ThomasRoane Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Seattle is still jerking Wilson around on his contract. Personally, I think RW needs a good running game to succeed and the Redskins have made moves to improve in that area. We know that McCloughan loves him since he pushed to draft him and gushed about him having the "it" factor. The advantages are his durability, evasiveness, and leadership. The kid is definitely a winner and is loved by his team mates. The only disadvantage I can think of is his height. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Not me. (forgot to mention for what it would cost, salary-wise) I want to see Rg3 (and to a lesser but still serious extent, Kirk,) through this season. And I think I am hard (but fair) on Robert. And I have nothing but respect---no hedging qualifications like many here---on Wilson's performance level at this point in his career--i am very impressed--and yes, of course, that's "even after" considering what I regard as the excellent quality of his support system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 No. Hell no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Short answer, yes with an "if". Long answer, no with a "but". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacon Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Can we trade RG3 for an all-star line instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.fskinsfan Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Can we trade RG3 for an all-star line instead? Mmm smells like Bacon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 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. I'd prefer to be built on the QB. Of course you need to have Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shiv Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 No. I don't think he would succeed here so whats the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Please no, no offense to the guy but its different surviving in Washington than surviving in Washington.... Or is it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Do we have the kind of defense that can win when RW throws 4 interceptions? He's good, but not elite. There's no way he posts back-to-back 12+ win seasons on this team. He's the kind of QB you can plug into a great team and push them over the edge, but he can't turn a "meh" team into Super Bowl winners. And if that's truly the case, then spending $15 million/year on him will destroy your ability to build the kind of team he needs to win around him. If we could get him at his current salary for more than a year, absolutely. But after next year when he'll be getting the kind of money a QB in his position would? No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 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. Wilson doesn't impress? His supporting cast is great, and that's why he's been to two SB's this early in his career. He's a young QB and makes dumb throws sometimes (though pretty rarely really). But to say, with no qualifications, he doesn't impress? That's just denial. He is a really good young QB who sometimes looks great due to his situation. But he's definitely far beyond "doesn't impress". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco Bell Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 The way this poll is worded it's essentially asking who would you draft first, RG3 (and yes cousins) or RW, since the trade is greenlit if we so desire meaning we are really choosing whoever we want. So, I'm taking RW unless you value 2 inches of height, perhaps .1 less on your 40 time now, multiple injuries, and then about 35 less NFL level TDs and 2 less SB visits out of 3 years in your starting QB. Remember this is a pick whoever choice at this current stage in their careers. Keeping RG3 also loses around 9 points in QB rating, 400 rushing yards and nets you only 3 fewer ints. RW has 18 more sacks, but 5 less fumbles and 2 less fumbles lost. RG3 has a .5 better completion % at 63.9 vs. 63.4. RG3 also averages 11 more passing yards per game but has about 1,850 less total passing yards thus far. RW's also played in 48 games vs. 37 games. If you take away the, in hindsight, unique 2012 offenses, the numbers get more skewed obviously, which if you are rating prospects is no different than taking into account various offenses in college. But, all these career stats I'm giving are based on all 3 years for both. If it looks like I "prefer" RW over RG3, it's really just the stats explaining themselves...RG3's statistical advantages are seemingly minute in relevance relative to RWs advantages. 35 more total TDs is monstrous compared to .5 completion % for 3 year careers. Serious injuries vs no serious injuries. One guys been to 2 SBs already. If I'm a GM, I'm making the move that makes the most sense for a football team and allows me to keep my job at the highest probability. If you look at them as prospects, it's truly hard to pick RG3 over RW as of today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 As I've said before, I can easily see Snyder gassing up the jet and bringing a Brinks truck to Russ' house in the offseason if they don't reach a deal. My only issue is that I've read he wants to be the highest paid QB in the league and he's not that good for that price And now in a world with no money involved, SEA calls today and offers them straight up? I'm all in. Russ actually has knees and can avoid unnecessary contact. For that reason, I'd want him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasRoane Posted July 16, 2015 Author Share Posted July 16, 2015 Excellent write up Taco. Also, look at the receivers that RW has had to work with since he's been at Seattle. Not counting Jimmy Graham who came to them in a trade, what receivers would you swap for on Seattle's Roster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I say no - check that - HELL NO!!! It has nothing to do with RW or his abilities or lack there of is some cases. I don't want guys from other teams for our key skill positions until we have a solid team around them. You put Rogers, Brady, Manning Brees etc on this team and we win what, 5 more games. That still leaves us out of the POs. Even if we make it we go nowhere once we are in. And RW is not anywhere near as good as any of those guys. Let's build the team from within. This is clearly a make it or break it yr for Robert no matter what side of the I love/hate Robert side of things you are on. If he shows the right improvement, that would best for the team. If not, kick him to the curb along with Cousins (Unless Cousins ends up starting this season fro some reason, no way he stays after this yr. He will hit the FA market and get picked up.) Keep McCoy or another veteran to start for another yr or two and find our QB in the next draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morrison J Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 You put Rogers, Brady, Manning Brees etc on this team and we win