Broncos very near deal for Colin Kaepernick

[RichNhansom]

Jeez, I guess that team Montana and Young worked with was just average then and had no impact on their success as well.

This is a perfect point. I doubt you would find a single 9er fan that would say this TEAM is as or more talented than the ones Montana and Young played for and I would agree simply because the unlimited number of resources teams had before the cap but you will also never find a 9er fan that thinks Wilson should ever be in the same conversation with those guys even though his to date resume looks much better even with the lessor talent.

Take a hard line Popeye. Is our TEAM superior to your dynasty teams? Or is Wilson just better than Montana and young?

Can't be both unless you view it with rose colored glasses. Remember to factor in all the pieces to your dynasty puzzle.

Imagine what Wilson could do behind some of your dynasty o-lines throwing to guys like Rice. You might have had a couple more super bowl trophies.

 

[Marvin49]

Jeez, I guess that team Montana and Young worked with was just average then and had no impact on their success as well.

This is a perfect point. I doubt you would find a single 9er fan that would say this TEAM is as or more talented than the ones Montana and Young played for and I would agree simply because the unlimited number of resources teams had before the cap but you will also never find a 9er fan that thinks Wilson should ever be in the same conversation with those guys even though his to date resume looks much better even with the lessor talent.

Take a hard line Popeye. Is our TEAM superior to your dynasty teams? Or is Wilson just better than Montana and young?

Can't be both unless you view it with rose colored glasses. Remember to factor in all the pieces to your dynasty puzzle.

Imagine what Wilson could do behind some of your dynasty o-lines throwing to guys like Rice. You might have had a couple more super bowl trophies.

So specifially on is THIS team better than the Montana/Young 49ers and "unlimited resources" of those teams minus the cap.

1) The 49ers under Harbaugh were definitely better than the 80s 49ers DEFENSIVELY. There were some great defenders in the 80's, but as a unit the Harbaugh 49ers were better on D. On offense...not so much. Frank Gore is IMO the best RB in Niner history and I think Staley would start on any Niner team, but at most positions the 80's Niners were better.

2) The "unlimited resources" thing is WAY, WAY played out. Yes...its true...they could pay players whatever they wanted and had a payroll larger than any other NFL team. Thats a granted....but they also played in an era without free agency. All you were doing is paying exporbitant amounts of money to player you drafted, traded for or signed off waivers. If you drafted well, you were set. Players couldn't get away...

...but it wasn't like they were throwing money at free agents NY Yankee style. There were no free agents. Players were stuck with the team that drafted them. The only 49ers championship during the Free Agency Era was '94.

 

[chris98251]

Your missing the point, the comment was that Wilson is a product of the team around him, the counter was wasn't Montana and Young also? Doesn't matter cap or no cap it is about the QB's and how they perform. I didn't see Montana or Young, Manning or Brady play defense, catch passes regularly or block Defenders anymore then Wilson does.

Archie Manning, Dan Marino, Dan Pastorini, all were elite QB's but could not carry their teams by themselves, consider yourself as we do fortunate that we have a front office and coach that has and was able to get the talent to allow the QB on the teams at the time to grow, flourish and become the best they could be.

 

[Marvin49]

Your missing the point, the comment was that Wilson is a product of the team around him, the counter was wasn't Montana and Young also? Doesn't matter cap or no cap it is about the QB's and how they perform. I didn't see Montana or Young, Manning or Brady play defense, catch passes regularly or block Defenders anymore then Wilson does.

Archie Manning, Dan Marino, Dan Pastorini, all were elite QB's but could not carry their teams by themselves, consider yourself as we do fortunate that we have a front office and coach that has and was able to get the talent to allow the QB on the teams at the time to grow, flourish and become the best they could be.

Wasn't missing the point...just commenting on a part of the reply.

Didn't really want to Wade into the "Wilson a product of his team" conversation because you can kinda make that argument in regards to most players.

Is Montana as good without the WCO? Does Aikman hve 3 rings withough Emmitt and the best O-Line in Football? Does Bradshaw have 4 without Swann, Stallworth, and that Defense?

Who the hell knows. Team game.

 

[RichNhansom]

Jeez, I guess that team Montana and Young worked with was just average then and had no impact on their success as well.

This is a perfect point. I doubt you would find a single 9er fan that would say this TEAM is as or more talented than the ones Montana and Young played for and I would agree simply because the unlimited number of resources teams had before the cap but you will also never find a 9er fan that thinks Wilson should ever be in the same conversation with those guys even though his to date resume looks much better even with the lessor talent.

