All Forums | NFL Betting

R. Wilson is on drugs....

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 5003
Posts: 53
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 12243
Posted: #26

Quote Originally Posted by suuma:



Than you will probably go 2-0. But your statements are flat out wrong. Tell me any games in which Russell Wilson really struggled or had an off-game and Marshawn Lynch carried the Seahawks to a win. Don't waste your time, you will have a hard time finding any games.

Some cold hard facts for everyone who thinks Marshawn Lynch is running this offense:

The Seahawks faced two of the top-5 run-defending teams in terms of ypc in 2014: Denver and Philadelphia. Lynch was held to 3.4 & 3.7 ypc - much less than his season average of 4.7 ypc. How did they manage to win? Russell Wilson was a combined 46/71 (64.8%) for 7.04 net-YPPA and 4 TD on 1 INT. And remember how good the Denver pass defense was.

The Seahawks faced five of the top-5 run-defending teams in terms of ypc in 2013: Arizona (2x), St. Louis (2x) and the Giants. Marshawn Lynch was held to 3.9, 4.3, 4.3, 2.9 and 2.9 ypc. His season average was 4.2. So in three of those games he was held to around his average (Seahawks went 2-1) and in two of those games he posted high school numbers (Seahawks went 2-0). Three of those five opponents (Arizona 2x and Giants) also had top-6 passing defenses in 2013.

How did the Seahawks manage to win those 4 games DESPITE Russell Wilson getting sacked 18 times for a loss of 117 yards ????

He still went 61/97 (62.9%) for 6.5 net-YPPA for 7 TD and 1 INT.

In 2014, the Seahawks also faced two of the worst run-defenses: Kansas City & San Diego. They went 0-2. Two of their 4 regular season losses happened against two of the worst run defenses. How is this even possible when you just have to hand the ball to Marshawn Lynch??? It was possible because Philip Rivers torched them through the air and the Chiefs defended the pass very well. Pass offense and pass defense, period.

People read the words beast and mode in headlines over the season and think he is the star of the Seahawks offense. He makes his yardage against bad rushing defenses and even this is not enough because running means almost nothing to win in this league.

 

Do you think it might be some coincidence that in those game you mentioned Lynch had his lowest rushing totals, that Wilson had his highest passing totals and attempts???

Like maybe, just maybe, the defense was stacking the run, allowing the pass game to be a bit easier??

Just an idea

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 4455
Posted: #27
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:

 

Do you think it might be some coincidence that in those game you mentioned Lynch had his lowest rushing totals, that Wilson had his highest passing totals and attempts???

Like maybe, just maybe, the defense was stacking the run, allowing the pass game to be a bit easier??

Just an idea



You don't get the math. I'm not talking about total numbers, I am always talking about yards per attempt.

It doesn't matter how many attempts you have, it's about gaining a certain amount of yards per attempt. You can have 100 attempts per game, but if you average just 3.3 yards per attempt, you won't have many first downs and you won't score much.

Neither Wilson had his highest passing totals, nor did Lynch have his lowest rushing totals in those games. It's about yards per attempt. In those two games against Denver and Philly, the Seahawks owned the time of possession for 38 and 42 minutes, so they logically had a decent amount of attempts in those games. Lynch had 26 and 23 carries in those games.

I watched both games against the Broncos and Eagles in 2014. Both teams don't need to stack the box because they already have really good front sevens and a good run defense, that's why I picked up these ones. Furthermore the Broncos had one heck of a pass coverage, they really didn't allow the passing game to be much easier.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 4455
Posted: #28
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:

Exactly....when you have to score 13 points to win games, its very easy to have the record he has...

The game plan for Wilson is simple, don't turn the ball over, run the ball, let the defense put you in great field position with 3 and outs or turnovers, and score 2 tds a game if that...

75% of the QBS in the NFL today, if they had been on Seattle the last 3 years could have done what Wilson has done



Seahawks scoring offense since Russell Wilson is the starter:

#9 25.8
#8 25.7
#9 25.2

But hey, they just need to score 13 points to win games. They beat out the Indianapolis Colts in 2012 and 2013. And don't tell me it's about the running game - Andrew Luck had no running game in 2014 and they averaged 27.1 points per game - the first year he averaged more than 7 yards per pass attempt. What a coincidence...
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 4455
Posted: #29
Quote Originally Posted by usarmy69-71:

you cannot give a guy all that money when he only throws around 15 passes a game Wilson is about average if lynch isn't there. hes the one that makes Wilson good.remember seattle might be 0-2 the beginning of year--stl--gb.


