themunn wrote:

LymonHawk wrote:

themunn wrote:He's set 2 rookie records and is on pace to break 2 more (though RGIII might do better overall, since he has the luxury of two more games against the Eagles and Cowboys, whereas Russ has to play 3 of the top 6 passing defenses).

He's also on course to set the franchise record for passer rating.

Is it wrong to be optimistic of his future?

Please let me know when breaks the rookie record for wins.

Thank you.

Because football's an individual game and the quarterback is solely reponsible for whether or not the team wins, right?
Do you know which rookie holds the record for wins in the postseason?
Mark Sanchez

That must mean that unless Wilson wins 3 post season games, Sanchez was a better rookie, right? I mean, Sanchez was not only good enough to lead his team to the playoffs, but he then won 2 games while he was there!

Peyton Manning only won 3 games in his rookie season so there's no way he could be as good as Ryan Leaf who won just as many, but in just 10 games!

Get a grip

I think you just proved the point that 'rookie records' don't mean squat. Thanks.

Scottemojo wrote:

LymonHawk wrote:

themunn wrote:He's set 2 rookie records and is on pace to break 2 more (though RGIII might do better overall, since he has the luxury of two more games against the Eagles and Cowboys, whereas Russ has to play 3 of the top 6 passing defenses).

He's also on course to set the franchise record for passer rating.

Is it wrong to be optimistic of his future?

Please let me know when breaks the rookie record for wins.

Thank you.

His next win will be the Seahawks rookie record for wins. Rick Mirer won 6 games as a rookie in 1993. I will be sure to let you know when he breaks that record.

So Rick Mirer now holds the 'Hawks record for wins by a rookie...how'd that work out?

LymonHawk wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:

LymonHawk wrote:
Please let me know when breaks the rookie record for wins.

Thank you.

His next win will be the Seahawks rookie record for wins. Rick Mirer won 6 games as a rookie in 1993. I will be sure to let you know when he breaks that record.

So Rick Mirer now holds the 'Hawks record for wins by a rookie...how'd that work out?

Granted, the bar was set rather low. But you asked the question, I answered it.
I think we both know how Rick Mirer turned out. So clearly, Wilson is going to flop next year. My apologies for ever thinking he might be better than Rick Mirer.

LymonHawk wrote:So Rick Mirer now holds the 'Hawks record for wins by a rookie...how'd that work out?

Would you prefer Wilson to NOT break rookie records? Your logic and argument does not make sense to me.

The more records he can break the better. IMHO when its all said and done he will by far be viewed as the greatest Seahawks QB of all time. On the way to doing that why not celebrate his accomplishments? I sure will.

LymonHawk wrote:

themunn wrote:He's set 2 rookie records and is on pace to break 2 more (though RGIII might do better overall, since he has the luxury of two more games against the Eagles and Cowboys, whereas Russ has to play 3 of the top 6 passing defenses).

He's also on course to set the franchise record for passer rating.

Is it wrong to be optimistic of his future?

Please let me know when breaks the rookie record for wins.

Thank you.

No, there is nothing wrong with being optimistic of his future. However, IMHO, it is wrong to call him a HOFer before the season began.

Roethlisburger had 15 wins as a rookie in 2004. I don't see that broken for a long, long time.

Of course, he might have had a couple of good players around him on that team. Tougher to do on a rebuilding team. But he's going to break the Seahawks record for rookie wins, and that's something. It's also something he's proving not to be a liability like most rookie quarterbacks, and is instead one of the strong points of the team.

Some other records he might have a shot at:

Best touchdown pass–interception differential, rookie season: 14 (20–6) Dan Marino, 1983 - he's at 17-8 currently.
Highest completion percentage, rookie, season: 66.44, Ben Roethlisberger, 2004 (196/295) - he's at 63.6% currently.
Highest passer rating, rookie, season: 98.1, Ben Roethlisberger, 2004 - he's at 93.9 currently.
Most Passing Touchdowns, Rookie, Season 26, Peyton Manning, 1998 - he's at 17 currently.

I don't think it's blind sycophancy to laud what he's doing here. He's breaking some pretty impressive rookie records, and looking very good doing it. Wouldn't we rather look back at this season fondly, remembering how much we enjoyed the ride, rather than remembering how we stood strong in our doubt and skepticism, holding out, making him really, really prove himself, before we let ourselves enjoy what he's done?

