So 1 game is a consistent basis?

because you're a Raiders fan? :hmmm:

Man, RunKC, that 1 game sample size of Wilson throwing interceptions is huge. Conveniently, you left out the fact he led his team to 3 TD drives in 4:17 to advance his team to the Super Bowl. But that's ok! We get it.

Amazingly, Aaron Rodgers, everyone's FAVORITE QB, gets a pass ... because Seattle's defense IS SO GOOD, no one can beat it. Oh, I mean, other than Tom Brady.

But I guess the fact that Russell Wilson single-handedly kept the Hawks in the driver's seat in the Super Bowl while the Hawks defense let Brady go ballistic on them in the 4th quarter doesn't get mentioned because, well, it doesn't fit the narrative!

But yes. Let's talk about that 4 interception game. However, let's ignore Andrew Luck and his 12-33 and getting taken out of the game in the 3rd quarter. Because, you know, apparently the Colts just aren't good enough and Andy has it too tough !

if Andrew Luck was SO GOOD, he would have at least kept Indy in the game against New England. Because anyone who watched the Super Bowl and thought, "damn, this Seattle defense is legendary!" ... is kind of off their rocker.

Seattle's OFFENSE was the only reason they were in that game. Remember, it was 14-7 with 31 seconds remaining in the 2nd quarter. I guess Russell had nothing to do with that CLUTCH 5 play, 80 yard TD drive in 0:29 SECONDS.

Just LMAO

So funny to me.

New England / Seattle play on a neutral field 10 times and NE wins 8 of them. No doubt. Russell getting that game to 14-14 at half was HUGE, and totally changed the game. Then, before you knew it, he had two more great drives and it was 24-14.

the play of the game was Butler tripping Lockette with 7:55 remaining in the 4th on 1st down. That play was going to be a HUGE gain (and maybe even a TD with 1 move after the catch). The DB fell down, grabbed at Lockette's foot, and Lockette fell down and no penalty was called and then Seattle punted two plays later. That allowed Brady to get those two TD drives.

but no one will ever remember that (other than me)

I think it would be the other way around it 8 of 10.

Remember, the Seahawks defensive backfield was pretty decimated from injuries by the superbowl. That's something they kind of rely in

https://chawktalk.files.wordpress.co...te-tripped.png

Malcom Butler should be public enemy #1 to Seahawks fans. He literally saved that game. Twice.

There's several examples of Russell Wilson playing very poorly and not having consequences.

NYG-0 TD's/2 INT's, below 60% comp. Ran for 1 TD and yet his team won 38-17.
STL-0 TD's/1 INT. QBR of 29. And his team still won 20-6.
HOU-0 TD's/1 INT, 52% comp, 20.6 QBR and his team still won 23-20.
OAK-0 TD's/0 INT's, 5.11 avg, 42 QBR and his team still won 30-24.
NO in the playoffs-50% comp, 25 QBR, 5.72 avg and his team still won 23-15.

Russell has the rare advantage of being on a completed stacked team, especially with that defense to cover for him when he plays poorly.

95% of teams don't have the luxury to have that kind of a defense.

Some teams (San Diego, Indianapolis and Green Bay) rely on their QB so much that most of the time if the QB can't play a great game, they will lose. Why? Because they don't have anywhere near the talent that the Seahawks do.

he catches that ball and makes one cut and he might be gone to the left ... worst case scenario, they tackle him in bounds around the NE 40 ... in a 24-21 game ... with the clock running around 7 minutes and Seattle back in scoring territory

I can go to any QB and cherry pick 5 regular season games where they didn't play well. Peyton, Tom, Aaron ... anyone.

Wow, what an insane cherry pick LMAO

I honestly don't want to diss Wilson, because I'm largely on your side on this, but I will say this:

1. the less a guy has to pass, because he is relying on his legs and his running game, and because he knows he doesn't have to score big points because his defense is likely to control the other team's offensive output, the easier it is to avoid mistakes. This isn't a Wilson thing, it's a good decision-making, good coaching thing.

2. QBR and similar can be useful, but I dont' think too many people think Wilson outplayed Brady that game, though Wilson's QBR was higher than Brady's.


AGAIN, I do tend to agree with you on your points overall in this thread, so don't take it as a massive attack on what you're arguing here.

I can show you 5 Brady playoff games where he has a terrible QBR and his team has won.

Luck isn't elite yet, too many turnovers.

Wilson isn't elite yet, doesn't have the numbers. In his case, it's not really his fault, he hasn't been asked to do as much or enough to out up the numbers.

