SoulfishHawk":pk2hcrk3 said:
I literally never said he wasn't a good QB. He's damn good. That's the key, WHEN HE'S ON. Geezus man, people back opposing players more than their own QB. Excuses for Stafford's injuries, blasting Russ and saying he's washed and should be traded when he struggles right after surgery. Seems legit. Again, I'm done talking about the Russ stuff. You have your opinion, I have mine. If you think Matt Stafford is more clutch than Russ, have at it.
I never said Stafford was more clutch, all I said is that you're not giving the guy enough credit. Nobody here said that Matt Stafford is more clutch than Wilson, get that out of your head. Not everything said about Stafford is an affront to Russell Wilson. Me and several other posters simply responded to comments you made about Matt Stafford and his ability to win when games are on the line, and him being just a "stat padding QB". Look deeper into things and you'll see that he is actually quite good when the game is on the line, in fact both him and Wilson have been among the best in those high pressure situations over their careers.
This is why the Rams felt compelled to go out and grab Matt Stafford. Jared Goff couldn't get things done in high pressure situations, he just folded like a lawn chair in crucial moments.
Also, Wilson's trading rhetoric largely came from directly from himself. Remember his campaign last offseason? Before you say it was media hype, remember, a lot of that speculation came directly from his agent and Russ himself. Remember, Russ holds a no trade clause. If he's gone, he's gone because he wants to be out. Doesn't matter what Pete Carroll or John Schneider want to do, the ball is completely in Wilson's court.
My personal view on Russell Wilson was that he had no business playing with that injury and that he needed to be benched for longer so he could recover, I wasn't wrong on that accord either. He was hardly a functioning QB when he first came back.