawn lynch.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 If we had drafted Wilson in 2012 and Seattle had drafted Griffin your question would now be should we trade Wilson for RG3. The QB isn't the problem with this team it is the front office and coaching. We'd be in the same boat now whether we had drafted Wilson or Luck in that draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Seattle was built, just like San Fran, to not be dependent on the QB so much. That's how we're being built. Wilson doesn't impress. Unless you play fantasy football where he was the second highest ranked QB last season. Wilson has played very well so far. His pocket awareness is miles ahead of Griffins. He doesnt turn the ball over (except of course on the last play of SB). Although he has made it too and won one of those. And he hasnt missed a game in his career. Griffins TD% last year was 1.9%. His INT% was 2.8%. Both of those numbers are pathetic. They really are not even in the same league of QB at the NFL level. I would trade Griffin for Wilson straight up in a heartbeat. Russel Wilson: Games played 48. TD's 83. INT's 26. Fumbles 27 Robert Griffin: Games played 37. TD's 48. INT's 23. Fumbles 32 These are their regular season stats. We wont even talk about the post season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Where does the myth that Seattle has a great O line come from? it doesn't have to be a great line (although that would always help, obviously!)... Seattle's line doesn't suck eggs. (like, say, for a completely random comparison, the skin's line--- which was absolutely awful) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 probably from marshawn lynch.. I mean they may be good in run blocking but then again ours was as well Pass blocking? Seattle isn't great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrison J Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 That was really my point, that you and I value the QB differently. Please don't misunderstand me, QB is critical. However, I go back to 2012. Robert by all measures was playing extremely well. He led the league or close to the lead in many significant categories. Also, we had a great running game with AM leading the way. Yet through 9 games we were 3-6. The Def allowed 27.6 pts/gm those 9 gms. The Off scored 25.1. During the 7 gm win streak that changed to 19.8 pts/gm or a 7.8 pts/gm diff. The Off went up to 28.7 pts/gm. or a 3.6 pts/gm increase. **NOTE: I removed the Cleveland gm since Cousins was the QB. The numbers are a little diff when you add that back but still fairly close. Those 6 gms Robert was in, and even the one Cousins played, the Def is what was different than the first 9 gms. Def gives up 8 pts/gm less and you will win ball games! My point is, yes Robert playting well put us in postion, but while the D stunk we still lost. When they played even just average we won. Look at the last 2 yrs - The D has given up almost 30 pts a gm!! Has the QB play been poor? At times yes. But that's not the only hole. Had the D just been average! we could been close to .500, even with the QB play. I still stick by the fact theres just a clear tier between Rogers and even 2012 RG3 imo. Stats (especially averages) can also give off false indicators though. There was 5 games where our DEF game up over 30 points last year.. Packers had 8 games where they scored over 30 points last year. Packers averaged 30.4 points a game last year. I don't think there is a drop off in receiving corpses between the two teams. Garcon is marginally better than Cobb imo and Nelson is prob marginally better than Jackson. With out improved O-Line if Rogers was a Redskin we'd immediately have the best offense in the NFL. It'd be that dramatic of an impact. Obviously you need a serviceable DEF to win a championship but if the offense is putting up 30 points every game then we'd no doubt be winning 10+ games a year. Thats my point. Worth taking note having Rogers means more time in possession and less work for the defense to do, meaning less of an opportunity to concede points in the game too. I can't remember a team every averaging over 30 points a game and not winning over 10 games. Its practically unheard of to average 30 points scored and given up a game surely. We may just have to agree to disagree but my main points is put Aaron Rogers in this team and I've absolutely no doubt we'd be contenders. He transforms offenses and by the time he retires will prob be the greatest QB in NFL history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cumberland Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Pass blocking? Seattle isn't great as someone way smarter than i am recently told me, good run blocking and PA covers up a lot of holes. hopefully we're headed in that direction again.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 as someone way smarter than i am recently told me, good run blocking and PA covers up a lot of holes. hopefully we're headed in that direction again.. Yep, when an opposing D can't stop you from doing what you want, it elevates even your own defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Kev Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 .............I don't think there is a drop off in receiving corpses between the two teams............ You're dead right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KuNiT21 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 You're dead right there. How so? You really believe Jordy/Cobb is really that much better than Garcon/Djax? I don't. Rodgers wouldn't skip a beat on his 30PPG average if he came here. In fact he may like DJax even more on the deep ball than he does Nelson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Whoaa Nelson is better than D Jax? LOLWUT How so? You really believe Jordy/Cobb is really that much better than Garcon/Djax? I don't. Rodgers wouldn't skip a beat on his 30PPG average if he came here. In fact he may like DJax even more on the deep ball than he does Nelson. Exactly. Our corp is better. In fact, those receivers would be very average without A Rod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrison J Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Whoaa Nelson is better than D Jax? LOLWUT Exactly. Our corp is better. In fact, those receivers would be very average without A Rod Nelson and D Jax are very different receivers in fairness but I don't think its a stretch in any way to say Nelson is better. I think if you asked around the league 80% would prob say Nelson. Looking at the likes of James Jones and Greg Jennings who's production has fallen dramatically since leaving Rogers though and it's hard to make such a definitive judgement on those receivers. I definitely think Nelson is the most talented receiver Rogers has had though. No doubt Rogers makes every player on the offense look better though and he'd prob make D Jax into an All Pro WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Whoaa Nelson is better than D Jax? LOLWUT Exactly. Our corp is better. In fact, those receivers would be very average without A Rod I dont know about average. Nelson gets no love because of his skin color. The