Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Russell Wilson to Denver

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post

    The Rams did appear to have a better team than the Broncos, but it's non-sequitor (that means it is illogical) to believe this is any sort of evidence as to the value of the Russ trade. It's also an opinion. We can also make the comparison that Wilson had a far better history and career up to the point either was traded. There's plenty of other factors.

    Here's the reality. We traded for Russ. Deal with it. The only reasonable judgement of the trade will be if it helped the team more than the picks would have. And this is UNPROVABLE. You continue to try to prove something that is UNPROVABLE.

    But I know one thing, the rest of the NFL is interested in Russ in Denver. Last year was the first year in decades we weren't on MNF. How many national games do we have this season? The rest of the NFL wants to see Russ in Denver even if you don't.
    The Broncos fired their coaching staff because they were holding the team back. Also the lack of a franchise QB has also held this team back.
    I am more confident in Wilson's ability to improve our offense and get the most out of our weapons than I am in this young coaching staff. If the coaching staff is successful this team will scary!
    sigpic

    Comment


    • Last two Superbowl winners teams that brought in veteran QB's!!!!!

      sigpic

      Comment


      • Originally posted by LordTrychon View Post

        Like obfuscating the conversation by attacking a single phrase in the comment rather than actually responding to it?

        I'm not trying to obfuscate anything. I would think it's pretty clear, which is why I didn't expand further, but here you go -

        You made a constant point of how Wilson is not very good because of his playoff record (which is not really that bad). Stafford came up because he's an example of someone who had 0 playoff success prior to becoming a world champion.

        Wilson succeeded in the playoffs early on in his career because he was on a very good team.

        When his team wasn't as good, he had less success.

        When Stafford was on a bad team, he had even less success in the playoffs than Wilson did. That didn't mean he wasn't any good, or was incapable of winning in the playoffs.

        I don't think anyone is saying that this team is guaranteed a Super Bowl this year.

        To have a winning playoff record in any given year, you essentially have to be one of the last four standing.

        Playoff record is a horrible way to judge a QB.

        Because it takes a team to win.... especially in the playoffs.

        Wilson's record shows that. Stafford's record shows that.

        Even your own arguments 'Wilson was successful when he was on a great team' shows that, but you argue that it's just Wilson's fault anyway.

        What Super Bowl winning teams were bad outside of the QB?

        Here's a fun list -

        Here's the QBs with the MOST losses in the playoffs, in order of number of losses (then by wins) -

        Peyton Manning
        Tom Brady
        Brett Favre
        Ben Roethlisberger
        Aaron Rodgers
        Dan Marino
        Drew Brees
        Jim Kelly
        Joe Montana
        John Elway
        Russell Wilson
        Donovan McNabb
        Philip Rivers
        Warren Moon

        For a QB, a lot of playoff losses means taking a team to the playoffs a lot even when the team isn't Super Bowl Championship level.

        The Seahawks haven't been at that level for several years. That's not Wilson's fault.

        The fact that they got to the playoffs anyway very well may be his fault.
        Nice work.
        "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

        Comment


        • Originally posted by CanDB View Post

          Based on the bolded, this is getting a little messy.
          You mean the doe snot?
          "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

          Comment


          • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

            You mean the doe snot?
            Well, between the crap and the doe snot, I'm not as hungry as I was a while ago.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post

              The Rams did appear to have a better team than the Broncos, but it's non-sequitor (that means it is illogical) to believe this is any sort of evidence as to the value of the Russ trade. It's also an opinion. We can also make the comparison that Wilson had a far better history and career up to the point either was traded. There's plenty of other factors.

              Here's the reality. We traded for Russ. Deal with it. The only reasonable judgement of the trade will be if it helped the team more than the picks would have. And this is UNPROVABLE. You continue to try to prove something that is UNPROVABLE.

              But I know one thing, the rest of the NFL is interested in Russ in Denver. Last year was the first year in decades we weren't on MNF. How many national games do we have this season? The rest of the NFL wants to see Russ in Denver even if you don't.
              Good job.
              "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

              Comment


              • Here's some cool trivia:

                With wins over Seattle and LAC Russ Wilson would become the fifth QB to beat all 32 teams, and he'd also be the youngest to accomplish that feat.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by CanDB View Post

                  Based on the bolded, this is getting a little messy.
                  what bolded?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by LordTrychon View Post

                    Like obfuscating the conversation by attacking a single phrase in the comment rather than actually responding to it?

                    I'm not trying to obfuscate anything. I would think it's pretty clear, which is why I didn't expand further, but here you go -

                    You made a constant point of how Wilson is not very good because of his playoff record (which is not really that bad). Stafford came up because he's an example of someone who had 0 playoff success prior to becoming a world champion.

                    Wilson succeeded in the playoffs early on in his career because he was on a very good team.

                    When his team wasn't as good, he had less success.

                    When Stafford was on a bad team, he had even less success in the playoffs than Wilson did. That didn't mean he wasn't any good, or was incapable of winning in the playoffs.

                    I don't think anyone is saying that this team is guaranteed a Super Bowl this year.

                    To have a winning playoff record in any given year, you essentially have to be one of the last four standing.

                    Playoff record is a horrible way to judge a QB.

                    Because it takes a team to win.... especially in the playoffs.

                    Wilson's record shows that. Stafford's record shows that.

                    Even your own arguments 'Wilson was successful when he was on a great team' shows that, but you argue that it's just Wilson's fault anyway.