We're fans, not jury members, folks.

I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

Tical21 wrote:I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

I don't see that at all. Hass is still one of my favorite Seahawks of all time. Great Seahawk! I am, however, more than happy to be lauding our new quarterback's performance as even better so far. I also want Wilson's eventual replacement to be even better than him. What is possibly wrong with that?

Tical21 wrote:I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

I'm embarrassed that "Matt Hasselbeck haters" is what you took from this discussion.

Hasselbeck is the best QB we've had, and he's the obvious guy you compare to if you want to judge the player you believe is the next franchise QB. So far, the comparisons are positive. That's not hating on Hasselbeck.

Seahawk Sailor wrote:

Tical21 wrote:I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

I don't see that at all. Hass is still one of my favorite Seahawks of all time. Great Seahawk! I am, however, more than happy to be lauding our new quarterback's performance as even better so far. I also want Wilson's eventual replacement to be even better than him. What is possibly wrong with that?

And thanks for the previous post showing potential records he could break.

LymonHawk wrote:I think you just proved the point that 'rookie records' don't mean squat. Thanks.

No, all I've done is prove that it's daft to judge QBs by wins.
You judge TEAMS by wins. You judge players by their individual performance. And right now Russell Wilson's individual performance is whats showing him as a fantastic player and gives the impression of a possible HoF career.

Sonny Jurgensen is a Hall of Fame quarterback who lost more games than he won.
Warren Moon only barely breaks the .500 barrier
Rex Grossman has a better win percentage than both (and his one superbowl appearance matches that of Jurgensen and is one more than Warren Moon's)

Is Rex Grossman a better QB because he wins more?

Tical21 wrote:I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

Sooooo, you just read what you want to read and nothing more? That's about all I'm getting out of this.

LymonHawk wrote:

themunn wrote:He's set 2 rookie records and is on pace to break 2 more (though RGIII might do better overall, since he has the luxury of two more games against the Eagles and Cowboys, whereas Russ has to play 3 of the top 6 passing defenses).

He's also on course to set the franchise record for passer rating.

Is it wrong to be optimistic of his future?

Please let me know when breaks the rookie record for wins.

Thank you.

No, there is nothing wrong with being optimistic of his future. However, IMHO, it is wrong to call him a HOFer before the season began.

Your Right Lymon;

It's TOTALLY RW's fault that A) the defense collapsed against AZ, and B) Edwards drops the winning TD. It was also his fault that Turbin, Tate and other dropped critical passes against SF. It was also his fault that he scored "too quickly" against Detroit and the defense fell apart. Ditto for Miami though RW could have won the game and the play calls didn't work. Sure the Rams game was on him, but on that final pick McCoy falls down. Things happen. That's why it's ludicrious to base the success of a QB strictly on wins.

It's a team sport people. The QB doesn't win or lose a game more often than not. It's a whole group effort. His efficiency is enough to win games. The offense needs to get better and the defense DEFINATELY needs to improve for this team to be a Super Bowl contender. In 2005 we had extremely good balance on offense and a bend but don't break defense that made timely stops or turnovers.

I know one thing if RW continues to post 100+ QB ratings we will be winning the majority of our games. QB's playing that well tend to win and win alot. I'm excited for this team and what we have at QB. Last year I was nervious everytime TJack took the field (expecially in the redzone), not knowing what we'd get. This year I'm I have supreme confidence that RW will lead us for the score. It's been a fun ride to watch all the TD passes this year (we haven't seen this kind of production TD's since 2007)

volsunghawk wrote:

Tical21 wrote:I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

I'm embarrassed that "Matt Hasselbeck haters" is what you took from this discussion.

Hasselbeck is the best QB we've had, and he's the obvious guy you compare to if you want to judge the player you believe is the next franchise QB. So far, the comparisons are positive. That's not hating on Hasselbeck.

Even when you know that Hasselbeck's rookie numbers did nothing in predicting how good or bad he would eventually become?

To try and elevate RW's status, the OP went to belittle the best QB this franchise ever had. The fact Hass' rookie season was less than stellar is no big secret. It's been posted hundreds of times on this board.

So why bring it up again? To show that the year's "Hero" is better than Hasselbeck? Yup, no fair weather fans around here!

