All things off season 2015.

Peyton in his prime was paid a ton of money and had insane stats. Indy felt flat on its face when Peyton was injured. I doubt Seattle would fall flat on its face if Wilson were to go down with a season ending injury.

Yes, Wilson has something that Peyton doesn't: an elite defense and running game. But a lot of QBs would not take advantage of those opportunities the way Wilson has.

I think Wilson should be paid, as long as his guaranteed money doesn't surpasses Luck's. He should definitely get more money than Cam Newton.

Yeah Wilson never gonna put up Peyton numbers because his game is not an air raid type qb. But he lifted the Seattle organization to the level they are now. I understand the arguments against...but he has the intangibles others do not. And that part of his game which is tough to measure always leads to discussions as these. One thing is he had bottom level talent at receiver since he has been there

I think if you would privately ask every GM and FO would you trade your qb straight up for Wilson...only Green Bay, New England and possibly Carolina would say no.

Yeah Wilson never gonna put up Peyton numbers because his game is not an air raid type qb. But he lifted the Seattle organization to the level they are now. I understand the arguments against...but he has the intangibles others do not. And that part of his game which is tough to measure always leads to discussions as these. One thing is he had bottom level talent at receiver since he has been there

I think if you would privately ask every GM and FO would you trade your qb straight up for Wilson...only Green Bay, New England and possibly Carolina would say no.

Yea. Slipperyness isn't a stat but if it was Wilson would own it. He has the ability to feel pressure and make a busted play a big gain.

He doesn't have to set passing records to have success with that team. He keeps the chains moving which is what he needs to do with Lynch and that defense.

Yea. Slipperyness isn't a stat but if it was Wilson would own it. He has the ability to feel pressure and make a busted play a big gain.

He doesn't have to set passing records to have success with that team. He keeps the chains moving which is what he needs to do with Lynch and that defense.

Here is one of the problems I have with the Russell Wilson arguments. Just about anyone can have success on that team. As a QB on that team, your job is to not throw pick sixes and you win. They have the best RB in the game and he just flat out wears defenses down since the opposing teams offense is hardly on the field with all the three and outs that defense forces.

The comment was made that almost every GM secretly wants Wilson over who they have now (which I disagree with). But if Wilson was on another team, do you honestly think he has the won/loss record that he has now? Which is primarily what people argue in his favor (that and the SB win that was led by... guess what... that defense).

He has great pocket presence, but that doesnt win games. That team wins by attrition. They wear you down for 3 quarters and beast mode takes over in the 4th.

I wouldn't say he's elite either, but he's better than what we have right now, so i'm not going to knock him too much.

Here is one of the problems I have with the Russell Wilson arguments. Just about anyone can have success on that team. As a QB on that team, your job is to not throw pick sixes and you win. They have the best RB in the game and he just flat out wears defenses down since the opposing teams offense is hardly on the field with all the three and outs that defense forces.I think you are missing Russell's playmaking (most 4th qtr comebacks since he's been in the league 15), rushing yards and the effect of his rushing threat to the overall running game (jumped from 14th to 1st FBO), and the effect of the running game on the defense.(pts allowed from 7th to 1st time of possession from 28th to 5th)

So when you say 'just about anyone can have success on that team' you dismiss the difference between the pre-Russell Seattle mediocre sub-.500 team and the Russell led team that is SB champion and contender.

He has great pocket presence, but that doesnt win games. That team wins by attrition. They wear you down for 3 quarters and beast mode takes over in the 4th.You are right that pocket presence doesn't win games. But boiling down Russ's impact to pocket presence ignores the jump the team made in offense, rushing, passing, time of possession and overall defense.

While I do not dispute, and in fact agree, with your assertions that Wilson had an effect on the various areas you cite, those factors only have value if they are transferable to a new team. For example -- while he likely would cause some improvement in time of possession, defense, and running game here, I don't see him having the impact suggested by the numbers you cite. Mainly because each of those stats is much more dependent on the other personnel involved rather than straight up passing numbers (not suggesting passing numbers are not dependent on others, just suggesting defensive rankings, time of possession, and improved running game or much more so).

Since his effect much more dependent upon personnel around him, his value is a much more difficult thing to quantify. His straight passing numbers are just not that impressive. That may be why there is such wide disagreement as to his value. I imagine that one or two teams would value him very highly while others not so much.

I think you are missing Russell's playmaking (most 4th qtr comebacks since he's been in the league 15), rushing yards and the effect of his rushing threat to the overall running game (jumped from 14th to 1st FBO), and the effect of the running game on the defense.(pts allowed from 7th to 1st time of possession from 28th to 5th)

So when you say 'just about anyone can have success on that team' you dismiss the difference between the pre-Russell Seattle mediocre sub-.500 team and the Russell led team that is SB champion and contender.

You are right that pocket presence doesn't win games. But boiling down Russ's impact to pocket presence ignores the jump the team made in offense, rushing, passing, time of possession and overall defense.