1. He threw 28.1 passes per game in 2014, not 15.

2. Tony Romo threw just one more time per game - 29.2. So what? It's about the efficiency on a single down.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 12243
Posted: #30

Quote Originally Posted by suuma:



Seahawks scoring offense since Russell Wilson is the starter:

#9 25.8
#8 25.7
#9 25.2

But hey, they just need to score 13 points to win games. They beat out the Indianapolis Colts in 2012 and 2013. And don't tell me it's about the running game - Andrew Luck had no running game in 2014 and they averaged 27.1 points per game - the first year he averaged more than 7 yards per pass attempt. What a coincidence...

Yes, those are Top 10 ppg for offense, but that still doesn't take away how much of an advantage he has playing with that defense...

Since you obviously think youre a numbers and stats guy....why don't you take a long at the average starting field position, and which team has the shortest average yards per scoring drive in the NFL since Wilson has been at QB

Do you think its a coincidence its Seattle

When your DEFENSE forces 3 and outs, and turnovers like they do...its MUCH easier to score when youre starting at midfield or the other teams side of the field

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 37007
Posted: #31
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:

Yes, those are Top 10 ppg for offense, but that still doesn't take away how much of an advantage he has playing with that defense...

Since you obviously think youre a numbers and stats guy....why don't you take a long at the average starting field position, and which team has the shortest average yards per scoring drive in the NFL since Wilson has been at QB

Do you think its a coincidence its Seattle

When your DEFENSE forces 3 and outs, and turnovers like they do...its MUCH easier to score when youre starting at midfield or the other teams side of the field

What yard line was their avg starting position........their own 30? 31?

 There's only about 5-6 yards of difference between the top team & the bottom, so I don't see where they had a massive advantage.

 I don't understand why people want so badly to discredit Wilson. The guy does what he does........his #'s speak for themselves. It doesn't matter if he's not a "pure, pocket passer".......who cares? He's a play maker.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 4455
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:

Yes, those are Top 10 ppg for offense, but that still doesn't take away how much of an advantage he has playing with that defense...

Since you obviously think youre a numbers and stats guy....why don't you take a long at the average starting field position, and which team has the shortest average yards per scoring drive in the NFL since Wilson has been at QB

Do you think its a coincidence its Seattle

When your DEFENSE forces 3 and outs, and turnovers like they do...its MUCH easier to score when youre starting at midfield or the other teams side of the field



Midfield?

The average Seattle starting field position since 2012, their rank and in brackets their advantage against the NFL's average:

28.9 yard line #9 (+1.37)
31.28 yard line #3 (+3.43)
30.16 yard line #4 (+2.53)

Let's take the 2014 number: they had a better starting field position of 2.53 yards than the average team. Do you really think that 2.53 yards make any significant difference in the long run?

A few examples:

New Orleans had the 2nd-worst starting field position in 2012, but they finished 3rd in ppg.

Steelers had the 3rd-worst starting field position in 2014, but they finished 7th in ppg.

Bills had the 3rd-best starting field position in 2014 (strong defense), but they finished 18th in ppg.

Do you see any pattern? Maybe passing offense?

You can spin it as much as you want, at the end you are just hating on Wilson and his top-10 passing offense he has been running with a bad receiving corps and a shaky o-line due to his fantastic play action ability. And your reasoning is flawed.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2014
Posts: 1138
Posted: #33
LetsGoPack I usually agree with a lot you have to say, but you look pretty ignorant in this thread. You're dead wrong here. I think you're still a little bit bitter about the NFC Championship, which I understand. It was a heart-breaker for the Packers.
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2003
Posts: 56708
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:



1. He threw 28.1 passes per game in 2014, not 15.

2. Tony Romo threw just one more time per game - 29.2. So what? It's about the efficiency on a single down.

Really...you cannot say general stuff like that and expect to not have retorts.

Wilson averaged 7.7 ypa and his TD average was 4.4% and his passer rating was 95.

Romo had 8.5 ypa, a 7.8% TD average, a 113 passer rating

Rodgers had a 8.4 ypa, 7.3% TD average and a 112 passer rating

Manning who really is captain checkdown had 7.9 ypa, 6.5% TD average and 101 passer rating

The others do not have the defense that Wilson has, he really is not worthy of comparing to the real top QB's in the league


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 4455
Posted: #35
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:


Really...you cannot say general stuff like that and expect to not have retorts.

