Jerry Angelo ranks Wilson 9th

[davidonmi]

No way is Rivers better than RW. Rivers pulled a good season out of nowhere, but he hasn't been good in a while.

I love RW but he is not better than rivers. Rivers may have had the second best season of any qb this year. Hard to argue with nearly 70% and 4500 yards and a 32/11 td to interception ratio

 

[Russ Willstrong]

Also wrong assumption to credit RW with Johnny Footballs hype. It was clear that Johnny was hyped by the same media clowns that said RW wouldn't amount to more than a backup.

 

[MrCarey]

So 3 guys ahead of Russell don't have a ring...And somehow their better?
Key words in the headline is 'Former GM'.

Dan Marino doesn't have a ring and he is WAY better than Russell. Don't use that argument, it makes you lose credibility. I agree that there are a certain few individuals ahead of him that shouldn't be there (Luck, Newton, Big Ben), but the ring argument means jack. As far as QB goes, Rivers is absolutely better than Russell (right now), and not having a ring doesn't change that.

The best way to debunk your point will always be this: Dilfer is not better than Marino. Dilfer is not better than Russell Wilson. Dilfer is not better than the top 20ish on this list. Dilfer has a ring as a starter.

How original.

I don't need to be original to be right.

 

[plyka]

So 3 guys ahead of Russell don't have a ring...And somehow their better?
Key words in the headline is 'Former GM'.

Dan Marino doesn't have a ring and he is WAY better than Russell. Don't use that argument, it makes you lose credibility. I agree that there are a certain few individuals ahead of him that shouldn't be there (Luck, Newton, Big Ben), but the ring argument means jack. As far as QB goes, Rivers is absolutely better than Russell (right now), and not having a ring doesn't change that.

The best way to debunk your point will always be this: Dilfer is not better than Marino. Dilfer is not better than Russell Wilson. Dilfer is not better than the top 20ish on this list. Dilfer has a ring as a starter.

Your argument makes the mistake of interpreting something for everything. Rings do not mean EVERYTHING, and that's why Marino is better than Dilfer. Everything else is so one sided in favor of Marino, that 1 aspect being in favor of Dilfer, even if it is the most important, doesn't rebalance the scales in Dilfer's favor. But all that doesn't mean that a ring doesn't count for SOMETHING because it does. In fact, championships are the most important factor. If there are 10-20 factors, there is no other factor as important as rings (especially for a starting QB).

And, that's why no one but the insane put Marino in the same category as Montana. Marino may have a lot of factors in his favor, but Montana has the most important factor in his corner: 4 rings.

 

[JMR]

Also wrong assumption to credit RW with Johnny Footballs hype. It was clear that Johnny was hyped by the same media clowns that said RW wouldn't amount to more than a backup.

I'm not talking about media hype. Draft stock. Russell broke the seal on < 6' QBs in the NFL. That has helped us get over it with Manziel to the point his height really isn't being discussed.

 

[BlueBlood]

So 3 guys ahead of Russell don't have a ring...And somehow their better?
Key words in the headline is 'Former GM'.

Dan Marino doesn't have a ring and he is WAY better than Russell. Don't use that argument, it makes you lose credibility. I agree that there are a certain few individuals ahead of him that shouldn't be there (Luck, Newton, Big Ben), but the ring argument means jack. As far as QB goes, Rivers is absolutely better than Russell (right now), and not having a ring doesn't change that.

The best way to debunk your point will always be this: Dilfer is not better than Marino. Dilfer is not better than Russell Wilson. Dilfer is not better than the top 20ish on this list. Dilfer has a ring as a starter.

How original.

I don't need to be original to be right.

You just need to be right to be right and youre DEAD WRONG!!!!!! Russell Wilson is in his 20s and is a two time pro bowler, Superbowl winner and I'm not even going to mention stats..

Dan Marino isn't even good anymore "bro" he's like 50! Wilson is way better! :3-1:

 

[scutterhawk]

Jerry Angelo is an idiot..................Good DAY.

 

[MrCarey]

Rivers is currently better than Russell Wilson. STATS prove that. It's nothing to be ashamed of, because Rivers is elite as hell.

