Wilson can't be compared to Cam. Cam led his team to a 6-10 record his first year. Wilson lead them to a 12-5 record including the playoffs, while setting all sorts of records. He is not going to be a bust, count on it.
Cam Newton had statistically the best first two years ever by a QB. He was the number 1 pick because his team around him was shit. Wilson got drafted by a team that had a ton of young talent and was only a year removed from the playoffs. You are right, they can not be compared. Cam is the better player hands down. http://www.advancednflstats.com/2012/12/cam-newton-best-first-two-seasons-ever.html
You can't compare him to Freeman either. Freeman only threw short passes all year and had a very soft schedule. He played like 3 games against teams that didn't suck. Wilson was tearing apart some of the best defences in the NFL. The stat dates aren't arbitrary, I just divided the season in half. No matter how you spin it you cant explain away how Luck ended up with fewer touchdown passes despite 33% more throws nor how he had bad games against some of the shittiest defences in the league. Every stat I use as evidence you blindly refute as fantasy football, somehow you made the conclusion that all Wilson does is scramble around like an idiot, and Luck can do no wrong. So I don't know what else to say. I feel that I've already adequately adressed every point you are making in previous posts so yea, lets just agree to disagree on this.
LOL. Still on the Newton bandwagon? Cam is a poor passer at the NFL level. No way around it. He consistently performs poorly against good teams. He was overrated. His wonderlic test scores called it and even his 2011 season showed signs of it. They forced him to pass more and he had a shitty year until meangless end of season games. The only thing Cam is better at is height and weight.
Anyone who seriously thinks Cam Newton is a better football player than Russel Wilson has spent too much time looking at meaningless numbers and far too much time watching ESPN. Wilson is all class...I'd cut off my right hand to have a guy like that on my team
I'm not even a huge Luck fan. I think all that "next John Elway or Peyton Manning" crap is way overblown. But I just don't think Wilson is that great of an NFL QB. Wilson did not "tear apart" defenses. He threw for 171 yards against the Niners in his win against them and threw for 122 yards against them in a loss. In that win against the 49ers, you fail to mention that Lynch ran for over 100 yards, 7 points came off a blocked FG returned for a TD, etc. Yes, Wilson played a solid, mistake free game and made some plays. The interception he threw wasn't really his fault even though the throw was a tad high. But he did not "chew that defense" just because he threw TD's once Seattle got in the red zone rather than Lynch running it in. Seattle's defense and running game pounded the Niners in that game. He threw for 150 yards against Arizona in both games vs them. He threw for 188 yards vs the Jets. Those are 3 of the best pass defenses in the league. I don't consider a QB that throws for under 200 yards in games like that to be "carving up great defenses." The only defense that he "carved up" is the Bears with 293 yards, and although they started out with ridiculous stats defensively, they were an average unit for most of the year when you actually watched them play. I just don't get how your whole argument is based around "qualify why Luck had fewer TD passes." Stats don't tell the whole story and the secondary/tertiary factors. To say a guy is inferior than another player because he had fewer TD passes while having more pass attempts is asinine. You can tell from the eyeball test that Luck was better and more valuable to his team. The sandlot ball I refer to is similar to how Big Ben has played the QB position over the years. I would not deem the Steelers' offense one that is based on precision, crisp route running, and great timing. So many times the wide receivers run their routes and Big Ben is scrambling around behind the LOS playing "sandlot ball" with his WR's where they ad-lib on the go and make something out of nothing. Wilson does the same thing far too often for my liking. You'd be surprised by the number of times that he drops back, doesn't see anything he likes or can't process what he sees, and then rolls out and starts scrambling and takes off running or chucks it to a WR that has already run his route and is just ad-libbing vs his defender. I just don't consider QB's that play like that "one of the best QB's in the league." I don't consider Big Ben a top flight QB for just that reason, regardless of how many "rings" he has. I'm not saying Wilson is an awful QB like Sanchez. He's a solid QB who takes care of the ball and can make some big plays for you. Is he a franchise QB IMO? No. Will he ever be a top 5-10 QB in this league like Luck and RG3? IMO, no. I just take issue with people rewriting history and calling him one of the best QB's in the league this year and overrating his performance while selling short the performance of that defense and running game.
All in all I think there are many clues that point to the Jets bringing in Tarvaris Jackson... 1. Idzik is high on him 2. Our new QB coach David Lee has coached him last year in Buffalo 3. Childress loved him, and he was the predecessor of Mornhinwheg with the Eagles, both under Andy Reid. 4. He played 5 years of WCO under Childress with the Vikings. 5. He's a UFA and he's probably going to be pretty damn cheap... not to mention this would be an ideal scenario for him in terms of having an opportunity to start (unless Reid/Childress want him in KC).
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JackTa00.htm Except for one point. His stats make mark Sanchez look like Joe Montana.
I am not saying everyone on that list blows, but I would prefer Matt Moore and Kyle Orton to most of them.
All stats matter to a degree. Point out someone we are talking about here that has markedly better stats than Nacho. Moore...negative. Flynn...negative... Jackson...negative. Maybe you really do have a point, but are just unable to articulate it? All of my posts regarding the waste products on the list starts with their stats.( well, lack thereof)
weren't you agreeing with junc's diatride about "stats being used out of context" so maybe you are taking Jackson's stats "out of context" since you agreed with junc whenever people brought up Sanchez stats that they were being used "out of context"
No. I agree with Junc that right now, Sanchez is your best bet, especially when you consider him in the context of the OCs we've had. You have 9 guys here blowing Matt Moore, yet fail to take into context....that his whole career has been as a backup wherever Dan Henning has been an OC. And his completion percentage is abou 5 points higher than Nacho, on far less passes in a high percentage passing scheme.....are you kidding?
the fact that the previous OC (schotty and to a lesser extent Sparano) tried to run the ball more to hide Sanchez ability to consistently throw the ball accurately? I'm not a big stat guy and I don't go over as much "tape" as you do, but I've watched Sanchez play over the course of 4 seasons to have an idea of the kind of player he is, he's not a good QB, never has been, never will be. We're better off looking for other options during this time while we find our next long term solution at QB. I'm not a fan of Jackson so I hope he doesn't end up here, I've let it be known more than once that I'm in favor of starting McElroy in '13.
I'd love it if they could acquire either Smith or Flynn. Although I voted for Flynn, I'd almost rather snag Smith. Either one would be a huge upgrade over our current guy.