Learn how this sport is played? Wilson plays it just fine.

Indy doesn't have the talent nor coaching that Seattle has but Wilson still makes clutch plays and isn't carried by the team.

The point they are making, not completely invalid, is that if a Manning, Brady or Rodgers have a QBR of 13.6, as Wilson did against the Packers, there is no way in hell their team wins. Completely impossible. Their teams are too reliant on them, because their defenses and run games are not nearly as dominant as Seattle's.

Not completely invalid, but I agree with you that I think Wilson has "it", and that as the years go by more evidence will build in support of Wilson being an exceptional player.

It's why it's ridiculous to use wins and losses as a qb statistic. Wilson's best playoff performance, he lost. His worst 2, he's won.

It's hard to say on point 2.

No one will remember how amazingly clutch the TD drive at the end of the 1st half was for Wilson. That was a 29 second TD drive against the NE Pats to tie the game (while getting the possession back in the 3rd) in the Super Bowl.

Wilson also played a great 3rd quarter, while Brady played a poor 3rd quarter.

Brady played an all-time 4th quarter, while Seattle was in "let the defense finish the game mode" and neutered the offense in the 4th quarter.

The aforementioned Butler/Lockette trip was a HUGE momentum shift in the game. That play probably saved the day almost as much as the Butler pick.

...but you can't take away the drive that got them to the 1 from Wilson, either. He made a HUGE 3rd and 10 completion and then got fairly lucky on a 1st down bomb to Kearse on that deflected pass ... but you can't just say if that's incomplete Russell doesn't drive them down and score anyway being on the NE 40 with 50 seconds, 2 timeouts, and 2nd and 10.

and I will never, ever, ever put that pick on Russell Wilson. That was a terrible play call and he made the 100% correct read and was 100% right to throw it because it was the design of the play. Could he have made a better throw? Maybe. But come on. That's pretty insane to ask of someone. It was still such an unnecessary play call.

All you need to do is watch Wilson in the fourth quarter and crunch time. He's money. (Outside of that great play by the NE DB to win the super bowl).

This is wrong, as I have shown you in the Baltimore win Brady had in the AFCCG the 2nd year they lost to NYG.

I don't even hate Wilson. I think he's a good QB who could be a franchise QB someday.

But he's not in Aaron Rodgers class. No ****ing way.

If his defense completely bottoms out and he got in a shoot out in the 30's or even 40's with an elite QB like Rodgers, he's going to lose.

2007 Tom Brady won against San Diego in the postseason with a 19 QBR

He brings stability to the qb spot, he's a franchise qb.

Of course he's not Rodgers, but because he isn't asked to do what Rodgers is doesn't mean he cant, we don't know.

It's the same dumb rhetoric chiefs fans have. No shit Alex smith isn't Rodgers, last I checked, those guys aren't laying around everywhere.

2011 then. I looked it up. QBR of 59.6, which is alot more than 13.6, which is what Wilson had against GB.

There could be a game here or there, but I'd be fairly surprised.

but not much more than 19.6 that Brady had in 2007 with his 18-1 super team ... correct?

So, see, this I don't get. QBR makes no sense sometimes.

Wilson's line against GB was 14/29, 209 yards, 1 TD, 4 picks. That gets him a 13.6 QBR. That is a ****ing AWFUL line. Not even 50% completions and 1 TD versus 4 picks. That's a "you ****ed your team with a rusty, spiked dildo of a line".

Brady's line against SD was 22 of 33 for 209 yards, 2 TDs and 3 picks. 18.9 QBR. That is a bad line. Not good. Not what we expect from elite QBs, but that is NOWHERE near as bad of a line as Wilson's, and yet the QBR difference is only 13.6 versus 18.9? 66% completion percentage, and yes, more picks than TDs, but 2/3 versus 1/4.

WTF?

Don't tell Hootie that..he's his guy. He probably has his poster up in his bedroom.

Yeah, see response I just posted. Those metrics are nice, but in this case, I'm shaking my head over such a small discrepancy when Brady's game sucked, but Wilson's game was EPIC SUCK.

Whatever, you have enough people debating you on this, and I'm largely on your side, so carry on.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/68...terback-rating

(and Wilson rushed for a TD and QBR accounts for rushing as well)

Because it is what the fans deserve, and settle for.

and not only that, but Jermaine Kearse was responsible for two of those interceptions that bounced out of his hands ... which is another thing QBR accounts for

Let's put it this way ... like Win Shares and in the NBA and WAR in baseball ... QBR isn't perfect but it's BY FAR the best metric we have to determine the value of a QB.