 

[MrCarey]

So 3 guys ahead of Russell don't have a ring...And somehow their better?
Key words in the headline is 'Former GM'.

Dan Marino doesn't have a ring and he is WAY better than Russell. Don't use that argument, it makes you lose credibility. I agree that there are a certain few individuals ahead of him that shouldn't be there (Luck, Newton, Big Ben), but the ring argument means jack. As far as QB goes, Rivers is absolutely better than Russell (right now), and not having a ring doesn't change that.

The best way to debunk your point will always be this: Dilfer is not better than Marino. Dilfer is not better than Russell Wilson. Dilfer is not better than the top 20ish on this list. Dilfer has a ring as a starter.

Your argument makes the mistake of interpreting something for everything. Rings do not mean EVERYTHING, and that's why Marino is better than Dilfer. Everything else is so one sided in favor of Marino, that 1 aspect being in favor of Dilfer, even if it is the most important, doesn't rebalance the scales in Dilfer's favor. But all that doesn't mean that a ring doesn't count for SOMETHING because it does. In fact, championships are the most important factor. If there are 10-20 factors, there is no other factor as important as rings (especially for a starting QB).

And, that's why no one but the insane put Marino in the same category as Montana. Marino may have a lot of factors in his favor, but Montana has the most important factor in his corner: 4 rings.

Montana also had the best WR of all time.

 

[HansGruber]

Rivers is currently better than Russell Wilson. STATS prove that. It's nothing to be ashamed of, because Rivers is elite as hell.

Could you make the trolling attempt a little less obvious?

 

[TDBinOLY]

Regarding Johnny Manziel:........ I think that when he sees a really good NFL defense, he will be stuffed up his own ass.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Yeah, because those "stats" are what prove who is better. smmfh

Here's a stat for you and Phylis Rivers:
Superbowl Titles: RW = 1, Rivers - squat

Rivers is a damn good QB, but no way is he better than RW.

 

[MrCarey]

Yeah, because those "stats" are what prove who is better. smmfh

Here's a stat for you and Phylis Rivers:
Superbowl Titles: RW = 1, Rivers - squat

Rivers is a damn good QB, but no way is he better than RW.

Joe Flacco is just as good as Wilson then? And Eli Manning is better than both? Big Ben is too, apparently.

 

[Brahn]

I am okay with people saying Luck is better. Better in the way 1A is better then 1B. I would assume the ring gets Wilson at the least to 1B.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Doesn't matter, I'll take RW and his leadership, decision making etc. over Rivers any day.

 

[HansGruber]

Yeah, because those "stats" are what prove who is better. smmfh

Here's a stat for you and Phylis Rivers:
Superbowl Titles: RW = 1, Rivers - squat

Rivers is a damn good QB, but no way is he better than RW.

Joe Flacco is just as good as Wilson then? And Eli Manning is better than both? Big Ben is too, apparently.

By your logic, Tony Romo is better than all 3 of them. And Philip Rivers. Which is laughable even to Charger and Cowgirl fans.

During the Broncos/Chargers playoff game, a friend of mine who is a lifelong Charger fan spent the whole time telling me that a QB like Wilson would put that team over the top. I know a lot of Charger fans and NONE of them think Rivers is elite. He drives them crazy the way Krieg used to drive the old-school Seahawk fans crazy.

That's the problem with judging QBs like a fantasy geek. Guys like Romo and Rivers look far better than they are, because the stats rarely show the late-game choking and lack of leadership. We all saw it just a few weeks ago. Mr "Greatest of all Time" getting behind in one game (the most important one) and then just choking like always.

So while Superbowls don't tell the whole story, they tell a more complete story than regular season passing yards. And yes, I'd take Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger any day over Rivers or Romo, and it's not even close.

 

[MrCarey]

Yeah, because those "stats" are what prove who is better. smmfh

Here's a stat for you and Phylis Rivers:
Superbowl Titles: RW = 1, Rivers - squat

Rivers is a damn good QB, but no way is he better than RW.

Joe Flacco is just as good as Wilson then? And Eli Manning is better than both? Big Ben is too, apparently.

By your logic, Tony Romo is better than all 3 of them. And Philip Rivers. Which is laughable even to Charger and Cowgirl fans.

