Out of the 4 qbs listed below who would you want as your starter and why?

Exactly how I'd rank it.

 

I already gave you my reasons. BTW, Trint Dilfer, Brad Johnson and Mark Rypien are SB-winning QBs.

 

I want Dan Marino.......

 

Those are three guys who definitely come up when I'm thinking about Wilson. Such similar games.

 

Seriously some people act as if we would have won a Super Bowl last year if you replace Tannehill with Wilson. lol Wilson is not even the best player on his offense. He is probably fourth behind Harvin, Lynch and Okung.

You replace Wilson with Alex Smith and they still win the Super Bowl last year. Is Alex Smith an elite quarterback too? He has been in a NFC championship game before.

 

Stop being disingenuous. I never said they played the same game (either as Wilson or each other), I was pointing out that winning a SB doesn't automatically make you a great QB. Wilson has played well, but I don't think his game would translate to a team that lacked the power running game and overpowering defense that Seattle has.

 

He's either been told not to, or he's too scared of getting hit to do it.

 

This is a ridiculous post.

The fact is that every single QB in the NFL. college, and even high school play in a system established by the head coach and the rest of the coaching staff.

Each QB is expected to adapt his game to the system installed by the coaching staff. The better QB's are able to do this and the below average QB's don't have the ability to adjust.

All three of these QB's would be able to play in any offensive scheme in the NFL and enjoy success because they happen to be very good QB's in the NFL.

As far as Wilson is concerned.

He showed in college that he could play in one system at NC State and have success, as well as at Wisconsin, where he also had great success.

Other than Luck, I would take him over any other young QB in the NFL and feel very fortunate that he was the QB of my team.

He plays within the system the Seahawks have established as their offense and that is exactly what he is suppose to do. If the Seahawks offense called for him to pass the ball more often and run less, I have no doubt he would be one of the leading passers in the NFL and the Seahawks would still be the best team in the NFL.

 

Have you watched any of his college highlights? I cant believe what so ever hes afraid of getting hit....

 

Russell Wilson is a Drew Brees clone IMO. Is Drew Brees dependent on a great running game? Just because Seattle has a great running game, doesnt mean thats why Russel Wilson is such a good QB. That game winning drive yesterday.....was Wilson.

 

Preposterous balderdash.

 

If Wilson played exactly the same but was 3" taller nobody would be doubting him.

 

Id probably say Wilson above everyone else. the other three have shown good and limitations as well...

So Id say Wilson first right now obviously because hes had the ultimate success. Whether hes a product of the system or not he is the reason the system is succeeding. Hes executing and making it work. Last year he might have had the least talented WR core/TE's in the league with Harvin out. All he did was win a SB and elevate the players around him which is something I havent seen the other three players listed do consistently.

Cousins has shown flashes of being excellent in limited time. Hes had a few stinkers and so-so games in there as well. Foles is strictly a system QB. I dont see him as a guy who is a franchise or close to pro bowl QB. I do see him as a guy who can succeed in certain situations.

Tannehill is the most confounding of the group. The talent is there imo. I still think eventually he will be a good QB. I think the coaching staff and systems around havent fit him so far. Losing Sherman helps him but its only been three games and not giving him time to adjust to the change is a mistake. Last year Joe Philbin wanted a new LT. He was told by Jeff Ireland that his LT was fine. The OL was an unmitigated disaster and allowed 58 sacks. Thats how you ruin a QB. Joe Philbin, Mike Sherman are/were absolute jokes. Any success the team has imo, is in spite of them, not because of them. I reserve judgement on Bill Lazor. Not for nothing though, Eli Manning is a 2x SB winner and he takes longer then 3 games to adjust to a new offense as well. Ben Roethlisberger took longer then 3 games to adjust to Todd Haley too as well.

 

Hmm I really respect your opinion on players around the league but I really don't see how you can watch Foles and Wilson and think Wilson is better.