LymonHawk wrote:

volsunghawk wrote:

Tical21 wrote:I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

I'm embarrassed that "Matt Hasselbeck haters" is what you took from this discussion.

Hasselbeck is the best QB we've had, and he's the obvious guy you compare to if you want to judge the player you believe is the next franchise QB. So far, the comparisons are positive. That's not hating on Hasselbeck.

Even when you know that Hasselbeck's rookie numbers did nothing in predicting how good or bad he would eventually become?

To try and elevate RW's status, the OP went to belittle the best QB this franchise ever had. The fact Hass' rookie season was less than stellar is no big secret. It's been posted hundreds of times on this board.

So why bring it up again? To show that the year's "Hero" is better than Hasselbeck? Yup, no fair weather fans around here!

So your saying if RW exceeds 20 TD's this season that isn't noteworthy? When you factor in the greatest QB this team has had only accomplished that feat 4 seasons out of 14? The whole point of this thread is to put RW's accomplishments into context. That is all, we all love and respect Hasslebeck, he was tremendous. What RW is doing is also tremendous. Should that not be highlighted?

Seahawk Sailor wrote:

LymonHawk wrote:

themunn wrote:He's set 2 rookie records and is on pace to break 2 more (though RGIII might do better overall, since he has the luxury of two more games against the Eagles and Cowboys, whereas Russ has to play 3 of the top 6 passing defenses).

He's also on course to set the franchise record for passer rating.

Is it wrong to be optimistic of his future?

Please let me know when breaks the rookie record for wins.

Thank you.

No, there is nothing wrong with being optimistic of his future. However, IMHO, it is wrong to call him a HOFer before the season began.

Roethlisburger had 15 wins as a rookie in 2004. I don't see that broken for a long, long time.

Of course, he might have had a couple of good players around him on that team. Tougher to do on a rebuilding team. But he's going to break the Seahawks record for rookie wins, and that's something. It's also something he's proving not to be a liability like most rookie quarterbacks, and is instead one of the strong points of the team.

Some other records he might have a shot at:

Best touchdown pass–interception differential, rookie season: 14 (20–6) Dan Marino, 1983 - he's at 17-8 currently.
Highest completion percentage, rookie, season: 66.44, Ben Roethlisberger, 2004 (196/295) - he's at 63.6% currently.
Highest passer rating, rookie, season: 98.1, Ben Roethlisberger, 2004 - he's at 93.9 currently.
Most Passing Touchdowns, Rookie, Season 26, Peyton Manning, 1998 - he's at 17 currently.

I don't think it's blind sycophancy to laud what he's doing here. He's breaking some pretty impressive rookie records, and looking very good doing it. Wouldn't we rather look back at this season fondly, remembering how much we enjoyed the ride, rather than remembering how we stood strong in our doubt and skepticism, holding out, making him really, really prove himself, before we let ourselves enjoy what he's done?

We're fans, not jury members, folks.

It's not blind sycophancy to call him a HOFer before he's even played a game? Sorry Jase, we'll have to disagree on this one.

Who seriously called him a Hall of Famer?

Not calling Wilson a HoF'er at all. I'm simply enjoying the great, record-breaking rookie season he's having, and am hoping for more of what I'm seeing. These are the good parts of being a Seahawks fan, and yet we continue being prosecuting lawyers, trying to find that one hole, that one fault, that will justify our previous skepticism.

He's having one of the better rookie campaigns in recent history. I'm simply ensuring that when I look back on this season, I can say, "yea, I remember when he broke that record, and I loved every minute of it!"

I'd rather be rah-rah about the good stuff than nitpick problems I can't even begin to help fix.

BTW: Y'all realize that Tarvaris had better stats as Seahawk rookie than Hasselbeck did as a Seahawk rookie...and what did that prove?

Seahawk Sailor wrote:Not calling Wilson a HoF'er at all. I'm simply enjoying the great, record-breaking rookie season he's having, and am hoping for more of what I'm seeing. These are the good parts of being a Seahawks fan, and yet we continue being prosecuting lawyers, trying to find that one hole, that one fault, that will justify our previous skepticism.

He's having one of the better rookie campaigns in recent history. I'm simply ensuring that when I look back on this season, I can say, "yea, I remember when he broke that record, and I loved every minute of it!"