During the Broncos/Chargers playoff game, a friend of mine who is a lifelong Charger fan spent the whole time telling me that a QB like Wilson would put that team over the top. I know a lot of Charger fans and NONE of them think Rivers is elite. He drives them crazy the way Krieg used to drive the old-school Seahawk fans crazy.

That's the problem with judging QBs like a fantasy geek. Guys like Romo and Rivers look far better than they are, because the stats rarely show the late-game choking and lack of leadership. We all saw it just a few weeks ago. Mr "Greatest of all Time" getting behind in one game (the most important one) and then just choking like always.

So while Superbowls don't tell the whole story, they tell a more complete story than regular season passing yards. And yes, I'd take Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger any day over Rivers or Romo, and it's not even close.

Romo is pretty damn good, and the reason he isn't a perennial playoff contender is because of his pisspoor defense.

And if you'd rather have Eli Manning over Rivers or Romo, you crazy. Dude won some Super Bowls on a miracle play and a defensive trouncing. Just because Chargers fans that you know won't call him elite doesn't mean anything. Just a few years ago Seahawks fans were saying that Hasselbeck isn't even a serviceable backup while starting for us. Fans are not the people to ask, unless the team is winning. Then they'll tell you something crazy like Russell Wilson is better than Drew Brees.

I get that people love our guy, but these guys have years of proof that they are damn good.

 

[HansGruber]

Romo is pretty damn good, and the reason he isn't a perennial playoff contender is because of his pisspoor defense.

And if you'd rather have Eli Manning over Rivers or Romo, you crazy. Dude won some Super Bowls on a miracle play and a defensive trouncing. Just because Chargers fans that you know won't call him elite doesn't mean anything. Just a few years ago Seahawks fans were saying that Hasselbeck isn't even a serviceable backup while starting for us. Fans are not the people to ask, unless the team is winning. Then they'll tell you something crazy like Russell Wilson is better than Drew Brees.

I get that people love our guy, but these guys have years of proof that they are damn good.

As a lifelong Seahawk fan, I've seen enough of the "damn good" QBs. Guys like Dave Krieg and Matt Hasselbeck will keep you in it, they'll win a lot of games, put up gaudy stats, etc. Dave Krieg is still in the Top 20 all-time for passing yards. He was "damn good" too, but ya know what?

There's a difference between "damn good" and champion. Hasselbeck showed it when we got robbed on the Jerramy Stevens reception on the 1 that was called back for the phantom hold. The very next play, Hasselbeck threw an INT trying to force a big play (throwing into double coverage) and that INT killed the Seahawks Superbowl dream. That play took the wind out of our sails and you could see our team visibly defeated. I saw the same thing from Denver after Malcolm Smith returned Manning INT #2 for a TD.

Guys like Eli Manning, Joe Flacco, and Ben Roethlisberger have something that your "damn good" QBs rarely ever get - the Superbowl ring.

And they got that ring by being good "game managers" - not turning over the ball, giving their team a chance, etc. The Giants were going up against the greatest QB of all time having, at that time, the greatest season a QB had ever had (and many still argue the 2007 Patriots were overall the best offense of all-time). But that "damn good" offense wasn't good enough. Eli tossing a questionable pass at his TE's head WAS.

In the end, all that matters is the Lombardi. You can keep your "damn good" fantasy-stat QBs.

I'll take my World Champion QB Russell Wilson.

And the fact that you stated that he is logically the equivalent of Joe Flacco and the inferior of Phillip Rivers pretty much says it all. That's just.... silly.

 

[nanomoz]

The same Jerry Angelo that thought pairing an elite defense with a erratic, risk-taking quarterback was a good idea?

Jerry Angelo can exfoliate CANHawk's frumunda cheese.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Yeah, because those "stats" are what prove who is better. smmfh

Here's a stat for you and Phylis Rivers:
Superbowl Titles: RW = 1, Rivers - squat

Rivers is a damn good QB, but no way is he better than RW.

Joe Flacco is just as good as Wilson then? And Eli Manning is better than both? Big Ben is too, apparently.

Not in their first 2 years, methinks Wilson will have 4-5 Superbowl victories by the time he's in the league 9*10 years.