Take a hard line Popeye. Is our TEAM superior to your dynasty teams? Or is Wilson just better than Montana and young?

Can't be both unless you view it with rose colored glasses. Remember to factor in all the pieces to your dynasty puzzle.

Imagine what Wilson could do behind some of your dynasty o-lines throwing to guys like Rice. You might have had a couple more super bowl trophies.

So specifially on is THIS team better than the Montana/Young 49ers and "unlimited resources" of those teams minus the cap.

1) The 49ers under Harbaugh were definitely better than the 80s 49ers DEFENSIVELY. There were some great defenders in the 80's, but as a unit the Harbaugh 49ers were better on D. On offense...not so much. Frank Gore is IMO the best RB in Niner history and I think Staley would start on any Niner team, but at most positions the 80's Niners were better.

2) The "unlimited resources" thing is WAY, WAY played out. Yes...its true...they could pay players whatever they wanted and had a payroll larger than any other NFL team. Thats a granted....but they also played in an era without free agency. All you were doing is paying exporbitant amounts of money to player you drafted, traded for or signed off waivers. If you drafted well, you were set. Players couldn't get away...

...but it wasn't like they were throwing money at free agents NY Yankee style. There were no free agents. Players were stuck with the team that drafted them. The only 49ers championship during the Free Agency Era was '94.

I understand all that Marvin but look at the current Seahawks and imagine if we didn't lose so much talent to FA. How good would this team be. The 9ers didn't have to deal with that.

You also have to consider that just like in baseball now there was a much much smaller field of teams that were either willing or able to compete with what your management was willing to spend so the competition was much less back then as well. It's the main reason dynasties could be formed to begin with. Get a good front office and an owner willing to throw money at it and if things break right you could be dominant for a very long time. Now a days that is much more difficult to do.

But as was pointed out above the post was regarding Wilson vs Montana/Young and how they are revered vs how 9er fans like Popeye above want to pigeon hole Wilson due to the talent around him. If like Popeye says, you can't fairly evaluate Wilson then you also can't evaluate Montana or Young. Neither of those QB's won a title with any other team and neither would be in the HOF without that talent around them.

 

[Marvin49]

Jeez, I guess that team Montana and Young worked with was just average then and had no impact on their success as well.

This is a perfect point. I doubt you would find a single 9er fan that would say this TEAM is as or more talented than the ones Montana and Young played for and I would agree simply because the unlimited number of resources teams had before the cap but you will also never find a 9er fan that thinks Wilson should ever be in the same conversation with those guys even though his to date resume looks much better even with the lessor talent.

Take a hard line Popeye. Is our TEAM superior to your dynasty teams? Or is Wilson just better than Montana and young?

Can't be both unless you view it with rose colored glasses. Remember to factor in all the pieces to your dynasty puzzle.

Imagine what Wilson could do behind some of your dynasty o-lines throwing to guys like Rice. You might have had a couple more super bowl trophies.

So specifially on is THIS team better than the Montana/Young 49ers and "unlimited resources" of those teams minus the cap.

1) The 49ers under Harbaugh were definitely better than the 80s 49ers DEFENSIVELY. There were some great defenders in the 80's, but as a unit the Harbaugh 49ers were better on D. On offense...not so much. Frank Gore is IMO the best RB in Niner history and I think Staley would start on any Niner team, but at most positions the 80's Niners were better.

2) The "unlimited resources" thing is WAY, WAY played out. Yes...its true...they could pay players whatever they wanted and had a payroll larger than any other NFL team. Thats a granted....but they also played in an era without free agency. All you were doing is paying exporbitant amounts of money to player you drafted, traded for or signed off waivers. If you drafted well, you were set. Players couldn't get away...

...but it wasn't like they were throwing money at free agents NY Yankee style. There were no free agents. Players were stuck with the team that drafted them. The only 49ers championship during the Free Agency Era was '94.

I understand all that Marvin but look at the current Seahawks and imagine if we didn't lose so much talent to FA. How good would this team be. The 9ers didn't have to deal with that.

You also have to consider that just like in baseball now there was a much much smaller field of teams that were either willing or able to compete with what your management was willing to spend so the competition was much less back then as well. It's the main reason dynasties could be formed to begin with. Get a good front office and an owner willing to throw money at it and if things break right you could be dominant for a very long time. Now a days that is much more difficult to do.