Ah yes... The other thing people try to jump on with Russell, 4th quarter comebacks. Problem being, one was an int. that replacement refs called a TD. For others, all you have to do is look at game stats. Multiple games where he was under 50% comp with 0 TD and multiple ints in the game.

The problem with the 4th quarter comeback stat is it doesnt reflect the rest of the team. If you have a drive where you hand the ball off 10 straight times and the RB scores a go ahead TD, does the RB get credit for a 4th quarter comeback? No... Does the OL get credit for it? No... If the QB does not throw a single pass in the 4th quarter and they enter the 4th losing and end up winning, the QB gets credited with a 4th quarter comeback and no one else does. A lot of Wilsons 4th quarter comebacks is just handing the ball to Marshawn Lynch. Which is exactly what I said earlier... They wear you down for 3 quarters and beast mode takes over in the 4th.

If Russell has a 500 or less record, does he get the credit he does now? No. Does Russell have a +500 record on a fair amount of the teams? imo, No he doesnt. Does he post the record he has without that defense? Not even close.

You are also trying to make the claim that Seattle had everything in place except Wilson when they were posting losing records. That is not even close to being true. That defense has been great for 2 or 3 seasons, not a chance they were great prior to his arrival.

Im not trying to say Russell Wilson sucks, but he is no where near elite. And thats where people are trying to put him, the elite category.

Great pocket presence and being a good runner doesnt win much. An elite defense however does. Take that defense away and give them an average to below average defense, does Seattle win a SB?

While I do not dispute, and in fact agree, with your assertions that Wilson had an effect on the various areas you cite, those factors only have value if they are transferable to a new team.Interesting notion.

And I agree to an extent. But, Russell's main impact is through his playmaking and rushing those skills are transferable. In Seattle's case Russell's skills manifested themselves in the areas I mentioned. However how Russell's playmaking and rushing impacts a team is variable based on philosophy, personnel, coaching staff etc. But for certain any team with Russell is gonna improve their rushing offense because he by himself averages 600 yards rushing. And they're gonna get QB that can make something happen when the play breaks down.


...each of those stats is much more dependent on the other personnel involved rather than straight up passing numbers (not suggesting passing numbers are not dependent on others, just suggesting defensive rankings, time of possession, and improved running game or much more so).Lets not confuse Russell's transferable skills: rushing and playmaking with his statistical impact on Seattle.

Now we can quibble over how much impact his skills would have to another teams TOP, defensive rankings etc. But, his impact on Seattle is already known. And even aside from those defensive rankings Russell averages 600 yards rushing. That rushing volume belongs to Russell alone and is more of a direct impact then a passing game which is component system between OL, WR and scheme. If you look at Seattle's passing game for example they have mediocre at best OL and receivers which is a limiting factor on Russell's passing numbers. Also Seattle's has a winning formula that produces a highly efficient and productive offense with Russell's rushing as a main element so there isn't a need to be volume passing team.


I imagine that one or two teams would value him very highly while others not so much.If you go back to the draft Russell's main knock was his height otherwise he would have been viewed as one of the top QB prospects. I would imagine that Russell productivity has crushed the concerns over his height. I think Russell's value is no different then any other QB with similar production.

Ah yes... The other thing people try to jump on with Russell, 4th quarter comebacks.I guess you can beg and begrudge Wilson's 4th q comebacks if you want but you would not only have to parse out Wilson's but every other QBs 4th q comebacks to make a meaningful statement about Russell compares with theirs. Until you do that it is what it is Russell has the most 4th q comebacks since he was drafted.

If Russell has a 500 or less record, does he get the credit he does now?Not my argument.

You are also trying to make the claim that Seattle had everything in place except Wilson when they were posting losing records. That is not even close to being true. That defense has been great for 2 or 3 seasons, not a chance they were great prior to his arrival.To be clear. I am saying that Seattle's core was in place before Russell got there. Sherman, Earl, Kam etc. In my previous post I stated that Seattle was the 7th ranked defense before Russell got there. So yes, they were good before. But, everything about their offense improved dramatically upon Wilson arrival to include time possession (from 22nd to 5th iirc) and I' sure we both know TOP is huge for defense, which improved from 7th to 1st.

... Take that defense away and give them an average to below average defense, does Seattle win a SB?That defense was good before Russell got there and they were mediocre 7-9 with a middling offense that Russell breathed life into.

PFF reviews this, and judges whether the comeback was from the offense, whether it was truly an offensive comeback (vs. defensive score), etc. It's not perfect, because I don't think they factor in whether it was just the RB who carried the team..


Russell Wilson's Career 4th quarter comebacks and game-winning drives (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/comeback.cgi?player=WilsRu00)
- note only 5 of 15 did RW have >250 yards
- note only 5 of 15 did RW have >100 passer rating

NFL Year-by-Year Fourth Quarter Comebacks Leaders (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/comebacks_year_by_year.htm)


NFL Active Fourth Quarter Comebacks Leaders (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/comebacks_active.htm)