Foles actually makes reads, takes chances, hits covered receivers quite often, finds his second and third reads consistently.

Wilson on the other hand is treated like a college QB in their system. A lot of one read throws, cutting the field in half, bootleg dump offs, so on.

I wish I saw what others do in Wilson. Like him as a person and think he's a very good QB. I just can't put him into the elite category.

 

And he's not being told to stand there.

 

You really think I care how tall he is. I care that he doesn't ever make reads.

 

Sorry I meant to say isn't any more than a good QB. Posting at my work frommy phone ddoesn't always go well.

 

I dont see Wilson as elite like Brady, Brees, Peyton but he gets it done. Wilson doesnt have the elite arm talent that foles does to make distance throws but he is more accurate and his touch and ball placement are elite. Hes a really good player who reminds me of Rich Gannon (as a Raider) just faster.

What bothers me about Foles is his intermediate and deep ball. The consistency isnt there. To be honest, hes no better then Tannehill in his consistency, he just has betetr coaches and systems around him. And Shady Mccoy. He also struggles when hes not blitzed. Week 1 vs Jacksonville he was sacked 5x when not blitzed and 0 times when he wasnt. That speaks to a lack of awareness and mental clock.

 

Make up your mind. Earlier in this thread you said he is not a very good QB. In another thread, I recall you said he was mediocre, other than his legs.

 

I've noticed that too, he does seem to flip and flop around.

 

It makes me wonder if you actually ever watch any games the Seahawks play, if you only see Wilson as a one dimensional player.

I have nothing against Foles or Cousins, but I would take Wilson over either of these QB's and feel a whole lot better about the future of the Dolphins with him as our QB.

Wilson has now outplayed Peyton Manning the last two times their teams have played and Manning is only one of the greatest QB's in the history of the NFL.

 

Throwing stuff at the wall. IMO, there's nothing wrong with preferring Foles or even Cousins, but arguments like those thrown around about Wilson don't make any sense, especially with Game Rewind available so that anybody and everybody can check any game for themselves, and even check out all-22 if so inclined.

The Seahawks have some designed rollouts, it's true. God forbid the Dolphins tried anything like that. The QB purists would be spinning in their graves, but they're not quite dead yet, apparently. I kid. Seriously, though, a coaching staff that takes advantage of the talent at its disposal is something only Dolphin fans who are older can remember. I guess I can't blame people for being bitter about other teams doing things right.

The Seahawks are also really good at running standard, in-the-pocket pass plays that **GASP** make the QB read the whole field before and after the snap. Here is a decent write-up on a Seahawks site that goes into depth on one pass play in particular. The reads on the play in question are not particularly complicated for the NFL, but they're also not showing a guy who has the game dumbed down for him.

Note the physical ability. It's not something we Dolphin fans see all that much, but Wilson often puts the ball right where it needs to be so that only his receiver can get it. It's sometimes called "throwing a receiver open," and I'd weep if Tannehill could ever learn to do it while still in Miami.

 

To be fair to Alex44, he has a point. Seattle does manage Wilson's game. That doesn't mean he can't do more things. He just hasn't been asked to.

 

I'm not sure, nothing I guess.

But I'd sure like to see how many teams hold the Broncos to 3 points through 3 quarters this season.

 

If you say so, Coach Shula.

Thanks for that bit of inspired genius, but the fact is, when Foles was being coached by someone other than Kelly, he didn't show the same level of competency he does now. As for Wilson, I didn't say he was a system QB, I said he's doing as well as he is because he's on a team with a great running game and a great defense. But I guess trying to read what I actually wrote is too much effort, so why not just ASSume you knew what I meant?

 

That's kind of the point though, isn't it? He isn't asked to do much, relatively speaking.

Wilson has his fair share of games like the ones Tannehill has had this season and they never end in blowout losses like KC and Buffalo. They look more like the NE game where the defense and running game is so good that people hardly even notice that the QB play was just ordinary.