Wilson averaged 7.7 ypa and his TD average was 4.4% and his passer rating was 95.

Romo had 8.5 ypa, a 7.8% TD average, a 113 passer rating

Rodgers had a 8.4 ypa, 7.3% TD average and a 112 passer rating

Manning who really is captain checkdown had 7.9 ypa, 6.5% TD average and 101 passer rating

The others do not have the defense that Wilson has, he really is not worthy of comparing to the real top QB's in the league




The others also do not have the offensive line and receiving corps that Wilson has.

But I never compared him to Romo, Rodgers & Manning. I just said that it doesn't matter whether you attempt 28 or 38 passing attempts per game as long as you are efficient on a single down.

The ypa-numbers you posted are one-dimensional numbers. Those don't represent what happens on the field. You have to add the losses by sack yards.

2014:

Dallas 8.0 YPPA #1
Green Bay 7.8 YPPA #2
Denver 7.4 YPPA #4
Seattle 7.3 YPPA #7

2013:

Denver 8.1 YPPA #1
Seattle 7.6 YPPA #4
Green Bay 7.4 YPPA #6
Dallas 6.7 YPPA #13

2012:

Denver 7.6 YPPA #2
Seattle 7.6 YPPA #3
Green Bay 7.2 YPPA #9
Dallas 7.2 YPPA #10


The truth is, the Seahawks have had a top-10 passing attack in each of the three seasons, especially during the first two seasons. You can spin it like you want, it's a fact. Whether you take YPPA or the efficiency ranking by PFF.

I don't say he is a better QB than Romo, Rodgers or Manning. But what he makes with that pass protection and receiving corps is outstanding.




 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 3567
Posted: #36
I agree with the fact he doesn't deserve to be the highest paid player in the nfl..hell he should be no where close.

Not gonna go deep into this and look for stats, however some things i've noticed.

Seattle has a Run o-line and a based run smash mouth football (run it)

-Teams play into that and run a 8 and even 9 man box leaving single coverage with sometimes 0 help over the top.

Now any wr will break free from coverage when given time, and when you run a PA or bootleg or even have lynch and the FB in protection it's easy throws.

RW has athleticism and speed which causes teams to play a QB spy which means no over the top (safety help) and that's because of RW.


Now in regards to qualifying him as a great QB, I always say let him and Andrew luck switch teams the last 2 years (yes different built teams/systems etc..)

but wilson wouldn't make the playoff's and luck would have the same result as RW with seattle and TBH probably win the 2nd SB.

In a situation where the QB is the focal point of the team and your throwing/running a 70/30 ratio RW wouldn't be successful and that's where you have the GREAT qb's manning/brady/brees/rogers
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 4455
Posted: #37
And if you want to talk QB-isolated numbers, why not saying anything about 2012 and 2013 ?! Stats from ESPN:

2013:

Wilson: 8.25 YPA / 6.39 TD% / Rating 101.2
Rodgers: 8.75 YPA / 5.86 TD% / 104.9
Romo: 7.16 YPA / 5.79 TD% / 96.7
Manning: 8.31 YPA / 8.35 TD% / 115.1

2012:

Wilson: 7.93 YPA / 6.62 TD% / Rating 100.0
Rodgers: 7.78 YPA / 7.07 TD% / 108.0
Romo: 7.57 YPA / 4.3 TD% / 90.5
Manning: 7.99 / 6.3 TD% / 105.8


That isn't really far away, is it?

In 2014, Romo, Manning & Rodgers obviously had a way better pass protection than Russell Wilson. His o-line was always questionable but with Unger missing 10 (?!) games last season, it was even worse. And yet he did a very good job.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 4455
Posted: #38
Quote Originally Posted by Unplug:

I agree with the fact he doesn't deserve to be the highest paid player in the nfl..hell he should be no where close.

Not gonna go deep into this and look for stats, however some things i've noticed.

Seattle has a Run o-line and a based run smash mouth football (run it)

-Teams play into that and run a 8 and even 9 man box leaving single coverage with sometimes 0 help over the top.

Now any wr will break free from coverage when given time, and when you run a PA or bootleg or even have lynch and the FB in protection it's easy throws.

RW has athleticism and speed which causes teams to play a QB spy which means no over the top (safety help) and that's because of RW.