I'd rather be rah-rah about the good stuff than nitpick problems I can't even begin to help fix.

Who's nit picking? Cherry picking records isn't nit picking? OK?

T-Sizzle wrote:He is going to rewrite every Seahawks passing record. Enjoy the ride.

I hope you're right.. I really do. But he's played 11 freaking games. This is what Lymon is saying. This is what I've been saying for weeks. Feel free to be excited about the guy, I think he's playing well, but statements like this are just premature.

You know who else had a great rookie year? Sam Bradford. Cam Newton. They may still turn it around and have great careers.. but that just goes to show you how quickly things can change.

There's a distinct difference between being excited and between being outlandish and over the top with your statements. You're more of the latter.

Carmon1274 wrote:SA had 5x of 10TD's+ of rushing. Which his highest was 27TD's in 2005
Lynch has only 1x of 10TD's or more. Which his highest was 12

Don't bring numbers that make sense into a Russell Wilson debate. Believe me.

You guys are just Russell Wilson haters.

LymonHawk wrote:BTW: Y'all realize that Tarvaris had better stats as Seahawk rookie than Hasselbeck did as a Seahawk rookie...and what did that prove?

When was TJ a rookie in Seattle?

Edit: I see, Seahawks rookie. Even so, didn't TJ have nearly 20 starts before he was signed here, and Hasselbeck was hamburger raw? Wouldn't you compare TJ's starts with the Vikings to Hasselbeck's starts in Seattle for a more fair comparison? By your method, I could say that Warren Moon had a better Seahawks rookie season that Hasselbeck's rookie season.

Hasselbeck wrote:

T-Sizzle wrote:He is going to rewrite every Seahawks passing record. Enjoy the ride.

I hope you're right.. I really do. But he's played 11 freaking games. This is what Lymon is saying. This is what I've been saying for weeks. Feel free to be excited about the guy, I think he's playing well, but statements like this are just premature.

You know who else had a great rookie year? Sam Bradford. Cam Newton. They may still turn it around and have great careers.. but that just goes to show you how quickly things can change.

There's a distinct difference between being excited and between being outlandish and over the top with your statements. You're more of the latter.

True enough. In fact, I'd not be surprised in the least to see Wilson have a sophomore slump. Both those guys did, at least somewhat. Bradford's second year saw him miss six games, and his numbers were down accordingly. This year, he's on pace to do at least as well as his rookie year, no matter how well the Rams are doing. He has five games to throw four more TDs to match his rookie season there. And the Panthers are doing horrible, Newton's numbers are down, but not as much as one might expect in a sophomore slump. His TD:INT percentage is actually better than last year, and his yards per attempt is up, even if his completion percentage is down a bit. He'll still throw for 3,000 plus yards, which is a decent year in that respect.

Sure, Wilson only has 11 games under his belt, but he's outperformed everyone's expectations, including the guys who were on the bandwagon from day one. The progression he's made since the beginning of the season is pretty impressive. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see him rewrite Seahawks quarterback records either. He's not surpassing any Hall of Fame quarterbacks if he does; he's surpassing some solid quarterbacks, some guys who were pretty good. To see him do that only puts him in the same conversation as Hasselbeck, Zorn, and Kreig, which although good, isn't really anointing him as the next Joe Montana.

Enjoy the ride is exactly right.

LymonHawk wrote:

volsunghawk wrote:

Tical21 wrote:I just don't get it. We're Matt Hasselbeck haters now? Already like Wilson more? Only in Seattle is this discussion even possible. I'm embarrassed to be a Seahawks fan today.

I'm embarrassed that "Matt Hasselbeck haters" is what you took from this discussion.

Hasselbeck is the best QB we've had, and he's the obvious guy you compare to if you want to judge the player you believe is the next franchise QB. So far, the comparisons are positive. That's not hating on Hasselbeck.

Even when you know that Hasselbeck's rookie numbers did nothing in predicting how good or bad he would eventually become?

To try and elevate RW's status, the OP went to belittle the best QB this franchise ever had. The fact Hass' rookie season was less than stellar is no big secret. It's been posted hundreds of times on this board.

So why bring it up again? To show that the year's "Hero" is better than Hasselbeck? Yup, no fair weather fans around here!

