DrillMusic Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Completely serious. RW only has him on speed by a slight margin. Same w/ arm strength. Mccoy is every bit as elusive in and out of the pocket. Just as capable of high percentage of completions in a game. Will make it to the endzone on a keeper, and he would damn sure be smart enough to audible out of a pass on the goal line and let his all pro RB clean up in a SB. Mccoy is garbage compared to Russell Wilson.. i was in fed ex field last season on that monday night game last year where wilson had like 4 td's called back due to garbage penalties, and lets not forget the dagger... i couldnt believe what i watched when they showed it on the replay... russell wilson make his team look good on offense because he is elusive and the seahawks front office can give away unger because of wilsons mobility to keep plays alive save the poo for the nfl network, to me wilson is up there with brady and rodgers, ive never seen a qb like wilson.. and neither has anyone on this board... wilson is like a vick/rodgers hybrid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMS7JJG2z7s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 And those last two posts should pretty much kill this thread. I like Wilson but oh lord never mind. Just lock it up fellas lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hammer Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Eh, at this point neither one would do much here. Whoever is behind center is just a small fried shrimp out if a big platter of crap we have to eat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 save the poo for the nfl network, to me wilson is up there with brady and rodgers He's somewhere in between poo level and Brady / Rodgers level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laron Burgundy Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Or they can see the obvious differences in the two offenses and how one caters to the QB and the other doesn't. There's a very good chance Russell would struggle here. He's more of a sandlot QB than a rhythm and timing QB. I'm telling you he would struggle mightily in this system. I've been saying that since we hired gruden. We needed a creative offensive mind who could scheme to get the best from his players, not, well, gruden. Russell Wilson isn't the same player if he was here. Between our offensive line and gruden's inflexibility I don't think he'd be the sandlot hero he is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Why would Seattle trade a decent QB for two crappy ones? Better question, why the **** would 60% of our fanbase NOT do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 PLENTY of QBs have snagged starting gigs because they looked good on good rosters. Matt Flynn and Matt Cassell come right to mind as recent examples. QBs, like many other positions, look great in certain systems and on certain rosters, but that doesn't necessarily mean they've revealed themselves. There are teams even Brady and Peyton would struggle on. It's a team sport. Not sure if those are good examples, Flynn started 2 games in his 4 years at GB, Seattle was stupid for giving that much up for a guy who had 1 good game in 2011 and nothing more. Matt Cassell was a good QB, won a division with NE, was traded to the Chiefs and won another division in 2010, that knee injury is what did him in, he's never been the same since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagletooth Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 This is embarrassing. Post this on any other board it would be near 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 This is embarrassing. Post this on any other board it would be near 100%. We ain't any other team. We are one of the most efficient teams in the league at killing our quarterbacks. Wilson would simply be more meat for the meat grinder that we call a "pocket." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 This is embarrassing. Post this on any other board it would be near 100%. No it wouldn't. There's plenty of people that question how Wilson would play outside of the system he's in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyndorf25 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 I reluctanlty answered yes even though I still am an RG3 fan and supporter and even as a fan of the Spartans (my favorite college team) I love Cousins and wish him well in his NFL career as well. However, Wilson has already demonstrated that he has what it takes to be productive, consistent and above all, remain healthy at the NFL's most important position. He is also a natural leader. Sadly, neither RG3 nor Cousins have demonstrated the majority of these traits yet. Maybe they will this year, but based on what I have seen to this point, I would pull the trigger on that trade if it was a possibility at this point in time. It kills me to admit it, but I think Wilson so far has proven to be the best QB to come out of the 2012 draft. I hope the I am proven wrong because I have a lot of emotional investment in our two QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Not sure if those are good examples, Flynn started 2 games in his 4 years at GB, Seattle was stupid for giving that much up for a guy who had 1 good game in 2011 and nothing more. Matt Cassell was a good QB, won a division with NE, was traded to the Chiefs and won another division in 2010, that knee injury is what did him in, he's never been the same since. You misunderstood my post. Those 2 examples, and your post here, prove my point which was that QBs typically aren't a known quantity outside of their current system. The poster to which I replied had claimed that QBs are pretty