Now in regards to qualifying him as a great QB, I always say let him and Andrew luck switch teams the last 2 years (yes different built teams/systems etc..)

but wilson wouldn't make the playoff's and luck would have the same result as RW with seattle and TBH probably win the 2nd SB.

In a situation where the QB is the focal point of the team and your throwing/running a 70/30 ratio RW wouldn't be successful and that's where you have the GREAT qb's manning/brady/brees/rogers




Andrew Luck behind that offensive line in 2014 and receivers like Ricardo Lockette, Chris Matthews & Jermaine Kearse? He would have gotten sacked four times per game.

He was miles away from beating the Patriots with the Colts, but he would have won the 2nd Super Bowl with a worse o-line and receiving corps? Come on..

Btw, Andrew Luck has had a throwing/running ratio of 61/39 in his career.
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2003
Posts: 56708
Posted: #39
Seattle's line is questionable?


When your job is to not make mistakes and run a balanced offense, there is no way you can determine how great of an individual player Wilson is until his skills are tested in difficult situations.

I get to see him play because we are in the same division and all that and I dont think Wilson is a top QB, I think he is a good game manager and semi-dynamic but as a position player, a real true QB I think he could be replaced by many other players and the results would be similar.

The team is good and he is a beneficiary of a good team, lets see him play on a team with a crappy defense or lack of a good running back..
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 6630
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:

Seattle's line is questionable?


When your job is to not make mistakes and run a balanced offense, there is no way you can determine how great of an individual player Wilson is until his skills are tested in difficult situations.

I get to see him play because we are in the same division and all that and I dont think Wilson is a top QB, I think he is a good game manager and semi-dynamic but as a position player, a real true QB I think he could be replaced by many other players and the results would be similar.

The team is good and he is a beneficiary of a good team, lets see him play on a team with a crappy defense or lack of a good running back..

While I will agree he's not yet being among the best, but he's definitely not average at best like the OP suggested. In terms of salary, he doesn't deserved to the highest paid either but it's more due to the state of league and it won't be for long. Besides, there plenty of QBs don't deserve what they got.

Forget about the numbers for a moment, he's calm under pressure, mature beyond his years and he doesn't look to run first in first sight of trouble. Didn't he also lose his top 2 wideouts last year?

Sure, he needs to prove himself to be an elite QB but a lot of people are quick to credit all the success on everything else but him. I would say he's done pretty good so far.

 

 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2003
Posts: 56708
Posted: #41
Who wouldnt be calm with a great running game, decent OL and a great defense?

He isnt afraid of getting cracked every play like some QB's are.

I also do not buy the receivers line...every single team in the league has receivers that are elite..every receiver to make it there are 20 who wish they had the skills to be in their position.

Some of the best all time QB's make ANY receiver look better than they are...while some mediocre QB's make receivers look less than they are.

Look at Arizona...was Fitz the top player in the league and elite or was he made elite by the QB who worked with him during that time? Fitz has been average since Warner left..I think a great QB can make receivers look better than they are. Brady has made how many receivers look so good, Manning and Rodgers the same...of course Warner and Favre and most all solid QB's are that way. I do not consider Wilson to be the kind of QB that makes a no-name into a pro-bowl receiver...in fact I think he makes previously awesome elite receivers look less than they were when they played with a higher level QB...
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2006
Posts: 19693
Posted: #42
The receiving corp Wilson has...............that is funny!
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 4364
Posted: #43
Quote Originally Posted by XenAndWin:

I hope they pay him a king's ransom, so that
team can go back into obscurity where it belongs.

Kinda like the Niners have been until Harbaugh showed up......now back into your hole d bag
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 37007
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:

Who wouldnt be calm with a great running game, decent OL and a great defense?

He isnt afraid of getting cracked every play like some QB's are.

I also do not buy the receivers line...every single team in the league has receivers that are elite..every receiver to make it there are 20 who wish they had the skills to be in their position.

Some of the best all time QB's make ANY receiver look better than they are...while some mediocre QB's make receivers look less than they are.

