Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   2014 NFL Draft Forum (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=47)
-   -   Russell Wilson, QB, Wisconsin (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52068)

Asteinebach 04-10-2012 03:50 PM

Russell Wilson, QB, Wisconsin
 
NFL Live just made a fantastic point about Russell Wilson. The guy is tough, has a great arm, he's intelligent, and an all-around good QB prospect. He's a 5th round prospect because he's too short. Really? Wherever this kid is drafted, he's a steal. McShay just said he's a 5th round QB because of his height, I bet some team takes a risk on his talent late in the 3rd.

holt_bruce81 04-10-2012 03:53 PM

Love me some Wilson. He's the 6th Quarterback on my Big Board.

BoiseSt39 04-10-2012 04:58 PM

I would take Wilson before Oswieler.

FUNBUNCHER 04-10-2012 05:02 PM

If Wilson was 6'2, he's a better pro prospect than Locker/Gabbert/Ponder and would have been a top 15-20 pick this year IMO.

I think Wilson goes in at least the 4th round, probably the 3rd.

mightytitan9 04-10-2012 05:21 PM

shanahan shouldnt of traded up and taken him in the 3rd

tjsunstein 04-10-2012 05:22 PM

I really want him to see some serious playing time in the NFL. Hope the Jags pick him up. Gabbert isnt surviving out there.

descendency 04-10-2012 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER (Post 2942478)
If Wilson was 6'2, he's a better pro prospect than Locker/Gabbert/Ponder and would have been a top 15-20 pick this year IMO.

If he were 6'4", he'd be a more athletic (and experienced) Ryan Tannehill (with a touch less arm strength). Russel's NFL QB skills are vastly over-rated because people think that he's so under-rated because of his height. It isn't just height, though.

tjsunstein 04-10-2012 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by descendency (Post 2942513)
If he were 6'4", he'd be a more athletic (and experienced) Ryan Tannehill (with a touch less arm strength). Russel's NFL QB skills are vastly over-rated because people think that he's so under-rated because of his height. It isn't just height, though.

But youre saying at 5-6 inches taller he's a more atheltic, more experienced Ryan Tannehill with a touch less arm strength. I'll sacrifice those 5 inches for Russell Wilson if thats all you have against him.

descendency 04-10-2012 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjsunstein (Post 2942523)
But youre saying at 5-6 inches taller he's a more atheltic, more experienced Ryan Tannehill with a touch less arm strength. I'll sacrifice those 5 inches for Russell Wilson if thats all you have against him.

Where would you take Troy Smith?

Rashaan Salaam 04-10-2012 06:22 PM

When people say that "If he were taller...he'd be a 1st round pick" is a poor argument because you're saying that he has 1st round talent. If you have 1st round talent, then you're a 1st round pick.

Height didn't bother him at N.C. State nor Wisconsin. I have him as my 3 rated QB behind Luck/Griffin.. He is a 1st Round Talent in my opinion.

Wilson doesn't fold under pressure, stands tall in the pocket, excels on 3rd Downs & EOG situations.

Osweiler at 6'7 has way more passes batted at the LOS than Russell Wilson 5'10.

If I'm the Dolphins, Bills, Seahawks, Chiefs, Jags...I'm taking a SERIOUS look at Russell Wilson

@Descendency - I can see where you can make the comparison to Troy Smith, but they were different in Accuracy, 3rd Down passing & Clutch Situations. That's what separates Wilson from Smith; Which is why I rated Wilson higher than Smith. But, they do have some similarities though (Athleticism, Mental Toughness, Leadership)

FUNBUNCHER 04-10-2012 06:41 PM

Just like 40 times are sacrosanct for cornerbacks, there's a height limit for QBs that starts at 6 feet.

Mike Vick doesn't go 1/1 if he was 5'10.

Peyton Manning isn't the first overall if he's 6 feet and a quarter inch.

It's not rational, but it is factual.

If Wilson gets a chance, I think he ends up a starter at some point in his career.

To Descendency, is there something specific about Wilson's game you don't like, or is it your core opinion that Wilson is overrated as a QB??
His stats last season were freakish for someone who only threw the ball 300 times,( 33 TDs/4 INTs).

WCH 04-10-2012 06:47 PM



Debating a players hypothetical draft stock if only he were taller or faster or stronger is a waste of time.

onejayhawk 04-10-2012 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjsunstein (Post 2942523)
But youre saying at 5-6 inches taller he's a more atheltic, more experienced Ryan Tannehill with a touch less arm strength. I'll sacrifice those 5 inches for Russell Wilson if thats all you have against him.