much a known quantity regardless of the supporting cast, or something along those lines, and used Peyton vs. Dilfer as an example. I pointed out that Flynn and Cassell were both in good systems with good rosters, and went on to other teams and had mixed results. Cassell had 1 good season in KC, 2010, when the team was #1 in rushing and the D was 11th in least points allowed. Flynn, we all know what happened there. Most QBs are very system-dependent. There's 1-3 elites that can do well elsewhere, but even for those guys there are still teams in the NFL where they would struggle. I think many, too many, tend to forget how system-dependent ALL QBs really are, even the elites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 No it wouldn't. There's plenty of people that question how Wilson would play outside of the system he's in. Maybe But the question is whether you would trade one for the other and I'm sure 99.9% of the general public would say yes The only people that prefer RG3 over RW are skins fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Russell is a system Quarterback? What system is that? Watching this video here's what I see that the kid has. Elusiveness (He makes defenders look downright stupid at times)Robert is a straight line runner while RW can juke. Pocket Presence (He doesn't have to see pressure - he feels it.) Vision (His eyes are always working down field. They don't drop down when pressure comes) Extends the play (He's far better than RG III at extending the play)Robert dislocated his ankle rolling out with no one even near him. Accurate passer. (Great location - he throws to spots where his player has the best chance to make a play) Uses windows. (He's as good as Drew Brees at sliding to find a throwing lane) I personally think he's better than Robert in every area but arm strength. One major category though is availability. You can easily see RW playing for another 10 years. Robert seems to be one more hit away from moving to the booth to start his broadcasting career. Oh, one more thing. Ciara! Hands down he has the better looking gal. Yeah, Russell Wilson is a system QB alright. And that system is called winning! How do you make a post stating it's not about the system, yet never actually mentioning the system he plays in? Let's ignore the drastically better roster, with much better football management in charge. Better blocking, just as dominant running attack, and a playcaller that is light years ahead of Kyle Shanahan and Jon Gruden. If Griffin was drafted by the Seahawks he would've never been injured twice, and he would've never made the outrageous demands he made to Pete Carroll. Unlike Shanahan, Carroll would've verbally put Griffin in his place before his ego got out of control. Wilson would not have been successful here. The play design with Kyle is on-par to what he has enjoyed in Seattle, but the playcalling isn't. And he wouldn't get bailed out of his mediocre performances by a dominating defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Maybe But the question is whether you would trade one for the other and I'm sure 99.9% of the general public would say yes The only people that prefer RG3 over RW are skins fans Right now, of course everybody would do that trade. One player cannot stay healthy and the other one can. If gruden were still coaching this team it would make zero sense to trade for Wilson though and I believe that's how the original post was framed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Skins Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 How about we use our new GM to draft our own Russell Wilson for a fraction of the cost instead? Anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dont Taze Me Bro Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 First, the trade would have to happen next off-season. Second, no way Seattle is going to trade Wilson for RGIII and Cousins. The ceiling for Cousins passed after the 2013 FA period. I like to think RGIII hasn't hit his ceiling yet, due to injuries, which is another reason Seattle wouldn't pull the trigger. Also, why would we want to pay Russell that much money for accomplishments obtained in Seattle? Knowing darn good and well we are still rebuilding the lines, etc. We are not one player away from being a Super Bowl contender, or even a consistent playoff team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
actualone Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 what the....... People on this board and in this thread....smh So some want to trade an good system QB who plays in a great system that works for a good system QB that plays in average system that doesn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail4Life Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Yes. Guarantee he would do better than Griffin even with that "awful line" that forces Griffin to hold onto the ball for 6 seconds. I want RG3 to stay here and succeed but if we could get Wilson in exchange I'd take that in a heartbeat. Wilson IS what Griffin was SUPPOSED to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Wilson is the superior player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 what the....... People on this board and in this thread....smh So some want to trade an good system QB who plays in a great system that works for a good system QB that plays in average system that doesn't? Who is the second good QB in this equation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasRoane Posted July 20, 2015 Author Share Posted July 20, 2015 How do you make a post stating it's not about the system, yet never actually mentioning the system he plays in? Let's ignore the drastically better roster, with much better football