But as was pointed out above the post was regarding Wilson vs Montana/Young and how they are revered vs how 9er fans like Popeye above want to pigeon hole Wilson due to the talent around him. If like Popeye says, you can't fairly evaluate Wilson then you also can't evaluate Montana or Young. Neither of those QB's won a title with any other team and neither would be in the HOF without that talent around them.

See...ya made a good point about keeping the team together with your first comment but it kinda went off the rails with that second one.

What management was willing to spend was kinda meaningless because players were bound to teams. They couldn't get away. Teams that spent more on players and were willing to spend didn't get any real advantage outside of happy players because the CBA didn't allow for player movement. If you had a cheap owner or a generous one, players were bound to their teams equally as much.

As for Wilson/Montana/Young I can kinda see your point, but Montana/Young were much larger focal points of their respective offenses than Wilson is. That's not to say that he's not good, just sayin those Niner teams were passing teams that could run sometimes, not like Seattle who could run the ball and run tons of play action and put Wilson in favorable positions. That's not an insult to Wilson BTW, just sayin he's in a different boat as were Aikman/Bradshaw (tho his numbersare admittedly better than both those guys).

Now...if you DRAFT a really good team, it was fantastic because those player couldn't leave. That part is certainly true.

 

[Popeyejones]

Take a hard line Popeye. Is our TEAM superior to your dynasty teams? Or is Wilson just better than Montana and young?

:lol:

Didn't see this before so I'll answer it now.

WILSON: As I've said since he came into the league and on this board many times over, I'm a huge fan of Wilson's game because he reminds me more of Steve Young than any other player I've ever seen at the QB position.

That said, I don't think he's there yet, although I think he can get there.

He looked to have gotten there in the last 8 games of the regular season last year (after being pretty mediocre for the first 8 games and before being pretty bad in the playoffs), but I don't think you can make any long term judgements about a player based on 8 games (examples from last year: based on the first 8 games of last year Devonte Freeman is one of the best RBs of all time and Aaron Rodgers is barely starter-worthy).

That said, still love Wilson's game and still think he can get there.

IS THE HAWKS TEAM BETTER THAN THE 9ERS 80s/90s DYNASTY TEAM OR IS WILSON BETTER THAN THOSE TEAMS' QBS?

LOL delusional homer alert.

That era of 9ers teams are talked about as being among the all time greats because over a decade and a half they won 1/3rd of all Super Bowl's that were played. (the point here is that you can take the 9ers out of the equation entirely; to compare the current Seahawks to any of the NFL's historic dynasties is just wildly premature. Great team no doubt, but in conversation already with the all time greats? You have to be a hardcore Hawks homer to take that seriously).

The current era Seahwks won a Super Bowl once three years ago. They're not even clearly the best team of their era (let alone a historic all time great) until Brady retires.

I think they have a better chance than anybody (or at least as good of a chance as anyone) to be the best team of this upcoming window, but you have to be seriously out your gourd to ask a question that takes it as a given that they belong in conversation with any of the all time great dynasties in the NFL, regardless of which team you're talking about.

They can get there, but haven't done nearly enough yet to belong in that conversation.

 

[RichNhansom]

Take a hard line Popeye. Is our TEAM superior to your dynasty teams? Or is Wilson just better than Montana and young?

:lol:

Didn't see this before so I'll answer it now.

WILSON: As I've said since he came into the league and on this board many times over, I'm a huge fan of Wilson's game because he reminds me more of Steve Young than any other player I've ever seen at the QB position.

That said, I don't think he's there yet, although I think he can get there.

He looked to have gotten there in the last 8 games of the regular season last year (after being pretty mediocre for the first 8 games and before being pretty bad in the playoffs), but I don't think you can make any long term judgements about a player based on 8 games (examples from last year: based on the first 8 games of last year Devonte Freeman is one of the best RBs of all time and Aaron Rodgers is barely starter-worthy).

That said, still love Wilson's game and still think he can get there.

IS THE HAWKS TEAM BETTER THAN THE 9ERS 80s/90s DYNASTY TEAM OR IS WILSON BETTER THAN THOSE TEAMS' QBS?

LOL delusional homer alert.

That era of 9ers teams are talked about as being among the all time greats because over a decade and a half they won 1/3rd of all Super Bowl's that were played. (the point here is that you can take the 9ers out of the equation entirely; to compare the current Seahawks to any of the NFL's historic dynasties is just wildly premature. Great team no doubt, but in conversation already with the all time greats? You have to be a hardcore Hawks homer to take that seriously).

The current era Seahwks won a Super Bowl once three years ago. They're not even clearly the best team of their era (let alone a historic all time great) until Brady retires.