You won't find a lot of people who think that.

He's certainly quite a bit better than Alex Smith, though.

Tom Brady, an amazing QB, has had a handful of TERRIBLE postseason games. So has Peyton Manning.

...it happens to EVERYONE

the 4 INT cherry pick in a game where he PROBABLY DISPLAYED THE MOST CLUTCH 4 MINUTES IN NFL HISTORY is hilariously pathetic

I most certainly do think that Luck and Wilson are in Aaron Rodgers' class. Aaron Rodgers is amazing. But Aaron Rodgers is nowhere near Peyton and Tom.

I'm tired of Aaron getting passes in the postseason, too. Peyton doesn't get passes. Why does Aaron?

I'm not ready to crown Luck just yet.

He's got the most upside in the NFL but he was a turnover machine last year. He's still young, still improving, and that's not the best surrounding cast out there.

I'd trade two 1st's for him in a heart beat because of what he will be but I wouldn't say he's there quite yet...

When you throw 616 passes you're gonna throw some picks.

His INT % was the same as Drew Brees and Peyton Manning.

Pretty sure you could offer Irsay $100M + 10 1st round picks and he wouldn't do it for Luck.

But I agree. I haven't crowned him yet, either. I do know he'll be an elite QB for the next decade plus, though. Think it's hilarious he gets more credit for winning his dogshit division and winning a few playoff games then Russell gets for a Super Bowl + a runner up.

Wilson has had arguably the most successful first three years of an NFL career in history, yet more than half of this board doesn't think he's worth two first round picks because he isn't elite. He's won 42 games including 6 postseason games, a Superbowl, and 2 NFC Championships.

Meanwhile, its been 28 years since the Chiefs last won a game in which we started a QB that we drafted and 22 years since we won a playoff game.

SMDH

Team stat propping up qb play. Do not pass go

Those same people who don't think Wilson is worth two 1st don't seem to mind referencing all of our QB's "wins" in an effort to prop him up.

Can't have it both ways.

I dont.

You won't hear that from me. My argument is Wilson vs elite QBs. Wilson is not elite, no matter how much you want him to be.

A lot of this argument is people digging their heels in against Hootie, but some of it comes from the differences in how people view "elite" or "franchise" QB's.

Personally, when I think of elite I'm thinking of a guy that can carry his team when needed, make the clutch play when needed and makes his teammates better.

If Wilson isn't elite, he's as close as you can get without being elite. If I had to pick one QB to win a game, he'd probably be damn high on the list.

I just find it hilarious that this fanbase has no problems using any stat imaginable to discredit guys like Wilson and Luck while they make ridiculous excuses for our current QB.

Same here

We have our guy. Next.

I think it's hilarious that Peyton and Tony suck because they choke! Stats don't matter. Duh! But Russell sucks because stats matter, even though he generally plays his best ball in clutch moments.

We've had plenty of teams that were stacked other than at QB. We have 0 playoff wins to show for it. Wilson has 6.

The Chiefs have 8 postseason wins, 2 conference championships, and 1 Superbowl championship in our history (going back to the merger 49 years ago).

Russell Wilson has 6 postseason wins, 2 conference championships, and 1 Superbowl win in his 3 year career.

Guys!

The only way to win in the NFL is to have a franchise QB!

/ChiefsPlanet the past 10 years

...unless you're Seattle

You don't want to miss out on the next Trezelle Jenkins and Glen Dorsey in order to get Russell Wilson. Too high a price...

Threw 4 INTs and they still came back and won.

You can go back to 1998, and I'll give you any 5 of our first round picks for Wilson.

Way too high a price.

I'd much rather have an OT that can't block, or a OLB that runs from ball carriers.

You can pool all of Dorsey's picks, and I can't think of a combo I wouldn't trade for Wilson. I can't think of a group of 4-5 I wouldn't trade for Luck.

Most important position on the field, and we're bringing a knife to a gunfight.

but let's assume we're talking about 2 HOF 1st rounders ...

would you really not trade Tony Gonzalez and Derrick Thomas for Russell Wilson? I'm sorry, but I would. I'm sure you would, too.

I kind of like how you give Russell full credit for getting the game to 14-14 at halftime based on very aggressive playcalling, but then lay all blame on Carroll and the offensive coordinator (whoever he is, is that Quinn?) for the bad playcall at the end, and in so doing completely exonerate Russell for throwing the actual ball right to the Patriots player.

I haven't said that Wilson made a horrible play there, because it's a pretty tough one either way, but you CANNOT credit Wilson for the tie at the end of the first half, and then exonerate him for the pick at the end.

