Russell Wilson and the Seahawks negotiations (update:signed)

[Mr. WEO]

There is room there. But it doesn't change what I asked, which is what is your ceiling?

 

Plan B would seemingly be trade for everything they can - and either get a qb back or use the picks towards one. Ideal? Obviously not. Likely? No. For the sake of discussion though, that's plan B I assume, just like the bills but with more ammo to get their guy to take a shot with.

 

What guy?? Wilson is their guy. There is no other Russell Wilson out there looking for a spot on the Seahawks roster.

 

If 25 million is what it took to keep this incredible run going, I would pay him because I know even of they bleed a few defenders, the team will still be a lot better off than than with some other guy they trade for or some kid in the draft.

 

I've asked before--wouldn't you take Wilson if it meant losing Dareus? Mario?

[NoSaint]

 

What guy?? Wilson is their guy. There is no other Russell Wilson out there looking for a spot on the Seahawks roster.

 

If 25 million is what it took to keep this incredible run going, I would pay him because I know even of they bleed a few defenders, the team will still be a lot better off than than with some other guy they trade for or some kid in the draft.

 

I've asked before--wouldn't you take Wilson if it meant losing Dareus? Mario?

I've said many times I'm ok spending on a premiere guy even it costs some talent elsewhere- but there's some cap to that with most guys. I'm trying to find your (and ktd's) boundary.

 

Throw out a crazy hypothetical since you are saying they are buffalo without him and we've talked this qb here- say this rivers stuff blows up and Wilson is pushing hard at 25m a year fully guaranteed.... Do you consider a deal that gives you a starting qb, more cap space to keep a cornerstone defender and a pick to account for rivers shelf life being shorter and send Wilson to the AFC?

Edited July 15, 2015 by NoSaint

[Mr. WEO]

I've said many times I'm ok spending on a premiere guy even it costs some talent elsewhere- but there's some cap to that with most guys. I'm trying to find your (and ktd's) boundary.

 

Throw out a crazy hypothetical since you are saying they are buffalo without him and we've talked this qb here- say this rivers stuff blows up and Wilson is pushing hard at 25m a year fully guaranteed.... Do you consider a deal that gives you a starting qb, more cap space to keep a cornerstone defender and a pick to account for rivers shelf life being shorter and send Wilson to the AFC?

 

Well, no one is going to fully guarantee a 25 million a year contract in the NFL ever, but I'll play along.

 

I wouldn't take Rivers. In 2010, he had the number 1 defense (and offense) and no playoffs. Speaking of playoffs, he's a career 4-5. I would take Wilson all the way.

 

Wilson, no Dareus and the Bills are playing for a SB spot this year. Rivers and Dareus and we maybe win a wildcard game.

[#34fan]

Citing my posts in mass, without context, accusing me of backtracking somehow, and then failing to make any sort of coherent and relevant point regarding what you've quoted is an interesting way to argue.

 

Which unit benefits more from the other isn't chicken and egg. Most reasonable people might realize that one of the 2 units is historically outstanding and in the conversation for best ever while the other unit is the offense. Since "most reasonable people" is not inclusive of you, its probably worth pointing out that Russel's leadership and work ethic means !@#$ all in the defensive huddle. Hanging that much weight on intangibles while suggesting that Bill has entered murky waters might have been the height of irony in this thread until you doubled down and declared that I or he or both have yet to prove "to anyone's satisfaction" that RW shouldn't be paid like Rodgers, blissfully unaware that the case you've laid out for why he should receive the richest contract in NFL history is thin at best and non-existent at worst, and I'm being kind in my word choice. The only thing you've demonstrated to anyone's satisfaction is that you're still incapable of forming and supporting a logical argument.

 

This thread is all about quantifying and questioning RW's worth. The fact that 26 pages in and you can't even comprehend the topic speaks volumes. You're not what the guidance counselor would refer to as "Mizzou material".

 

 

I said Wilson wasn't elite - YES. Where did I say I didn't say it? I don't think Wilson is an elite Quarterback.

 

As for not wanting to pay Wilson the same despite him achieving equal or better results..... do we only pay Quarterbacks by win-loss records? Is that honestly your argument? That we should pay him because the Seahawks win? Tim Tebow had a winning record let's give him $25million too.... all he does is win don't you know.

 

Football is the ultimate team game - is Quarterback the most important position on the field? Yes. Can you win without a good one? No. Is Russell Wilson a good one? Sure. Is he good enough that I'd make him the best paid player in the league? No.

