TuscanyTile2 Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Thats your opinion and it would be a legit argument. Im not saying that he wasnt an all time great, he certainly was....as a game manager. Wilson is of the same cloth. And to confirm, the stats werent gaudy. The wins were, just like Wilson. If you had a choice between a young Aikman vs a young Wilson, who would you choose? I'd go Aikman without hesitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 He's not the good. Put him on most other teams and they're out of the playoffs in the first round if they even make it. That's just a dumb statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Gaudy stats or not, I think Aikman was one of the all-time greats. Great player I wouldn't put him top 10 all-time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 If you had a choice between a young Aikman vs a young Wilson, who would you choose? I'd go Aikman without hesitation. Aikman had maybe the greatest o-line ever in front of him. Wilson has done it last two years with a mediocre OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetster Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Some of you people are crazy? Russell Wilson is this eras Fran Tarkinton only much stronger. He brought Seattle back against all odds vs the Packers & for all intents & purposes he did enough to come back down vs the Patriots to win that game if the coaches make a better call. I still say that the receiver ran a lazy flat route. Every receiver is told to they need to get inside position, especially in the redzone where the windows are tighter. Butler attacked that ball & the receiver didn't. Wilson QBing on the Jets, OMG, we'd dominate the AFC east for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32EBoozer Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 It would require three first rounders at minimum to obtain Wilson's services. After all, if they were to, say, franchise tag him after the season, it would cost 2 first rounders to sign him away. So nothing short of three 1st's would do. Wilson isn't worth three firsts. Let's see how he does without a dominant defense and running game. If Idzik were still here we could have gotten him with a combo of a 2nd, 3rd and 4th in 2016, because that's just how GREAT Idzik was!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 If you had a choice between a young Aikman vs a young Wilson, who would you choose? I'd go Aikman without hesitation. I'd go Russell Wilson. 2 Superbowls in his first 3 years, better numbers and he has less talent around him and he didnt start his career 1-16. He's 10-1 vs. Superbowl winning QB's and his only lost to one of those QB's was with 5 seconds left in the superbowl. I dont think there's been a QB with a better start to his career. The closest would probably be Marino. He got to a superbowl (and lost) either in his rookie year or his 2nd year. I dont think there's another QB in history that has 3 playoff appearances, 2 SB appearances and 1 SB victory in their first 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly Posted May 11, 2015 Author Share Posted May 11, 2015 Some of you people are crazy? Russell Wilson is this eras Fran Tarkinton only much stronger. He brought Seattle back against all odds vs the Packers & for all intents & purposes he did enough to come back down vs the Patriots to win that game if the coaches make a better call. I still say that the receiver ran a lazy flat route. Every receiver is told to they need to get inside position, especially in the redzone where the windows are tighter. Butler attacked that ball & the receiver didn't. Wilson QBing on the Jets, OMG, we'd dominate the AFC east for years. "...Wilson QBing on the Jets, OMG, we'd dominate the AFC east for years. " ~ ~ we may not " dominate " but, we'd at least make the playoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly Posted June 29, 2015 Author Share Posted June 29, 2015 A trade is also possible for Russell Wilson It remains too early to know how quarterback Russell Wilson’s long-term future will play out in Seattle. It’s not too early to identify the potential outcomes.On the surface, there are three options for the Seahawks and Wilson beyond 2015: (1) new multi-year contract with Seattle; (2) exclusive franchise tag, which prevents him for entertaining offers elsewhere; and (3) non-exclusive franchise tag, which allows another team to sign Wilson to an offer sheet, and to give up two first-round picks if the offer sheet isn’t matched. There’s also a fourth option. The Seahawks could trade Wilson. A trade on or before the 2015 deadline for doing so is highly unlikely; with the offseason programs concluded, it would be too hard for Wilson’s new team to get the most out of him. It also would be too hard for the Seahawks to prepare another quarterback, whether it’s a quarterback on the roster or someone who would be signed or, in theory, acquired via a Wilson trade.Making a trade before October even