 

Perhaps Foles wasn't given the same opportunity to play as a rookie and that is why he didn't appear to have the same level of competency as he has with Kelly. Reid was a supporter of Vick and I don't think he ever felt Foles was ready to replace Vick as the permanent starter during Foles rookie season.

Now that Foles and Wilson have both proved that they are quality starting QB's in the NFL. I think they could play on any team in the NFL and the teams would be better simply by having either of these QB's as their starter.

Obviously Wilson being on the Seahawks is a benefit to him being a Super Bowl winning QB, but you put him on any other quality team in the NFL and I think he could lead that team to the playoffs . I think he is an excellent passer and if the Seahawks were to lose their running game because of injuries to the RB's, I have no doubt he could win plenty of games with his arm.

He also doesn't make mental errors and he has a far better understanding of the game than most young QB's, especially Tannehill.

The Seahawks drafted him in the middle rounds because they expected him to sit behind Matt Flynn for a season or two and they hoped he would eventually become the starter after a few years. Instead he came in and won the starting job immediately as a rookie.

Unlike QB's who are drafted in the first round and are given the starting job because of their draft position, Wilson actually came in as a rookie and he won the job because he was the best QB in camp.

If you think the only reason Wilson is as effective as he is because the Seahawks have a decent running game and a solid defense, so be it. All I know is I would trade Tannehill and our next two #1 draft picks for him and think we got a great deal if the Seahawks would make this trade.

Unfortunately I don't think the Seahawks would have any interest in this trade, even if it was offered to them. In fact I don't think the Seahawks would trade Wilson for any QB in the NFL, except perhaps Luck and I even doubt they would make that trade.

 

I'd take any of the three that aren't named Tannehill, because they know how to throw accurate passes. They also don't have 10-20% of their passes tipped because they telegraph the throw either, which would really help our offense.

 

Seattle has a pretty good defense.

 

That's possible, but I can only go by what I saw, not what I might have seen otherwise. I think Foles' talents are best suited to Kelly's system and wouldn't necessarily translate to other offensive systems.

I don't think Wilson could take this team to the playoffs. I think he'd do far better than Tannehill, but I think the way this offense is built, we need a guy with a quick release and downfield accuracy. I think Cousins is the best for this system. Doesn't matter, it's a what-if question, not reality. That's just my opinion. Shame people here feel so personal about their feelings on a QB's skills that they think they MUST be right.

 

Wilson no doubt. Watched that guy play at NC State. Success follows that dude everywhere.

 

Hindsight is pointless.

I'll say this... Were I the owner, I would have made damn sure we sucked for Luck.

I know some people are down on him right now. But they're wrong.

 

And if I'd had Wilson sitting there for me in the second round I would have taken him.. or, more accurately, my GM Deej would have selected him.

 

STILL with this nonsense?!!! Why do people persist on not giving credit where credit's due?

Wilson is 7-0 against Manning, Brady, Brees, and Rodgers!!! SEVEN AND ZERO!!

Did you not watch him effortlessly move the ball down Denver's throat in OT yesterday with Seattle's defense not even having to put its helmet on? Manning didn't even have a chance to win the game, and you know why?... it's because WILSON had already taken it, just as he's done repeatedly when Seattle needs it.

Wilson is not the friggin' Mark Sanchez of Seattle who's dependent on everything. The '09 Jets had the #1 scoring Defense AND the #1 rushing offense, so why did they only win 9 games while Wilson won 13 and a Super Bowl and saw much greater offensive production?

Wilson led Seattle's offense to 26.1 points per game last year and the NFL's 5th best Points Per Drive with 2.29 [more than Brees, Brady, Luck, and Chip Kelly's Eagles], and he did it behind one of the worst offensive lines in the league, a lackluster ground game, and one of the worst receiving units in the league. That's pretty far from being "dependent on a stellar defense", and it's made all the more impressive by the fact Seattle's offense had zero padded stats from trailing in garbage time, had next to no padded stats from forced shootouts.