what, 5 more games. That still leaves us out of the POs. Even if we make it we go nowhere once we are in. And RW is not anywhere near as good as any of those guys. We'd win 10 games minimum every single year with Rogers at QB. No question. This roster isn't as weak as many make out. Unfortunately right now its at its weakest at the most important position on the field. This trade is completely unrealistic though. Seattle would be out of their minds to make that happen. I'm pretty sure we'd jump at the chance if we had it though. Remove all the question marks over RG3 and bring in a stud QB in Wilson? No brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FXMASTER Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 There is already a guy on the team that is everything that RW is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 There is already a guy on the team that is everything that RW is. We already have a guy that's abstaining from sex with his ridiculously hot girlfriend? Who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 There needs to be a "Hell no" option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco Bell Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Excellent write up Taco. Also, look at the receivers that RW has had to work with since he's been at Seattle. Not counting Jimmy Graham who came to them in a trade, what receivers would you swap for on Seattle's Roster? Well lol, if I'm the one making the trades I'll trade Baldwin for Andre Roberts, their #1 for our #3? lol...Not that Baldwin is that impressive but Roberts has pretty much done nothing but unimpress. And obviously they drafted that guy Tyler Lockett who we traded down with seattle to get the picks for, so I'd trade him for Roberts, Crowder or I guess Grant (although he's still intriguing despite not actually producing much as a rookie, so probably has miniscule trade value) just because it is draft value even if we are a few months out from the draft at this point. But these trades aren't realistic obviously. I'm sure "realistic" trades would have to be something like Garcon for Baldwin, or Garcon for Lockett. If we are taking contracts into account, Garcon for Lockett might be a forward thinking move, but too much up in the air to say that's actually something I would do. And I'm definitely not trading Garcon for Baldwin. Let's just make the Andre Roberts / Jimmy Graham trade official now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 We'd win 10 games minimum every single year with Rogers at QB. No question. This roster isn't as weak as many make out. Unfortunately right now its at its weakest at the most important position on the field. This trade is completely unrealistic though. Seattle would be out of their minds to make that happen. I'm pretty sure we'd jump at the chance if we had it though. Remove all the question marks over RG3 and bring in a stud QB in Wilson? No brainer. I am typically a half glass full type guy, but I think people have our roster pegged pretty well. How many true starters do we have on our team? Maybe 6 to 10 maybe. Only 1 position on the team is really settled and that's WR. You might say RB but really we have just 1 guy with no confirmed back-up. WE do have a lot of potential. Some guys have been starters early and then fell off and are looking for redemption - Dashon Goldston and Ricky Jean Francois come to mind that were good early and then fell off the last yr or two. Someone like Jeron Johnson and a few others are looking to break out from early disappointment. I like how we are building, but we are still a long way off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 From what I've heard he turned down an offer which would have made him the 3rd highest paid QB in the NFL so if that's true he must be delusional, I would freak if we paid him that kind of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Kev Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 It's a big fat no from me. I want to see how this year plays out and am still hoping that Griffin can turn the corner. Now if it was RG3, Cousins & Hall for Wilson & Sherman...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 As much as many like picking apart RG3, if you put that same effort into picking apart Wilson you'll find some big flaws in his game as well. He is still transitioning from college to pro. He is probably the absolute best system for him right now. He is in a system that several journeyman QBs could do well in, hence Seattle's hesitation to tie-up a lot of resources in a mega-contract for Wilson. Granted, Wilson is talented and does contribute nicely to that system and IMO for that team is worth a contract that would make him top 10 QB paid. However, Wilson is wanting to be THE top paid QB and that is too much. Plus, he wouldn't do well here. His areas of needed improvement would be exposed in Gruden's offense. Wilson's QBR has been very bad at times and it prompted an article that stated no other QB has received as much help as he has from teammates based on said QBR. He takes shots deep, but doesn't risk it over the middle. In fact, I've read from Seahawks fans that have even said the middle of the field is a weakness for Wilson and that's why that goalline call late in the Superbowl baffled them even more. Harvin, though oft-injured, was brought in to help improve that area but it didn't work out,. The belief behind the heavy investment in Graham is that he can boost Wilson's middle of the field game while also feeding his strength in deep sideline passing. Wilson isn't risky either, which works a lot for Seattle but there are times where that will hurt your team too. Plus, there have been games where his strength in moving outside the pocket and hitting the sideline deep have been taken away and it's led to some bad games. Wilson is a very good, young QB. But he is young and has his flaws. Right now he is in a perfect system and IMO he would be foolish not to come down off the high contract demands and get himself a long-term contract in Seattle. Lynch may have a limited shelf-life, but they'll get a good replacement eventually and Wilson will be able to continue to progress. Coming here could derail his progress or hinder it completely, and we'd be tying up a mega-contract when the team is being rebuilt and needs a lot of resources. Those wanting to trade for Wilson, I think it's a pipedream anyway. His agent is likely setting a high bar so they can agree on something that gets him pay equivalent to a top 10 or maybe top 5 QB, but he's got to be pushing Wilson to stay put and Wilson would be crazy not stay put. We'd be equally crazy to trade for him, especially because not only would we lose a lot of resources signing him, we'd lose heavy resources trading for him, and that is not what SMGM does. Seattle went to 2 Superbowls, back-to-back, and they are hesitating with Wilson right now, but we should trade for him, in the middle of a rebuild? No way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.