less likely is the reality that, before the two sides would divorce, they’d have to want that outcome. They’re not there yet, and there’s no reason to think they’ll be there before the trade deadline.But they could be there by February. If ongoing discussions (discussions that could be continuing as soon as this week) fail to result in a long-term deal, the Seahawks could opt for a trade of Wilson over mere placement of the non-exclusive tender and acceptance of a pair of first-round picks from whichever team convinces Wilson to sign. Here’s how it likely would unfold. The Seahawks would apply the exclusive franchise tag, preventing another team (like the Rams, a division rival) from pursuing Wilson. The Seahawks then could shop Wilson, simultaneously controlling his next destination and seeking compensation other than a pair of first-round picks.They could seek more than two first-round picks. (If Robert Griffin III was worth three ones and a two, what is Wilson worth?) The Seahawks could seek the first overall pick from whichever team earns it, if there’s a clear-cut franchise quarterback emerging in the 2016 draft. They could try to get a veteran quarterback as part of the package.And that’s where it gets very intriguing. Three and a half decades after the Raiders and Oilers swapped Ken Stabler and Dan Pastorini, the Seahawks could send Wilson to another team for its starting quarterback.Plenty of teams would consider that. From Seattle’s perspective, the challenge would become finding the right fit for the offense — and for the short-term and long-term interests of the franchise. In the end, Wilson would get what he wants, a contract making him the highest-paid player in the game. And the Seahawks actually could end up with an arguably “better” quarterback who is willing to accept less money in order to pursue championships and to cement his own NFL legacy. > http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/28/a-trade-is-also-possible-for-russell-wilson/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jethead Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Right now, I'd take him over any QB not named Rogers or Luck. If we could get him for $20M/yr and draft picks it would be the deal of the decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chirorob Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 I used to like Wilson for being an underdog guy who worked hard to get to where he's at. Now he's little more than a money-grubbing, home-wrecking douchebag . Why? If someone is willing to pay it, why should he not try to maximize? He's not Brady, who has 100 million in the bank, or Peyton, or one of those guys. He's probably the lowest paid starter on the team. He sees guys worse than him making 18 and up. Why should he not want to maximize what he can get? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly Posted June 29, 2015 Author Share Posted June 29, 2015 I wish we could get him but ,..he'll most probably end up signing a long term deal with seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdxgreen Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Being from the NW and knowing the kinds of QBs, Seattle had before (paging Mr. Whitehurst.) I am surprised they are lowballing Mr. Wilson. How they forget! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Being from the NW and knowing the kinds of QBs, Seattle had before (paging Mr. Whitehurst.) I am surprised they are lowballing Mr. Wilson. How they forget! They're lowballing because they have to. They're about to lose a lot of pieces to that dominant defense as a result. Imagine getting used to devoting $600-800K cap space for your QB then all of a sudden having to devote Rodgers money to him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I'd go Russell Wilson. 2 Superbowls in his first 3 years, better numbers and he has less talent around him and he didnt start his career 1-16. He's 10-1 vs. Superbowl winning QB's and his only lost to one of those QB's was with 5 seconds left in the superbowl. I dont think there's been a QB with a better start to his career. The closest would probably be Marino. He got to a superbowl (and lost) either in his rookie year or his 2nd year. I dont think there's another QB in history that has 3 playoff appearances, 2 SB appearances and 1 SB victory in their first 3 years. To play devil's advocate, there was a time when Mark Sanchez was an improving young QB who had a 20-12 record + 4-2 in the playoffs and had been to two AFC title games. Did that make him a good QB? The question is how good Wilson would be if you take away Lynch and the dominant D? I guess the same argument could be made about Aikman. I would love to get Wilson here <pounds table> and be happy to pay him $20M. Not sure what that would take though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly Posted June 30, 2015 Author Share Posted June 30, 2015 Russell Wilson mentions a figure: $25 million Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson has yet again been interviewed. And he has yet again avoided questions about his contract with the team.But Wilson has finally floated a figure, during an interview with ESPN’s Marty Smith.Said Smith, “Nobody’s won more than you in the last several years. We’ve seen what some of your peers have gotten on the market recently. Based on the current market for the quarterback and based on your resume, what do you deserve?” Wilson opted to be coy. “I don’t know, how much would you pay me, Marty?” Wilson said with a laugh.