This is like asking, "What do you have against Brandon Weeden except his age?" It is a very big deal.

Also the system at Wisconsin is gimmicky as they come. No one plays a Pro system, in spite of the statements to the contrary. However, the Badgers are less Pro-like than usual.

J

Rashaan Salaam 04-10-2012 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER (Post 2942615)
Just like 40 times are sacrosanct for cornerbacks, there's a height limit for QBs that starts at 6 feet.

Mike Vick doesn't go 1/1 if he was 5'10.

Peyton Manning isn't the first overall if he's 6 feet and a quarter inch.

It's not rational, but it is factual.

If Wilson gets a chance, I think he ends up a starter at some point in his career.

To Descendency, is there something specific about Wilson's game you don't like, or is it your core opinion that Wilson is overrated as a QB??
His stats last season were freakish for someone who only threw the ball 300 times,( 33 TDs/4 INTs).

:yes:

I'm big on "Trust What You See"... and I see a starter. I think Vick would've went 1/1 if he measured at 5'10 because of his skill set was something we haven't seen before (4.2 speed at the QB spot).. Cunningham was more like a Lanky Version of Cam Newton

Rashaan Salaam 04-10-2012 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onejayhawk (Post 2942634)
This is like asking, "What do you have against Brandon Weeden except his age?" It is a very big deal.

Also the system at Wisconsin is gimmicky as they come. No one plays a Pro system, in spite of the statements to the contrary. However, the Badgers are less Pro-like than usual.

J

:gtfo:

Gimmicky?? The are quite possibly one of the ONLY programs in the country that run a TRUE Pro-Style offense.. You're talking about an offense that utilizes a FB in its Base Offense.. Pro Offense concepts where the Run Game is emphasized.. You're way off base homie

descendency 04-10-2012 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashaan Salaam (Post 2942596)
Height didn't bother him at N.C. State nor Wisconsin.

Then why does his completion percentage jump when he's out of the pocket versus in?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashaan Salaam (Post 2942640)
You're talking about an offense that utilizes a FB in its Base Offense..

What's a fullback???

(Oh and so does Georgia Tech.)

=========================

All I can say is I never saw Russel Wilson make 1 line check, audible, or any form of pre-snap change in 3 years at NC State. If Russel couldn't get away running around, he had to throw it up and hope. Quite a few games were lost because Russel took a lead and threw it away, 1 INT at a time.

If a college coach didn't trust him, why should a pro coach?

Rashaan Salaam 04-10-2012 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by descendency (Post 2942641)
Then why does his completion percentage jump when he's out of the pocket versus in?
--> Splitting hairs...the most important thing is that they were completed and kept the chains moving.


What's a fullback???

(Oh and so does Georgia Tech.)
Option attack and you're splitting hairs again:)
=========================

All I can say is I never saw Russel Wilson make 1 line check, audible, or any form of pre-snap change in 3 years at NC State. If Russel couldn't get away running around, he had to throw it up and hope. Quite a few games were lost because Russel took a lead and threw it away, 1 INT at a time.

If a college coach didn't trust him, why should a pro coach?

Unless you're at the practices/meetings, or on the sidelines.. its tough to speculate what he was allowed to do at the LOS. I remember when I was in college our QB used to make up stuff at the LOS to confuse the defense into thinking he was checking out of the play..a lot of the time, it was just to drain the Play Clock in an attempt to get the defense to tip their hand.

All I know is that he kept the offense on pace, digested a foreign playbook and led a team to a Big Ten Championship.

That says alot about his Mental & Physical skill.. Consider me sold.

Asteinebach 04-10-2012 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by descendency (Post 2942641)
Then why does his completion percentage jump when he's out of the pocket versus in?

Rodgers, Favre, Cunningham, Flutie, all had pretty good success throwing when flushed from the pocket. You're not saying much.

descendency 04-10-2012 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashaan Salaam (Post 2942663)
Unless you're at the practices/meetings, or on the sidelines.. its tough to speculate what he was allowed to do at the LOS. I remember when I was in college our QB used to make up stuff at the LOS to confuse the defense into thinking he was checking out of the play..a lot of the time, it was just to drain the Play Clock in an attempt to get the defense to tip their hand.

Except it's not. There have to be signals.

edit: Whether the signals mean anything or not, is a different story. But having no signal means no audible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asteinebach (Post 2942665)
Rodgers, Favre, Cunningham, Flutie, all had pretty good success throwing when flushed from the pocket. You're not saying much.