I think they have a better chance than anybody (or at least as good of a chance as anyone) to be the best team of this upcoming window, but you have to be seriously out your gourd to ask a question that takes it as a given that they belong in conversation with any of the all time great dynasties in the NFL, regardless of which team you're talking about.

They can get there, but haven't done nearly enough yet to belong in that conversation.

You really twisted up the comment. I never asked if the Seahawks are a current dynasty I specifically was referring to the talent surrounding Wilson vs the talent surrounding Montana/Young. Also like I said above the talent around the rest of the league at the time of your dynasty was far inferior to the modern day parity so while your dynasty is impressive it can't be compared to what it takes to do that in this modern era.

As for game breaks of 8 and 8 you really have to ignore the O-line play to not see the difference. Wilson has never played behind even a decent pass blocking O-line outside of the two pro bowls where he threw 3 TD's in a quarter one game and a half in the other. Yes you can say it's the probowl and players aren't really competing but then you have to ask why no other QB had similar success in those games.

Montana and Young also had elite O-lines, Receiving corps and good to great running games. Something Wilson has only had one of the three. You say they were pass first teams but ignore that Wilson destroys both when comparing passing stats in their first 4 years. Montana never even had a 4000 yard season ever let alone his first 4 years.

You can blame the era but Marino played 16 games 3 times his first 4 years and threw over 5000, 4100 and 4700 yards in those years. There is where your argument applies to the talent around them and it doesn't favor Montana.

I always liked Joe Cool but he is a perfect example of how you want to evaluate Wilson. Even more so than Wilson because at least his offense was built around passing and the talent he had to achieve those passing stats was top shelf. Wilson has done it despite the O-line and a developing receiving corp and having the benefit of sitting for a year to learn the system and gain chemistry. Or have receivers the level of Jerry Rice and Dwight Clark.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

I don't want to belabor this point too hard or debate, but you do know that non-Hawks fans have started to question Wilson's big game performance, right?

He basically single handidly gave away the divisional round game agaisnt the Panthers on turnovers, did everything he could to give away the NFC championship game against the Packers with turnovers (4 picks and a fumble; the hawks got bailed out by their defense and an onside kick recovery), and threw away the Super Bowl on an interception at the 1 yard line.

One hundred times out of one hundred I'd still take him over Kap with the game on the line (simply because he's a better player, and very, very good QB, whereas Kap is not), but that Wilson is a big game player who makes big plays with games on the line just isn't something that's really believed off of Seahawks fan forums.


Everyone can now criticize me for saying something that's plainly obvious despite being an unpopular thing to acknowlede. :th2thumbs:

(before you get too worked up though, just remember: "One hundred times out of one hundred I'd still take him over Kap with the game on the line (simply because he's a better player and very, very good QB, whereas Kap is not)"

People said Wilson was a game manager, sure. But his ability to win big games has not escaped the attention of the national media. He made it two SBs in his first three seasons, and started his career 10-0 against future HoF QBs. Wilson has been talked about as a "winner" on national sports coverage constantly.

As far as Wilson's postseason resume, he's been outstanding in the postseason with the exception of four games:

New Orleans 2013 - Raining cats and dogs
Green Bay 2014 - Raining cats and dogs
Minnesota 2015 - One of the coldest games in NFL history (Frozen cats and frozen dogs)
Carolina 2015 - Brand new turf that had the entire Seahawks team playing on roller skates for the first 20 minutes.

When he has normal game conditions, Wilson is excellent. This same trend proves equally true in the regular season. Unfortunately, under adverse game conditions Wilson tends to falls apart.

F I F Y...he he he

 

[Popeyejones]

You really twisted up the comment...

No, I didn't. I'll quote your direct two sentence question again and give you the same response, now in two sentences so it's clear.

Your question:

Take a hard line Popeye. Is our TEAM superior to your dynasty teams? Or is Wilson just better than Montana and young?

(SENTENCE 1): The answer is neither (as of yet) for the following reason:

(SENTENCE 2): The seahawks have simply not done enough as a team yet to be compared to any of the great dynasty teams in the history of the NFL, and Russell Wilson as a quarterback has simply not done enough yet to be compared to any number of the completely uncontested first ballot hall of famer QBs in the history of the NFL.


That's it. That's my answer to your question. You're free to like it or not, but it is my fianl answer, and only a hardcore Seahawks homer would seriously object to it. Maybe the Hawks get there and maybe they don't, but the way your question is framed is preposterously premature.