There's not a thing in the initial post that belittles Hasselbeck. The third post provides more stats and notes that the comparison is to "arguably the best QB in franchise history" in Hass. The first time any friction begins is in your post directly after that one.

If you wanted to find conflict here, it was you that brung it.

That said, yeah, T-Sizzle gets a little ridiculous with his proclamations at times... but his thread starter here wasn't one of them.

Scottemojo wrote:

LymonHawk wrote:BTW: Y'all realize that Tarvaris had better stats as Seahawk rookie than Hasselbeck did as a Seahawk rookie...and what did that prove?

When was TJ a rookie in Seattle?

Edit: I see, Seahawks rookie. Even so, didn't TJ have nearly 20 starts before he was signed here, and Hasselbeck was hamburger raw? Wouldn't you compare TJ's starts with the Vikings to Hasselbeck's starts in Seattle for a more fair comparison? By your method, I could say that Warren Moon had a better Seahawks rookie season that Hasselbeck's rookie season.

So now you're gonna nit pick what is a rookie? LOL!

LymonHawk wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:

LymonHawk wrote:BTW: Y'all realize that Tarvaris had better stats as Seahawk rookie than Hasselbeck did as a Seahawk rookie...and what did that prove?

When was TJ a rookie in Seattle?

Edit: I see, Seahawks rookie. Even so, didn't TJ have nearly 20 starts before he was signed here, and Hasselbeck was hamburger raw? Wouldn't you compare TJ's starts with the Vikings to Hasselbeck's starts in Seattle for a more fair comparison? By your method, I could say that Warren Moon had a better Seahawks rookie season that Hasselbeck's rookie season.

So now you're gonna nit pick what is a rookie? LOL!

LOL is the best you can do? You are the guy calling a 5 year vet a rookie. Pretty sure I didn't pick any nits there.

Old Man is trolling you guys good! lol

He's no troll. He's just sour today.

Scottemojo wrote:He's no troll. He's just sour today.

I don't know. That point about the definition of what a rookie is is so stupid, it's got to be trolling.

Yeah I don't get calling a 6 year vet (he's in year 7 now) a rookie.. especially since he had previous starter experience. At least in Hasselbeck's start he didn't start one game and only really had in-game experience when Green Bay would fake a field goal or when he'd come in in mop-up duty.

I think what Lymon is saying is.. lets back off of Wilson's enshrinement into Canton. Lets hold off on calling him the next Montana or even the next Brees..

If he develops into any of those things.. lets face it.. NO Seahawk fan alive is going to be pissed off about that, lol. But he's played ELEVEN games.. let's at least wait until he gets 3 years of starting under his belt before we go out throwing historical comparisons to the kid. And if he breaks some records this season.. that's good too.

He is rewriting history with everything.he is doing. I fully plan on celebrating that and enjoying it all along the way. In my OP there was no disrepect meant....the reality is Wilson is putting up those numbers.....its a shame not to be excited.

volsunghawk wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:He's no troll. He's just sour today.

I don't know. That point about the definition of what a rookie is is so stupid, it's got to be trolling.

So now anytime I say anything that is just dumb, I get to claim I was trolling? I can work with that.

Russel Wilson could break every passing record in the books. I love Hass like a brother but he never did that.

volsunghawk wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:He's no troll. He's just sour today.

I don't know. That point about the definition of what a rookie is is so stupid, it's got to be trolling.

Please explain. Perhaps you can tell me what the proper definition is for 'rookie' in professional sports?

LymonHawk wrote:

volsunghawk wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:He's no troll. He's just sour today.

I don't know. That point about the definition of what a rookie is is so stupid, it's got to be trolling.

Please explain. Perhaps you can tell me what the proper definition is for 'rookie' in professional sports?

You used the label "Seahawks rookie" for 2 people who were in completely different stages of their career. You're not a rookie again just because you switch teams. Your previous experience is still just that, experience.

BTW Russell Wilson is on pace for about 450 TD's, assuming he plays at a consistent level and is able to avoid injury for 17 seasons. Just FYI. NBD.

T-Sizzle wrote:He is rewriting history with everything.he is doing. I fully plan on celebrating that and enjoying it all along the way. In my OP there was no disrepect meant....the reality is Wilson is putting up those numbers.....its a shame not to be excited.