And that "great running game" you say Russell is "very much dependent on"? It ranked 22nd in yards, 23rd in average [3.99], and 17th in TDs last year when rightfully omitting Wilson's contribution. So there goes two more false assumptions.

Wilson accounted for 27 touchdowns and 4k yards on his own while throwing just 10 interceptions. Those are barebones stats. NOTHING was padded while trailing in garbage time. Next to nothing padded during forced shootouts. All of it behind the WORST pass protection in the NFL. On top of that, Seattle's offense saw 7 drives end in a kneel [with 5 of those occurring inside the opponent 40 yard line where it could've easily been another score], 5 more drives spent blatantly running out the clock [with 1 of these ending in opponent territory], and 8 more drives featuring Seattle's backup QB in mop up duty. That's 20 drives Wilson couldn't pad his stats with, and at 2.29 pts per drive, that's fairly significant. He threw and ran the ball 503 times. You realize those 503 attempts still involve execution, decision-making, and so on, yes? NFL defenses don't just hand him free passes while shouting Happy Birthday. Wilson's own defense doesn't grant him a special ability to not make mistakes. He still has to not make them, and the last I checked, not making mistakes is a critical part of being a successful NFL QB.


Seattle doesn't run the ball because they distrust Wilson; they run it b/c Pete Carroll WANTS TO, and b/c Seattle's offensive line was an open flood gate in pass protection, and b/c that's what teams with 4th quarter leads do. Seattle doesn't strive for great defensive play because they don't trust Wilson to score; they strive for Great D because they simply LOVE GREAT D. These are staples of Seattle's philosophy, and I believe it's been damn successful for them, but you pretend like it's an act of desperation in order to mask a lousy QB. Please, tell me, why would Pete Carroll or any coach need or want to attempt more passes than required if his defense and ground game are doing their jobs?

Peyton Manning turned the ball over on 2.3% of his drop backs last year.
Marshawn Lynch turned the ball over 0.3% of his rush attempts last year.
So with a lead in the 4th quarter and a strong defense behind at your back, you tell me whose hands the ball should be in.

In 2007, when the Colts had the #1 scoring defense [16.4 ppg], Manning notched just 3 games of 300 yards. In the 8 games Indy rushed for 100+, only once did Manning throw for more than 290 yards; the other 7 averaged 242 [the equivalent of 3,872 for a season]. In the 7 wins that saw Indy's D allow 14 pts or less, Manning threw 12 TDs [the equivalent of 27 for a season]. Hmph, this theme and these stats from a 31 year old Peyton Manning look similar to what we saw from Wilson last year.

 

Wut? Quick release and downfield accuracy IS Russell Wilson, as is the ability to handle the added pass rush pressure that's eaten up Tannehill. Do you even watch Wilson play because it doesn't seem like it WADR. How do you know WHAT Cousins is after just 5 NFL starts and a 1-4 record the past 35 games? The best fit for the system is the guy who has already established himself as a winner, a Super Bowl winner no less, has shown he can handle big games, has shown he consistently makes great decisions, and has shown he can carry his team when it needs to be carried. Wilson has this in spades; meanwhile we're still waiting to see what cards Cousins is truly holding even though he's flashed a little promise.

 

Damn.

Tried to post "In before Todd blows up the thread with 871 words on how beautiful Russell Wilson is."

Just missed the cutoff.

 

No, the Seahawks' defense is 7-0 against them. Wilson is 7-0 against the defenses of the Broncos, Pats, Saints and Packers.

 

Wilson can handle certain pressures---he's very mobile and not afraid to use his legs. It depends on where the rush comes from though.
Also, and this is just what I've seen, he's more accurate downfield when he rolls out. When he has to throw from the pocket, the long passes don't seem to be as accurate. Quick release? We must be watching a different QB...I haven't noticed him to have any more of a quick release than the average QB.