“I mean, you have a Super Bowl and you took ’em to another Super Bowl,” Smith said.“I think ultimately it comes down to the play,” Wilson said. “Just let my play speak for itself, and let the rest take care of itself. Continue to love the game for what it is, continue to fight, continue to play. No matter how much I’m getting paid, whether it’s $25 million or $1.5 million. I’ll be ready to go.” The second number is what Wilson is due to make this year. The first number could be what Wilson is aiming to get, a possible slip of the tongue. (Or maybe he was simply thinking about the jersey number worn by teammate Richard Sherman.)Wilson also called his relationship with the Seahawks “great” and “I don’t think it’s a bad relationship by any means.” He also reiterated his desire to stay in Seattle. That’s fine, but at some point the desire to stay in Seattle and the desire to get paid will conflict, especially if he’s serious about making $25 million per year — which is $3 million more per year than the current high-water mark in the NFL set two years ago by Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers. > http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/29/russell-wilson-mentions-a-figure/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly Posted June 30, 2015 Author Share Posted June 30, 2015 NFL: Why No One Likes Russell Wilson Anymore> http://www.cheatsheet.com/sports/nfl-why-no-one-likes-russell-wilson-anymore.html/?a=viewall#ixzz3eYqDCZc2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet9 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Anyone bitching about him going for a big contract are full of it. He either has or will have a family, etc. That's what a lot of this is all about. He can also lose his career in a second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Anyone bitching about him going for a big contract are full of it. He either has or will have a family, etc. That's what a lot of this is all about. He can also lose his career in a second. How can I feed my family on $1.5M? He is right to maximize his earnings, but I don't think I would emphasize the family angle. It didn't go over well for Sprewell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet9 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 How can I feed my family on $1.5M? He is right to maximize his earnings, but I don't think I would emphasize the family angle. It didn't go over well for Sprewell. Saying stupid sh*t is one thing. Making sure your grandkids are going to be able to pay for college is another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 To play devil's advocate, there was a time when Mark Sanchez was an improving young QB who had a 20-12 record + 4-2 in the playoffs and had been to two AFC title games. Did that make him a good QB? The question is how good Wilson would be if you take away Lynch and the dominant D? I guess the same argument could be made about Aikman. I would love to get Wilson here <pounds table> and be happy to pay him $20M. Not sure what that would take though. Marks first 2 years was 29 tds and 33 picks 54% completions that doesn't compare to Wilsons first 2 years with 52 tds 19 picks and 63 % if the Devil does it or not..LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brown Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Right now, I'd take him over any QB not named Rogers or Luck. If we could get him for $20M/yr and draft picks it would be the deal of the decade. Ummmmm I would take away every bad and unprintable thing I have ever said or thought about the Jets if this were ever done!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brown Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Marks first 2 years was 29 tds and 33 picks 54% completions that doesn't compare to Wilsons first 2 years with 52 tds 19 picks and 63 % if the Devil does it or not..LOL Thank you.. As you know I was a rabid Sanchez apologist and to compare him and Wilson at the start of their careers and their level of their play is INSANITY!