 

As for you continually saying "would the defense be so great without Wilson converting 3rd downs with his legs?" I am going to answer with a resounding - yes. That defense is an all time great defense. It is certainly the best the NFL has seen since the Ravens and Buccs won Superbowls on defense in the early 00s. Whilst it isn't an entirely scientific measure - Seattle's offense was only 14th in 1st downs in 2014 and only 11th in 3rd down conversion so it is not like Wilson is consistently keeping his defense off the field. He is doing just above average in that regard and yet they faced fewer downs on defense than any team in the league by a distance. Why? Because they are exceptional. If I go back to Seattle's Superbowl season... Seattle were just 20th in offensive downs and 17th in 3rd down conversion and yet the defense was still 4th in facing the fewest downs on that side of the ball and 1st in total defense. I think that in itself is enough evidence to suggest that it really isn't "chicken and egg"... more like "egg and omelette."

 

You have already decided Wilson is the best player in the league and you are not engaging in anything like reasonable argument. But that shouldn't be a surprise... you decided years ago Brad Smith was a play-off calibre Quarterback and you aren't willing to give up on that bone yet either.....

 

 

That's it????

 

That's you guy's limp-wristed, disgrace of an argument in it's entirety???? -PLEASE SAY IT AIN'T SO..... First of all, thanks for making me spit out a perfectly good gulp of beer... Secondly, Bill, you're going to want to pull J-mo's head out of your lap so he can read this too...

 

Not only does that defense BENEFIT from Russell Wilson... They THRIVE because of what he does, and the WAY he does it... Seattle's defense faces fewer downs because the offense extending their drives for as long as possible... Fourteen defensive drives below the league average is a direct result of two things: 1)A league-low in turnovers per drive and 2) an offense with the second-highest time of possession average (per play) in the league!

 

The fact is that 30 percent of Wilson's rushes produced 1st downs! -Sixty percent of Wilson's 3rd down rushes produced 1st downs! In real time that is a HUGE boost for ANY offense OR defense!

 

Look, I'm going to bed...You two are clearly more interested in standing by each other, than anything to do with actual football... Feel free to put J-mo right back to work, -it's probably what he was born for.

[GunnerBill]

Haha.... there you go again ignoring any argument even when supported by some evidence because you have already written your conclusion in stone. We get it. Wilson was one of your much loved long shots and he was the one you have been overwhelmingly right about. The kid is a fantastic player. The reason you are so invested in needing to prove him the best player worth the biggest pay day is that your other long shots are Brad Smith and co.....

 

And to WEO - I think this is the crux of our disagreement then. I have never advocated the Seahawks losing Wilson either but I think $25million is too steep. And I totally disagree on your assessment of the play-off scenario.

 

I think we would be in the play-offs in your switch out Mario or Marcel for Wilson scenario (just to be clear he is going to get paid at such a level that you probably need to lose one of your very best players and another very good starter but I will play the game) but I don't think we would make the Superbowl.

 

Rivers on this team keeping our defense intact? I make us Superbowl champions.

[Mr. WEO]

Haha.... there you go again ignoring any argument even when supported by some evidence because you have already written your conclusion in stone. We get it. Wilson was one of your much loved long shots and he was the one you have been overwhelmingly right about. The kid is a fantastic player. The reason you are so invested in needing to prove him the best player worth the biggest pay day is that your other long shots are Brad Smith and co.....

 

And to WEO - I think this is the crux of our disagreement then. I have never advocated the Seahawks losing Wilson either but I think $25million is too steep. And I totally disagree on your assessment of the play-off scenario.

 

I think we would be in the play-offs in your switch out Mario or Marcel for Wilson scenario (just to be clear he is going to get paid at such a level that you probably need to lose one of your very best players and another very good starter but I will play the game) but I don't think we would make the Superbowl.

 

Rivers on this team keeping our defense intact? I make us Superbowl champions.

 

Rivers with a #1 D didn't even make the playoffs. He's a dud in the playoffs. Wilson on this team beats all challengers this year in the playoffs.

[Kelly the Dog]

Rivers with a #1 D didn't even make the playoffs. He's a dud in the playoffs. Wilson on this team beats all challengers this year in the playoffs.

While I think Rivers is not as good as Wilson, Rivers could easily take this team to a Super Bowl if the line is decent. He does exactly what we need our QB to do, drop back and throw accurate passes to a shitton of playmakers. He's never had a bunch of guys like this. He's had a couple at a time.

[Mr. WEO]

While I think Rivers is not as good as Wilson, Rivers could easily take this team to a Super Bowl if the line is decent. He does exactly what we need our QB to do, drop back and throw accurate passes to a shitton of playmakers. He's never had a bunch of guys like this. He's had a couple at a time.

 

You can have him. He's a choker. (4-5, 60% 2165 yds/11TDS/9ints/rating 85/8YPA). You think he's going to become someone different because he's in the playoffs on the Bills?

 

Wilson on the other hand: 6-2, 61% 1820yds/12TD/6 int/rating 98/9ypa, 255 yds rushing/5.9per/2 rushing TDs.

[Kelly the Dog]

You can have him. He's a choker. (4-5, 60% 2165 yds/11TDS/9ints/rating 85/8YPA). You think he's going to become someone different because he's in the playoffs on the Bills?