                    What Super Bowl winning teams were bad outside of the QB?

                    Here's a fun list -

                    Here's the QBs with the MOST losses in the playoffs, in order of number of losses (then by wins) -

                    Peyton Manning
                    Tom Brady
                    Brett Favre
                    Ben Roethlisberger
                    Aaron Rodgers
                    Dan Marino
                    Drew Brees
                    Jim Kelly
                    Joe Montana
                    John Elway
                    Russell Wilson
                    Donovan McNabb
                    Philip Rivers
                    Warren Moon

                    For a QB, a lot of playoff losses means taking a team to the playoffs a lot even when the team isn't Super Bowl Championship level.

                    The Seahawks haven't been at that level for several years. That's not Wilson's fault.

                    The fact that they got to the playoffs anyway very well may be his fault.
                    I have seen a number of Hawk fans say Wilson has been carrying the team to what little success they have had.

                    Wilson is similar to PM and Brady how hard he goes into preparation. Most people would hate to work with someone who was texting preparation videos on days off. That is what makes QBs elite tho
                    Let's Ride!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by CanDB View Post
                      Here's some cool trivia:

                      With wins over Seattle and LAC Russ Wilson would become the fifth QB to beat all 32 teams, and he'd also be the youngest to accomplish that feat.

                      Hope he beats Sea and gets the win against LAC on MNF in front of everyone.

                      Beating KC will make my heart purr tho
                      Let's Ride!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Hadez View Post

                        I have seen a number of Hawk fans say Wilson has been carrying the team to what little success they have had.

                        Wilson is similar to PM and Brady how hard he goes into preparation. Most people would hate to work with someone who was texting preparation videos on days off. That is what makes QBs elite tho
                        This is correct. I the Seahawks fan world there are 3 groups.

                        Group 1 is all in on Wilson.
                        Group 2 is all in on PC
                        Group 3 the balanced who get Wilson did a lot for that franchise and kept them winning and relevant, but was way more than what PC needs to run his system.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Deandc View Post

                          Wilson cam run most any offense.
                          Sure, no doubt.

                          Most NFL playbooks are so large they contain enough to run several styles of offense depending on the scouting report. The previous discussion was about what Russell had been asked to run in Seattle in the past depending on who the OC was and what he wanted to emphasize.

                          Hackett says he and Russell are working closely together and are on the same page. Hackett has also made some general statements about the offense he and Russell plan to install. The selection of new offensive coaches tends to reflect that.

                          Russell invited Denver receivers to work with him throwing them the ball. There have been seven-on-seven drills already. The missing element is the full offense with rushing and passing attacks meshing and interacting. Realistically, that can't begin to develop until the hats and pads go on in TC and the hitting begins on the lines.

                          Preseason games/scrimmages will be vanilla, but provide a glimpse. It won't be until the season opener in Seattle that we'll begin to see the results of the Nate Hackett/Russell Wilson collaboration. It's a process.

                          P.S. Wilson and Cam are two different guys.
                          "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by CanDB

                            crap and snot......





                            JUST HAVIN A LITTLE FUN.....
                            Correction, doe snot NTBCW buck snot NTBCW buckshot.
                            "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

                              Correction, doe snot NTBCW buck snot NTBCW buckshot.
                              I deleted my post because the GIF was not active, but who cares.

                              It snot important.....

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by LordTrychon View Post

                                Like obfuscating the conversation by attacking a single phrase in the comment rather than actually responding to it?

                                I'm not trying to obfuscate anything. I would think it's pretty clear, which is why I didn't expand further, but here you go -

                                You made a constant point of how Wilson is not very good because of his playoff record (which is not really that bad). Stafford came up because he's an example of someone who had 0 playoff success prior to becoming a world champion.

                                Wilson succeeded in the playoffs early on in his career because he was on a very good team.

                                When his team wasn't as good, he had less success.

                                When Stafford was on a bad team, he had even less success in the playoffs than Wilson did. That didn't mean he wasn't any good, or was incapable of winning in the playoffs.

                                I don't think anyone is saying that this team is guaranteed a Super Bowl this year.

                                To have a winning playoff record in any given year, you essentially have to be one of the last four standing.

                                Playoff record is a horrible way to judge a QB.

                                Because it takes a team to win.... especially in the playoffs.

                                Wilson's record shows that. Stafford's record shows that.

                                Even your own arguments 'Wilson was successful when he was on a great team' shows that, but you argue that it's just Wilson's fault anyway.

                                What Super Bowl winning teams were bad outside of the QB?

                                Here's a fun list -

                                Here's the QBs with the MOST losses in the playoffs, in order of number of losses (then by wins) -

                                Peyton Manning
                                Tom Brady
                                Brett Favre
                                Ben Roethlisberger
                                Aaron Rodgers
                                Dan Marino
                                Drew Brees
                                Jim Kelly
                                Joe Montana
                                John Elway
                                Russell Wilson
                                Donovan McNabb
                                Philip Rivers
                                Warren Moon

                                For a QB, a lot of playoff losses means taking a team to the playoffs a lot even when the team isn't Super Bowl Championship level.

                                The Seahawks haven't been at that level for several years. That's not Wilson's fault.

                                The fact that they got to the playoffs anyway very well may be his fault.
                                Hooboy!

                                Glad you got that out. See, your question wasn’t necessary because you had an opinion to share.

                                I’ll let the wildly inaccurate take in bold go.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X