What history have I been rewriting?

Hasselbeck's rookie season with the Titans really was substantially better than Jake Locker's rookie season.
Jerry Rice's rookie season with the Seahawks was very disappointing, though. As was Franco Harris's rookie season with the Seahawks.

You know, Lymon is right, the word rookie is very versatile. I plan to use it much more.

LymonHawk wrote:

T-Sizzle wrote:He is rewriting history with everything.he is doing. I fully plan on celebrating that and enjoying it all along the way. In my OP there was no disrepect meant....the reality is Wilson is putting up those numbers.....its a shame not to be excited.

What history have I been rewriting?

You should really not need me to answer that for you.

Zebulon Dak wrote:
You used the label "Seahawks rookie" for 2 people who were in completely different stages of their career. You're not a rookie again just because you switch teams. Your previous experience is still just that, experience.

You are correct. Hass' was in his third year when he came here. If you want to compare his rookie stats, you should start with his first year with GB......but that's not what happened, is it?

T-Sizzle wrote:

LymonHawk wrote:

T-Sizzle wrote:He is rewriting history with everything.he is doing. I fully plan on celebrating that and enjoying it all along the way. In my OP there was no disrepect meant....the reality is Wilson is putting up those numbers.....its a shame not to be excited.

What history have I been rewriting?

You should really not need me to answer that for you.

You made the comment, now please back it up, or admit you were fabricating 'facts.'

Scottemojo wrote:Hasselbeck's rookie season with the Titans really was substantially better than Jake Locker's rookie season.
Jerry Rice's rookie season with the Seahawks was very disappointing, though. As was Franco Harris's rookie season with the Seahawks.

You know, Lymon is right, the word rookie is very versatile. I plan to use it much more.

So, do you consider Hass' first year with Seattle as his rookie year?

LymonHawk wrote:

Zebulon Dak wrote:
You used the label "Seahawks rookie" for 2 people who were in completely different stages of their career. You're not a rookie again just because you switch teams. Your previous experience is still just that, experience.

You are correct. Hass' was in his third year when he came here. If you want to compare his rookie stats, you should start with his first year with GB......but that's not what happened, is it?

The original comparison had nothing to do with Hass being a rookie. It had to do with Hass being "arguably the best QB in franchise history." You're the one who got your panties in a bunch over it.

LymonHawk wrote:

Scottemojo wrote:Hasselbeck's rookie season with the Titans really was substantially better than Jake Locker's rookie season.
Jerry Rice's rookie season with the Seahawks was very disappointing, though. As was Franco Harris's rookie season with the Seahawks.

You know, Lymon is right, the word rookie is very versatile. I plan to use it much more.

So, do you consider Hass' first year with Seattle as his rookie year?

Nope. He played for the Packers for two years.
So really, with all that extra time to learn the game, and playing with the offensive genius that is Mike Holmgren, it is really a bit sad that he is being outclassed by a bona fide rookie.

rook·ie
n.

2. Sports A first-year player, especially in a professional sport.

Topps doesn't make rookie cards for when a player arrives on a new team.

Russel is rewriting the recent history that no quarterback under 6' can play in the modern NFL, but I don't think that's what anyone was referring to.

12evanf wrote:

rook·ie
n.

2. Sports A first-year player, especially in a professional sport.

Topps doesn't make rookie cards for when a player arrives on a new team.

Russel is rewriting the recent history that no quarterback under 6' can play in the modern NFL, but I don't think that's what anyone was referring to.

And he's also rewriting the history books for every QB named Russell Wilson. Amazing!

LymonHawk wrote:

12evanf wrote:

rook·ie
n.

2. Sports A first-year player, especially in a professional sport.

Topps doesn't make rookie cards for when a player arrives on a new team.

Russel is rewriting the recent history that no quarterback under 6' can play in the modern NFL, but I don't think that's what anyone was referring to.

And he's also rewriting the history books for every QB named Russell Wilson. Amazing!

No, he's just writing that history for the first time, not rewriting it.

He's performing admirably, especially for a rookie. No reason not to be excited about that.

Zebulon Dak wrote:He's performing admirably, especially for a rookie. No reason not to be excited about that.

How DARE you insult Matthew Hasselbeck that way?!?!?!