 

Wilson on the other hand: 6-2, 61% 1820yds/12TD/6 int/rating 98/9ypa, 255 yds rushing/5.9per/2 rushing TDs.

 

You and I think exactly the same about Wilson. I'm just saying that Rivers throwing to Watkins, woods, Harvin, Clay and McCoy is way different than having his skill players, two good ones instead of five.

[Mr. WEO]

You and I think exactly the same about Wilson. I'm just saying that Rivers throwing to Watkins, woods, Harvin, Clay and McCoy is way different than having his skill players, two good ones instead of five.

 

Rivers hasn't lacked for passing targets. He's thrown for over 4000 yards every season as the starter but 2. He has been a top 10 passer every season. He led the league in 2010 (no playoff year). He's also top 10 in ints most years...

 

In the Bills ground and pound O, doesn't matter how many targets.

 

Again, you can have him.

[Kelly the Dog]

 

Rivers hasn't lacked for passing targets. He's thrown for over 4000 yards every season as the starter but 2. He has been a top 10 passer every season. He led the league in 2010 (no playoff year). He's also top 10 in ints most years...

 

In the Bills ground and pound O, doesn't matter how many targets.

 

Again, you can have him.

That just shows how good he is. He has weak targets and puts up great numbers.

[Mr. WEO]

That just shows how good he is. He has weak targets and puts up great numbers.

 

Yeah...that must be it!

 

Antonio Gates, Tomlinosn and Vince Jackson would be sad to hear they are/were "weak targets" for the overachieving Phil Rivers.

[Kelly the Dog]

 

Yeah...that must be it!

 

Antonio Gates, Tomlinosn and Vince Jackson would be sad to hear they are/were "weak targets" for the overachieving Phil Rivers.

You just proved my case. Thanks. In eleven years he has had two good targets, and Jackson was only good in about 4 of the 11.

[Jauronimo]

You just proved my case. Thanks. In eleven years he has had two good targets, and Jackson was only good in about 4 of the 11.

WEO is lost and confused without his mentor, #34 fan. Its as plain as Brad Smiff is dumb.

[Mr. WEO]

You just proved my case. Thanks. In eleven years he has had two good targets, and Jackson was only good in about 4 of the 11.

 

Come on Kelly! He averages, what...4200 a year? You need other than bad targets to do that. Look he's a regular season dynamo--who cares? Wilson has already bested him in 3 years vs. 11.

 

Again, you can have him.

 

WEO is lost and confused without his mentor, #34 fan. Its as plain as Brad Smiff is dumb.

 

Oh Jauronimo...you used to cut with a surgeon's skill.

 

But....any and all are welcome on "WEO Island".

[Kelly the Dog]

 

Come on Kelly! He averages, what...4200 a year? You need other than bad targets to do that. Look he's a regular season dynamo--who cares? Wilson has already bested him in 3 years vs. 11.

 

Name all these other great targets that he has had.

[Mr. WEO]

Name all these other great targets that he has had.

 

QBs aren't always stacked with "great targets"? How many did Jim Kelly have? How about Brady for his career?

 

 

Look, Rivers had a top 5 offense (points scored) every year his first 6 years---and you claim he had little to work with? That makes no sense. And he still went 3-4 in his first 7 seasons in the playoffs.

 

Oh, and Sproles was no slouch as a target either....better than McCoy. Harvin isn't much better than Floyd.

[Kelly the Dog]

 

QBs aren't always stacked with "great targets"? How many did Jim Kelly have? How about Brady for his career?

 

They rarely are. That's the point!

Rivers put up pretty great numbers with crappy targets. Malcom Floyd is a great target? Come on. To think that Rivers wouldn't be even better than he has been throwing to Watkins, Woods, Harvin, Clay and McCoy and make the Bills a serious contender simply because he wasn't good in the playoffs with crappy targets is foolish IMO.

[Mr. WEO]

They rarely are. That's the point!

Rivers put up pretty great numbers with crappy targets. Malcom Floyd is a great target? Come on. To think that Rivers wouldn't be even better than he has been throwing to Watkins, Woods, Harvin, Clay and McCoy and make the Bills a serious contender simply because he wasn't good in the playoffs with crappy targets is foolish IMO.

 

No, Floyd isn't a great WR. Didn't say that--said he's not much different than Harvin. And Rivers has had better TE and RB targets.

 

Look, he had the #1 offense and still no playoffs. Did he need a "1+" offense? His league leading offense and top passing game during the regular season suddenly reverted to "crappy targets" in the playoffs? Come on! That's ridiculous.

[YoloinOhio]

@NFL: Contract talks between @DangeRussWilson, @Seahawks to end at start of camp (via @RapSheet): http://t.co/XTH6Ffu5YIhttp://t.co/L7TcUwRG1o