Mr. Apple, meet Mr Orange.

Asteinebach 04-10-2012 07:17 PM

More or less, and despite being in the minority here, I don't care what the "prospect's draft stock" is, I want the guy that is going to be a solid NFL Starter. Tannehill is taller and has an edge in arm strength. Wilson is well-versed, experienced, intelligent, and highly motivated.

Anyone who says they "could see him starting," but at the same time "wouldn't draft him in the 1st," is defeating the purpose of the draft. The idea is to get the best players available. Tannehill has all sorts of "potential." But "potential" is the same word that's synonymous with "bust." So tell me, why not take the more certain player?

Asteinebach 04-10-2012 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by descendency (Post 2942667)
Mr. Apple, meet Mr Orange.

If Russell Wilson has a great success rate with throwing outside the pocket, he wouldn't be the first to do so. That's the point that I'm making. And if that's as much a part of his game as it is for Mike Vick to take off and start running, then tell me what the problem is? If Tim Tebow can start in this league, then Russell Wilson can overcome his inadequacies as well.

descendency 04-10-2012 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asteinebach (Post 2942668)
Tannehill has all sorts of "potential." But "potential" is the same word that's synonymous with "bust."

Jason Pierre Paul was only lots of potential and Aaron Curry should have been the #1 pick because Matthew Stafford was sure to bust. (I remember an epic topic titled "No, Please don't save my franchise" where tons of people proclaimed their hate, especially lions fans, for Matthew Stafford. It was the best kind of humor - fatal irony.)

I agree with you, if you think the guy is a day 1 starter, he's a first rounder (at QB).

FUNBUNCHER 04-10-2012 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asteinebach (Post 2942668)
More or less, and despite being in the minority here, I don't care what the "prospect's draft stock" is, I want the guy that is going to be a solid NFL Starter. Tannehill is taller and has an edge in arm strength. Wilson is well-versed, experienced, intelligent, and highly motivated.

Anyone who says they "could see him starting," but at the same time "wouldn't draft him in the 1st," is defeating the purpose of the draft. The idea is to get the best players available. Tannehill has all sorts of "potential." But "potential" is the same word that's synonymous with "bust." So tell me, why not take the more certain player?

Because lack of marginal height is considered a liability for a QB.
Even if the 5'10 QB is the superior prospect, the 6'4 QB with 'potential' is perceived to be able to see the field better after the snap and have a greater chance to make plays downfield under duress.

When the average height of an NFL lineman is 6'4/6'5, being 6-7 inches shorter is a a challenge.

And there's no way Mike Vick IMO would have been selected when he was if he was less than 6 feet tall.

Vick was a playmaker in college with an elite arm and rare speed, but he was NEVER a statistically dominant QB.

It was a flukey situation that allowed him to be selected that high in the first place. A guy with his production and skillset at QB wouldn't be the 1/1 pick over the last decade.

Asteinebach 04-10-2012 07:32 PM

I think any hate the Lions' fans had over taking Matthew Stafford #1 overall was simply past apprehension from mistakes made in the Millen era. But yeah, I understand what you're saying. It can go either way, but with as much need for 1st round QB's, I'd like to think there's a possibility 4-5 QB's might be selected in round one.

descendency 04-10-2012 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asteinebach (Post 2942673)
If Russell Wilson has a great success rate with throwing outside the pocket, he wouldn't be the first to do so. That's the point that I'm making. And if that's as much a part of his game as it is for Mike Vick to take off and start running, then tell me what the problem is? If Tim Tebow can start in this league, then Russell Wilson can overcome his inadequacies as well.

JaMarcus Russel started in the NFL. It's what first round picks do.

Russell Wilson's height (or something about him) actually limits him in the pocket (it's technically unfair to say it's definitely height), similar to Tim Tebow (whom is also a much better passer when the field is cut in half). Like Wilson, Tebow is also much better when the play breaks down in general, because of his athleticism. The general technique to beating both of them is to rush in a disciplined matter (as opposed to more traditional passers, like Brady, whom you just rush frantically because he can't run away) and play solid coverage behind.

Unlike Tebow, Russel will actually pull the trigger on a throw.

The biggest problem for Russel Wilson at NC State was he was never in summer practices, which limited his development as a QB. He was playing baseball (because no one felt his future was in football, until he got to Wisconsin - which was after the Rockies were starting to get frustrated with him) during those summer workouts.

The one thing I think I can say is that Russell wants to be a QB very badly. He only played baseball because he was told by most that he had no chance at the NFL because of his 5'10" stature.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.