The same aggressive play-calling is what resulted in both plays, the good at the end of the first half and the bad at the end of the game.

Seattle carries Wilson/ CP

So we're back to bitching about the Chiefs not drafting a QB for 30 years and blaming it on a regime that's entering their 3rd year.

Full circle

I absolutely can ...

Seattle had a timeout ... there was absolutely NO GOD DAMN REASON to throw the ball there. Not EVER. You have THREE downs to gain 1 YARD. You can run the read option on 3rd down.

There is 2 PLAYCALLS you can make on 2nd down. And both of them involve a heavy set ... you either hand the ball to Lynch and hope he scores, or you run the play-action from the 1 any other team runs in these situations that usually results in a TE wide open for a TD

YOU NEVER SPREAD OUT THE OFFENSE AND DESIGN A SCREEN PASS TO BE THROWN TO A WR IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FIELD WHERE THE ENTIRE DEFENSE IS

I mean, come the **** on.

I'm not sure on that one...pretty much a coin flip.

Our best 5 year stretch of 1st round picks since 1990 would have to be:

Derrick Johnson
Tamba Hali
Dwayne Bowe
Glenn Dorsey\Branden Albert
Tyson Jackson


That's six players. The most recent 4 of them are no longer Chiefs, and the other 2 are getting close to retiring without ever winning a playoff game.

https://bernardsblock.files.wordpres...1-45-00-am.png

I'm sorry, I just cannot fault the QB for making the right read on a TERRIBLE ****ing playcall that called for him to throw the ball into the middle of the ****ing field on the 1 yard line on 2nd down in a Super Bowl when you have Marshawn Lynch. If no one was on the field, Lockette catches that pass in stride 1000 times out of 1000 ... so even if you want to fault ball placement, which I find ridiculous, I still place ZERO blame on Russell Wilson.

I mean, seriously, given the context ... that is literally the worst play call in the history of the NFL. It really is. It was SO bad.

if Pats fans ever forget the name Malcom Butler, they are idiots ... between that defensive play to save the Super Bowl and the DPI he got away with when he fell down and tripped a wide open Lockette ... dude literally won a Super Bowl for them ... and no, I'm not forgetting about the "Tom Brady legacy game" that Tom Brady put on in the 4th quarter, either

Russell Wilson would immediately be the best QB in Chiefs history. Think about that for a minute and then tell me he isn't worth 2 stupid draft picks.

They lose that game to the Chiefs, so, no, they won't be in the Superbowl.

Meh, he's won playoff games with 13. Whatever qbr and lost games going ham. It's just not something that can be used for individual play.

A qb can win a game playing like shit and lose one playing great. Too many factors in play there.

So this is your prediction? Chiefs in the Super Bowl? LMAO

Tell me, do we win? And who is MVP?

Meh, look at your own screen shot. He's wide open with no one around him.

Great play by the defender.

Moving on

Legendary play

I do love a good QB discussion, but around here it always devolves into AS sucks, or the Chiefs haven't drafted a QB in decades or this fanbase is stupid and doesn't deserve 'John Doe' at QB.

For once, I'd love to see an actual football discussion remain a football discussion.

And it's always the same jackasses ****ing shit up.

Dude, the SECOND POST has Alex Smith in it.

LMAO

Actually you do, and Seattle does, and had done so successfully before, which is one of the main reasons why teh Patriots were ready for it. They had specifically practiced for it, and Butler had been BEAT in practice. :LOL:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...utler-got-beat

No shit. That was Hog Farmer. It was an obvious joke, too.

Butler played great. Don't woryr, his name won't be forgotten. Hell, he is likely starting at CB for us this year...

Yeah, and then Easy 6 chimes in with the same thing and he ain't joking.

THIS FAN BASE IS NOT SMART.

There isn't a GM or owner that would give 5 1st rd. picks for any QB.

That will never happen. Especially with the way contracts are going.

This isn't ****ing Madden.

I don't care what Seattle does .. The fact New England supposedly knew the play call makes it that much worse

Flukes can happen. 6 postseason wins in 3 years is no fluke. 8 games, and he's never scored fewer than 23 points...not a fluke.

LMAO Why? Because some won't do what most GMs/owners won't do. Give up 2 first only to have to give him a huge contract?

I don't see why that's a big deal.

We need to pull the trigger on a R1 QB anyway...so it's an extra first for a proven one...and a big contract, who cares...HE'S A ****ING QB. THEY GET BIG CONTRACTS.

Not that hard.