therealjohncarlson
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
- Messages
- 4,474
- Reaction score
- 319
KitsapGuy":34es0000 said:Just Bradford. But I don't think the Rams would do it.
This is the only correct answer
If you could switch QBs with any other team, would you?
- Thread starter chihawk
- Start date
This is the only correct answer
chris98251
Well-known member
Cousins if I had no choice. Given price tags and what they have shown. The guy has guts and talent.
DeathbyTalons
New member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2007
- Messages
- 612
- Reaction score
- 0
Cocaine is a hell of a drug....chris98251":2a7ye9us said:
Sac
Active member
chris98251":1mg2f8q3 said:
Only if we could vote him team captain, for obvious reasons.
kearly
New member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 15,975
- Reaction score
- 0
I wouldn't trade Wilson for Foles, but I think Foles might be a better QB in his system than Wilson currently is with the constrictions of Bevell's offense and the (at times) extremely poor pass protection.
I could see some wisdom in swapping for Luck. Luck is also a great leader who can make things happen with poor protection. Luck played in a very similar offense to ours in college that asked him to protect the football and hand off to his running backs, and his numbers were outstanding, almost as good as Russell's. Luck is also tall, meaning that all the headaches we currently have with teams attacking Wilson's vision issues and bootleg tendencies would be a thing of the past. Luck is also a tank. Wilson is tough and durable, but at least in theory he shouldn't be very durable at his height.
On the other hand, Wilson does cost less, and amazingly, Luck's contract doesn't come with the benefit of a 5th year. He was able to negotiate a 4 year deal when he signed as a rookie. So no matter how you slice it, Wilson will cost less than Luck, about $11.5 million less over the next two years.
Wilson is the better QB, but comes with some drawbacks that Luck doesn't have. Our offense, a bit like SF's, is designed to make the Alex Smith's of the world look like winners. Though Luck is a lesser QB, in our scheme you might not know it, and meanwhile we're not lighting plays on fire every time we call a bootleg that gets auto-blitzed because defenses cannot attack Luck the way they can Wilson for his height.
If we had better interior pass protection and a more adaptable OC, I would say there is absolutely no QB better for Seattle than Wilson right now. Even with those issues, there are only a small handful of QBs I would even consider.
I could see some wisdom in swapping for Luck. Luck is also a great leader who can make things happen with poor protection. Luck played in a very similar offense to ours in college that asked him to protect the football and hand off to his running backs, and his numbers were outstanding, almost as good as Russell's. Luck is also tall, meaning that all the headaches we currently have with teams attacking Wilson's vision issues and bootleg tendencies would be a thing of the past. Luck is also a tank. Wilson is tough and durable, but at least in theory he shouldn't be very durable at his height.
On the other hand, Wilson does cost less, and amazingly, Luck's contract doesn't come with the benefit of a 5th year. He was able to negotiate a 4 year deal when he signed as a rookie. So no matter how you slice it, Wilson will cost less than Luck, about $11.5 million less over the next two years.
Wilson is the better QB, but comes with some drawbacks that Luck doesn't have. Our offense, a bit like SF's, is designed to make the Alex Smith's of the world look like winners. Though Luck is a lesser QB, in our scheme you might not know it, and meanwhile we're not lighting plays on fire every time we call a bootleg that gets auto-blitzed because defenses cannot attack Luck the way they can Wilson for his height.
If we had better interior pass protection and a more adaptable OC, I would say there is absolutely no QB better for Seattle than Wilson right now. Even with those issues, there are only a small handful of QBs I would even consider.
chris98251
Well-known member
Weigh price tags and then give a pick, were good because of our ability to manage cost as well. That will have to be adapted here soon, but picking Brady, Manning, Rodgers will have it's down side if you have to absorb the price.
What I was thinking with Cousins, Foles is also a good choice.
What I was thinking with Cousins, Foles is also a good choice.
suppaball
Well-known member
A guy called Montana, Joe Montana.Basis4day":1g2uxjwj said:
BlueThunder
Active member
suppaball":30mlsc6y said:
Serious question. If Joe had wound up on the Buccaneers of that era, would anybody even know who Joe Montana was? He played on a pre-cap era, spare no expense Super-Team.
Donn2390
Well-known member
Rogers is ready for the old age home, and I've never been impressed with Luck, even when all of Seattle was screaming-The Glove-":umhxnqgo said:
"Suck for Luck" only a couple of years ago...
sc85sis
Well-known member
There may (or may not) be a QB who technically is "better" than Russ, but I'm not certain you could find a guy who is a better fit. This is especially true of the relationship between Russell and Pete. They're so similar in terms of their competitiveness, enthusiasm, positive attitude, etc. Russell has said on more than one occasion that he and Pete are really tight. The synergy is really quite wonderful.
scutterhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Messages
- 9,826
- Reaction score
- 1,797
I hope that this kind of poll asked, and taken by Seahawks fans, NEVER reaches Russell Wilson's eyes.
It's like a bunch of ingrates that can NEVER seem to be happy with the Success that he's brought to the Seahawks. :34853_doh:
I really do believe that there are some here that aren't happy with all the records that he's tied or broken in his two Years with the Seahawks.
With him getting sacked, hit, and hurried MORE THAT ANY OTHER QUARTERBACK because the O-Line has pretty much folded up way too often this last Season, is just astonishes me how some believe that some other Quarterback could just as easily come out the other side with the same outstanding results as RW.
I'm going to argue to Stay with what got us the Lombardi for the first time in Seahawks history.
It's like a bunch of ingrates that can NEVER seem to be happy with the Success that he's brought to the Seahawks. :34853_doh:
I really do believe that there are some here that aren't happy with all the records that he's tied or broken in his two Years with the Seahawks.
With him getting sacked, hit, and hurried MORE THAT ANY OTHER QUARTERBACK because the O-Line has pretty much folded up way too often this last Season, is just astonishes me how some believe that some other Quarterback could just as easily come out the other side with the same outstanding results as RW.
I'm going to argue to Stay with what got us the Lombardi for the first time in Seahawks history.
-The Glove-":3n6a6xxr said:
You do know we both will be pointed at, teased, ridiculed and laughed at now...right?
I think this topic has been fairly well debated, so let's mix it up a bit, and without thread jacking..let me ask those that want to answer...Luck vs Rodgers?
I'll take Luck (age).
volsunghawk
New member
Zebulon Dak":dqkzvv5a said:
I regret nothing.
BHF
New member
sc85sis":2ob4saq1 said:
*golf clap*
Great post. Wilson is such a perfect fit for us. That isn't to say that, say, Luck, couldn't fit, or that Pete and Bevell couldn't tailor the offense around Luck...but Russ fits so damn well into what we do. It's perfect. If I HAD to pick a QB to swap Russ for, it would be Luck...I guess. But what all the talking heads overlook is that for every drool worthy throw luck makes (and there are a lot of them), he makes an equally boneheaded "WTF?!?!" throw. Wilson just doesn't do that very often. Heck, I could probably count the number of times he did that all season (including playoffs) on both hands, and have fingers left over.
Similar threads