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brown Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Anyone bitching about him going for a big contract are full of it. He either has or will have a family, etc. That's what a lot of this is all about. He can also lose his career in a second. Hmmmmm.. I agree... People counting other folks money are the only ones saying so and so should be happy with whatever they offer. You should complain about what another makes when they start debiting your account when another cashes their check. Other than that knock it off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Marks first 2 years was 29 tds and 33 picks 54% completions that doesn't compare to Wilsons first 2 years with 52 tds 19 picks and 63 % if the Devil does it or not..LOL Thank you.. As you know I was a rabid Sanchez apologist and to compare him and Wilson at the start of their careers and their level of their play is INSANITY!!! I wasn't comparing them and neither was Villain. Villain was pointing out the great start to Wilson's career using W-L/playoff and super bowl success. I was just saying that similar logic is what made people think Sanchez would not suck in 2011. Ummmmm I would take away every bad and unprintable thing I have ever said or thought about the Jets if this were ever done!!! Isn't the purpose of JetNation that we print each of those bad thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brown Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I wasn't comparing them and neither was Villain. Villain was pointing out the great start to Wilson's career using W-L/playoff and super bowl success. I was just saying that similar logic is what made people think Sanchez would not suck in 2011. Isn't the purpose of JetNation that we print each of those bad thoughts? See what you were saying about Sanchez And as far as me printing stuff.. I would have been on permanent ban for years based on Herm and Sanchez alone!!! And those were guys I frequently defended, nuts but I am a Jets fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycdan Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I'd go Russell Wilson. 2 Superbowls in his first 3 years, better numbers and he has less talent around him and he didnt start his career 1-16. He's 10-1 vs. Superbowl winning QB's and his only lost to one of those QB's was with 5 seconds left in the superbowl. I dont think there's been a QB with a better start to his career. The closest would probably be Marino. He got to a superbowl (and lost) either in his rookie year or his 2nd year. I dont think there's another QB in history that has 3 playoff appearances, 2 SB appearances and 1 SB victory in their first 3 years. Not quite the same but at one point we were talking about Sanchez and his 2 AFCCG appearances in his first two years. The team around him matters. Wilson has proved to me that he is a very good QB. He has not shown me that he is Aaron Rodgers good. It may not be a fair comparison as he is not asked to do what Rodgers does, but nevertheless, he just doesn't feel like a $20MM QB to me yet. Given that the Seahawks can control him for 2 more years cheap plus franchise tags after that, I'd think he really ought to be a little more reasonable in his ask but that's his and Seattle's problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 See what you were saying about Sanchez And as far as me printing stuff.. I would have been on permanent ban for years based on Herm and Sanchez alone!!! And those were guys I frequently defended, nuts but I am a Jets fan You defended Herm? Ew. The only thing I will say for the guy is that he does eat clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Not quite the same but at one point we were talking about Sanchez and his 2 AFCCG appearances in his first two years. The team around him matters. Wilson has proved to me that he is a very good QB. He has not shown me that he is Aaron Rodgers good. It may not be a fair comparison as he is not asked to do what Rodgers does, but nevertheless, he just doesn't feel like a $20MM QB to me yet. Given that the Seahawks can control him for 2 more years cheap plus franchise tags after that, I'd think he really ought to be a little more reasonable in his ask but that's his and Seattle's problem. Wilson has taken his team to 2 Bowls but if you believe what you say then no one should complain about Mo and the Jets control on him who has yet to make a pro bowl..LOL Or maybe Mo could be more reasonable as well?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycdan Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 Wilson has taken his team to 2 Bowls but if you believe what you say then no one should complain about Mo and the Jets control on him who has yet to make a pro bowl..LOL Or maybe Mo could be more reasonable as well?? See...this is where we don't fully agree. Did Sanchez 'take' the Jets to those AFCCGs? I'm not sure I'd say Wilson TOOK the Seahawks to those two SBs. He was a big part of it, but not the same way Manning, Brees and Rodgers were in their respective teams' appearances. And I think I was mistaken above. Wilson would be on a 4-year contract, not 5-year based on his draft position so he and Mo are actually in similar situations. However, as I understand it, Wilson is trying to set a precedent by having fully guaranteed money. I don't think he's got that kind of leverage. Maybe Paul Allen