management in charge. Better blocking, just as dominant running attack, and a playcaller that is light years ahead of Kyle Shanahan and Jon Gruden. If Griffin was drafted by the Seahawks he would've never been injured twice, and he would've never made the outrageous demands he made to Pete Carroll. Unlike Shanahan, Carroll would've verbally put Griffin in his place before his ego got out of control. Wilson would not have been successful here. The play design with Kyle is on-par to what he has enjoyed in Seattle, but the playcalling isn't. And he wouldn't get bailed out of his mediocre performances by a dominating defense. So you are denying the skill set that Wilson has? I gave you a good inventory of skills that I believe would be portable to any system. Which one of those skills would not be useful in any other system? The hogwash about Gruden is tiring. RG III apologists have been quick to lambast the Redskins (and rightly so) for the crap O-line we've rolled out year after year. Yet the Coach whom they stuck with that line (and a line coach that was not even his hire) is supposed to be held 100% responsible for the bad play? Not to mention the pitiful defense he inherited that gave up a lead early and often. The Redskins have a new GM who has already improved the O-line. Long (already had him tho) and Scherff are already better than Chester and Polumbus/Compton. The GM will build a team around the QB, whomever that is so the system argument doesn't hold water. If Jay failed to produce then he'd be fired. Simple as that. So the coach shouldn't factor into the decision. The salary argument is also a moot point. If Robert produces this year the team is going to have pay him as well right? So which player would you desire most to make a long term investment in? Now, having said all that. Name the aspects of Robert's game that are better than Russell Wilson's please - today. Not what you hope either QB will be able to do in the future. What they have shown that they can do today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idaho fan Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Yes.. seems obvious to me.. who has the brighter future? Who will win more games out of the three? Perhaps Seattle has a better team around RW but at this point I think we would easily be better off with RW than anyone we currently have at QB. Is RW elite and worth the contract he will end up getting? Is RW going to be put on any trading blocks for the likes of RG and Cousins? Im thinking not, but is he better than what we have right now? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cumberland Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 let's take out the system argument and ignore the rest of the team's talent level difference for a minute and look at a couple things that would need to happen to be able to do the trade.1. team compensation: there's no way seattle would do the trade without more compensation than 1 or 2 qb's. we'd have to throw in a lot more - and i'm talking draft picks here and possibly some of our better/young players. 2. player contract: we all know russell is looking for a mega contract - the details of which would need to be ironed out prior to consummating any trade. robert, on the other hand, would not be looking for a mega deal even if he performs well this year and next. a manageable cap-friendly deal? yes, but not what russell is looking for. based on 2 above, would we really want to strap down a sizable amount of our cap on 1 player? and based on 1, barring a long-term deal, i believe it's more likely than not, the seahawks will use their franchise tag on him in 2016 which, if one goes by the letter of the cba, compensation alone would required 2 1st rd picks. and imo, that wouldn't even cut it for seattle to make the deal.putting both together, it just doesn't make any sense, imo, to do a deal like this.. maybe under the old snyder/ceratto tandem, we'd see something like this but not anymore with a real gm running the show. and can you imagine how the fanbase would react after having to trade away multiple 1st rd picks again and ending up with the same result we have now? personally, i'd like to see where scot takes us with improved talent acquisition and with a healthy robert leading our team the next 2 yrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theTruthTeller Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 First, the trade would have to happen next off-season. Second, no way Seattle is going to trade Wilson for RGIII and Cousins. The ceiling for Cousins passed after the 2013 FA period. I like to think RGIII hasn't hit his ceiling yet, due to injuries, which is another reason Seattle wouldn't pull the trigger. Also, why would we want to pay Russell that much money for accomplishments obtained in Seattle? Knowing darn good and well we are still rebuilding the lines, etc. We are not one player away from being a Super Bowl contender, or even a consistent playoff team. It's not going to happen in the offseason - Wilson (and Cousins) are free agents at the end of the seasons, and the Redskins signed the sixth year option for RG3. Pretty good chance if RG3 plays well enough in 2015 to justify a $16.5M contract for 2016, he won't be traded. But this is all hypothetical silliness anyway - Seattle is not going to trade Wilson and certainly not for RG3. Just looking at the top salaries (link) makes it pretty clear that he's going to get at least $20M - which is only $2M more than Cutler and Kap get. The top 5 QBs make so much money (average around 21M) that it wouldn't make any sense to franchise him either. They'll come to an agreement when they need to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.