Look at Arizona...was Fitz the top player in the league and elite or was he made elite by the QB who worked with him during that time? Fitz has been average since Warner left..I think a great QB can make receivers look better than they are. Brady has made how many receivers look so good, Manning and Rodgers the same...of course Warner and Favre and most all solid QB's are that way. I do not consider Wilson to be the kind of QB that makes a no-name into a pro-bowl receiver...in fact I think he makes previously awesome elite receivers look less than they were when they played with a higher level QB...
Wow.......I consider you a level headed guy, wall........but that's just silly. What "previously awesome"receivers has Seattle had in the L10 years, much less the L3? Harvin? Please......
 I can understand your frustration with AZ going in the toilet after CP went down........but, serious question, would you want Palmer over Wilson right now? My guess is you'll try to make a case for Palmer.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 3387
Posted: #45
he's one of the best athletes, give your head a shake. if not for a bad timeout he would have been in the superbowl his first 3 seasons. you dont get there without that kind of leadership. u think rodgers or brady is better? neither can run for crap which is what most sports are based on. not in and out of rehab, or appealing for cheating for 20 years. the man is a workhorse. You, sir, are dumb
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 3387
Posted: #46
oh ya and check out his rushing stats. DEERRRRRPPP
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2003
Posts: 56708
Posted: #47
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:

Wow.......I consider you a level headed guy, wall........but that's just silly. What "previously awesome"receivers has Seattle had in the L10 years, much less the L3? Harvin? Please......
 I can understand your frustration with AZ going in the toilet after CP went down........but, serious question, would you want Palmer over Wilson right now? My guess is you'll try to make a case for Palmer.

I do not care for Palmer either as you probably already know..Palmer has never taken a team to the elite level based on his abilities alone and he has played on several good teams in the past.

I consider nearly any receiver in the NFL to be capable of being as good as any that are considered elite if they are playing with a high quality QB..that is my point. Look at the top QB's now and in the past..they are able to play with most any receivers and make them look good, and on the flip side a handful of receivers can make a so-so QB look better than they are. I do consider Harvin to be a top receiver. To make it on an NFL roster at nearly any position the player is capable of their position.

Good example of AZ though...as I mentioned about Warner, he put Fitz on the top of the league because of his ability (Warner) and same goes for Boldin and when he retired Fitz has never come close to what he accomplished with Warner as the leader of the offense. You can say the same for any other elite QB..Brady is a great example, he has made a name for many receivers and when those players move to other teams it is difficult to repeat what they did while playing with an elite QB. I dont consider Wilson elite at all. I think he makes good decisions, he is athletic and dynamic but that does not make him an elite QB..and thus he is not deserving of top 5 to top 10 pay. He might get it if Seattle is stupid, but he has not earned it yet. Same goes for several other players like RG3.

Not sold on Wilson at all, in fact I think he would not be able to elevate a bad team say like the Raiders if he were their QB.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2014
Posts: 3387
Posted: #48
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:



Not sold on Wilson at all, in fact I think he would not be able to elevate a bad team say like the Raiders if he were their QB.

rg3 is a walking joke no comparison there. id bet wilson would have ANY team in playoff contention in his 2nd year (if the team was that bad). the man is a legend
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 37007
Posted: #49
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:


I do not care for Palmer either as you probably already know..Palmer has never taken a team to the elite level based on his abilities alone and he has played on several good teams in the past.



Good example of AZ though...as I mentioned about Warner, he put Fitz on the top of the league because of his ability (Warner) and same goes for Boldin and when he retired Fitz has never come close to what he accomplished with Warner as the leader of the offense. You can say the same for any other elite QB..Brady is a great example, he has made a name for many receivers and when those players move to other teams it is difficult to repeat what they did while playing with an elite QB. I dont consider Wilson elite at all. I think he makes good decisions, he is athletic and dynamic but that does not make him an elite QB..and thus he is not deserving of top 5 to top 10 pay. He might get it if Seattle is stupid, but he has not earned it yet. Same goes for several other players like RG3.
I'm not disagreeing with you.......that much. You have your idea of an ideal qb while mine isn't set in stone. There's no way we can judge RW's career so far except that to say he's had great sucess.........& his #'s reflect good play.
 I'll go back to an earlier post in this thread asking, " how could you NOT pay RW at least as much as Newton & Tannyhill got?". There's no amount of debate that will convince me that either of those guys are worth more than Wilson.
 Trust me, I'm not suggesting he get Rodgers money, or that he's the guy I would take over Rodgers, but the Panthers just paid Newton a ton........& I'd take Wilson over Newton any day of the week.
 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2015
Posts: 119
Posted: #50
pay the guy..he deserves it
All Forums | NFL Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.