will blink but I'm betting not. Certainly not when it's debatable whether there are 10 other QBs in the league who could have had similar success with the team Wilson had these past two years. I'll add the unpopular opinion here that a 5'10" QB probably isn't the guy who's going to break the injury guarantee barrier. He probably has a case for Flacco money but fully guaranteed money is kind of unreasonable, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted July 1, 2015 Share Posted July 1, 2015 To play devil's advocate, there was a time when Mark Sanchez was an improving young QB who had a 20-12 record + 4-2 in the playoffs and had been to two AFC title games. Did that make him a good QB? The question is how good Wilson would be if you take away Lynch and the dominant D? I guess the same argument could be made about Aikman. I would love to get Wilson here <pounds table> and be happy to pay him $20M. Not sure what that would take though. I dont know how good Wilson would be if we took away every good player/unit he has available to him. I think it would be safe to assume that he'd still be a top 10 QB in the league though. Lets be truthful here, the guy makes plays. He's arguably the best passer on the run in the league, he's a top 5 scrambling QB and has a completion rate over 63% overall. And outside of Lynch who does he really have as a legit weapon in the passing game or on offense in general? Doug Baldwin, Ricardo Lockette and Jermaine Kearse??? Mark Sanchez was looking like he could be someone legit because he stepped up in the playoffs twice. Yes, this is a fact. However, if you compare stats he's not even on Russell Wilson's level. If Wilson had the exact stats that Sanchez had his first 3 years in the league yet won a SB and made a second trip to the dance and decided to ask for 25 million a year I would be in complete agreement of the Hawks trading him. Russell Wilson stats speaks for themselves. Maybe his ability is why they made it to the superbowl back to back while Sanchez was the reason the Jets lost in the AFCCG back to back. I mean, didnt Sanchez have the #1 defense in 09 and like the #3 defense in 10 along with Ladanian Tomlinson, Santonio Holmes and Braylon Edwards? Yet another way to separate the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted July 1, 2015 Share Posted July 1, 2015 Are people seriously comparing Wilson to Buttfumblechez? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted July 1, 2015 Share Posted July 1, 2015 Not quite the same but at one point we were talking about Sanchez and his 2 AFCCG appearances in his first two years. The team around him matters. Wilson has proved to me that he is a very good QB. He has not shown me that he is Aaron Rodgers good. It may not be a fair comparison as he is not asked to do what Rodgers does, but nevertheless, he just doesn't feel like a $20MM QB to me yet. Given that the Seahawks can control him for 2 more years cheap plus franchise tags after that, I'd think he really ought to be a little more reasonable in his ask but that's his and Seattle's problem. In all respects, this isnt about what it feels like, its about what works, and that Seahawk offense hasnt worked right since 2005. He's not Aaron Rodgers, but at this moment he's having a better career than Aaron Rodgers. Beat the Pack straight up in one of the best playoff games in recent memory (Last years playoffs as a collective imo was the best I've ever seen) Now we can throw in all of the excuses and roadblocks we like such as "what would Wilson be without Lynch and that defense" and my answer to that would be "what would Lynch and that defense be without Wilson"? No matter how we want to slice it, at the end of the day the man has a 10-1 record against super winning QB's and that one loss came on just a brain dead playcall in the superbowl. This isnt about whether Wilson is better than Rodgers or any other QB based on his pay or even play. This is about can this defense and running back be successful without Wilson. I would pay 25 million a year not to find out. That reminds me of when I said that we should pay Revis 16 million because I didnt want to find out what the Jets would be like without him. Looks like Woody Johnson found out the hard way. The point is, certain guys you keep. Wilson isnt the best in the league, but he's close enough and he's shown that he can win it all and be a legit contender every year. You pay for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted July 1, 2015 Share Posted July 1, 2015 Are people seriously comparing Wilson to Buttfumblechez? It's this new advocate the devil has speaking for him on his behalf. Geez! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted July 1, 2015 Share Posted July 1, 2015 It's this new advocate the devil has speaking for him on his behalf. Geez! lol If the Hawks had you as the GM you would trade Wilson to the highest bidder and then pry Glennon from the Buc's.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.