dude can ball out. And Cobb is just straight up dangerous. But I do think overall our WR corps is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I still stick by the fact theres just a clear tier between Rogers and even 2012 RG3 imo. I think you are missing my point. This was never a comparison between Robert and Rogers. My point was that no matter the QB is that was back there, given the poor Def you are not going to win gms. In 2012 Robert was playing as well as any QB. Please note I did not say he was better than Rogers!! Not even close!!! All I am saying is that by anyone's measure Robert was playing at a very high level, you might even say elite. But it was not until the Def stopped giving up almost 30 pt's gm that the team started winning. I think your confidence in Rogers is a little - no way over the top. He is still just one person. There have to be people to block, run, catch, play Def and STs. Yes, he makes the people around him better, but to say we are immediately the best Off in football even without a better Oline is just too much of a stretch. You can't throw from your back. And before you start down that rabbit hole, I am not saying all Robert's problems are due to line. But you can't just ignore that atrocious line play. It definitely made things much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexa Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I would trade RG3 for Wilson straight up because Wilson is the better player. Period. Plus he's durable. Would I trade both Kirk and RG3 for Wilson? I'd have to think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theTruthTeller Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I would trade RG3 for Wilson straight up because Wilson is the better player. Period. Plus he's durable. Would I trade both Kirk and RG3 for Wilson? I'd have to think about it. I have to ask. If you trade RG3 for Wilson, exactly what are you planning to do with Cousins that is so valuable? McCoy can hold a clip board just as well as Cousins. He's been dangled out there for a trade for two seasons without a nibble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 There are 2 reasons I said no. 1. We made a lot of changes on the Defense, coaches and players. But we don't know how it's going to work out. I don't think Wilson is good if he doesn't have a great D to back him up. 2. He's more of a system guy, and with Jay and company, we don't know what kind of system is in place. So no, because too many unknowns. I say we go with what we know vs. what we don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 robert would thrive there and wilson would struggle here.... That's sort of how I feel. I mean they may be good in run blocking but then again ours was as well.... At least half of our line was good at run blocking. The other half was good for nothing...literally. Seattle's OL has been better than ours, with a strong RB, and a QB who knows how, and generally when, to use his legs. I would trade RG3 for Wilson straight up because Wilson is the better player...he's durable.... I don't know about "Period", but I'll give you that Wilson is durable. That's the biggest negative against Robert since he's been here. If he hadn't missed a game, I think we MIGHT be seeing a different player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 hmmm when di dthe question morph into whether anyone would trade RGIII for Aaron Rogers? RGIIIs dad would trade RGIII (the QB) for Aaron Rogers. I would trade RG3 for Wilson straight up because Wilson is the better player. Period. Plus he's durable. Would I trade both Kirk and RG3 for Wilson? I'd have to think about it. the one clear thing WIlson is better at is staying healthy. Plus he is not shell-shocked PTSD from 3 years behind the Redskins line... confidence is a beautiful flower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The question is, would our offensive line shell-shock Wilson if he ended up here. The answer is a definitive "maybe." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexa Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 I have to ask. If you trade RG3 for Wilson, exactly what are you planning to do with Cousins that is so valuable? McCoy can hold a clip board just as well as Cousins. He's been dangled out there for a trade for two seasons without a nibble. Well I think Kirk in the long run might be a better QB than McCoy. But I get what you're saying. Neither would be playing anyway so yeah...I'd make that trade, RG3 and Cousins for Wilson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The fact that people think Russell Wilson is just a system QB makes me sad. He is better at nearly everything than Griff and it seems like our fans would rather punch their own mothers than admit it. And don't get me wrong, in 2012 RG3 was better. But RG3 can't stay healthy and RW can, which is another reason why he's better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Wilson is further along in his development and the smarter player today, but RG3 has more upside and talent. I would not make the trade. Wilson is a great player, but it's still a risky trade to make. How much of Wilson's success can be attributed to Seattle's running game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Put Griffin in at Seattle, and a lot of his problems would be better hidden. Having something that can legitimately be called a defense, and having Marshawn Lynch, alleviates a lot of pains. The fact that people think Russell Wilson is just a system QB makes me sad.He is better at nearly everything than Griff and it seems like our fans would rather punch their own mothers than admit it.And don't get me wrong, in 2012 RG3 was better. But RG3 can't stay healthy and RW can, which is another reason why he's better The point is, Wilson looks better in Seattle because of the system he's in. If he doesn't have that system, I expect him to look exactly the same as he did before Seattle began imitating Washington's offense in 2012. (He was mediocre his first few games.) With all that being considered, and Gruden pretty clearly wanting to use his own offense rather than rebuild it, Wilson and RG3 are equal in my eyes. Trading our $5 for their $5 still gives us $5 in the end. (Not to mention, Wilson wants bigger bucks than Griffin can demand.) I can't speak for others, but I'd rather not bother with a trade that I expect would give us the exact same results. Whether he's injured or not (I don't think RG3 is as injury-prone as you make him out to be) doesn't make a difference if both are mediocre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 I dunno man. I think the QB pretty much reveals himself to be what he is. Peyton was on some weaker rosters. Trent Dilfer was on some great rosters. Nobody ever confused their abilities. It's not like the current Colts are so much more talented than we are. Now, if you want to say that Robert would be better if he had been drafted by the Colts and Luck would be worse if he had been drafted by the Redskins, I'd agree with that. More because of the organization than the rest of the roster though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.