ReFo: Cowboys @ Seahawks, Week 6

Notable performances from the Cowboys' Week 6 win over Seattle.

| 2 years ago
2014-REFO-WK06-DAL@SEA

ReFo: Cowboys @ Seahawks, Week 6


2014-REFO-WK06-DAL@SEAWell that didn’t exactly go according to plan.

The Seattle Seahawks have looked unbeatable at home in recent years, but don’t tell that to the Dallas Cowboys who took it to them in the early going and came away with a 30-23 victory.

Dallas overcome a 10-point deficit after surrendering a field goal and having a punt blocked for a touchdown within the first eight minutes of the game, but they stuck with their new-found dedication to the running game, and the ground-and-pound style — combined with some timely third-down conversions — made for an efficient outing for the Cowboys’ offense. While the offense did their part, it was the defense that made a statement on a national stage as they held Seattle’s offense in check from start to finish.

As for the Seahawks, it’s certainly not panic time, and with a team still loaded with talent, a game like this is sure to bring out their best moving forward. They were uncharacteristically handled in their own building, but there is no time to sulk about their own homefield mortality. So instead of sulking, let’s take a look at some of the key performances from the game.

Dallas Cowboys – Performances of Note

Rolando McClain, ILB: +5.2

Breakdown: One of the season’s biggest surprises got even bigger on Sunday as McClain continued his strong play in the middle of the Dallas defense. He made an impact in all phases as he graded at +1.8 against the run, +2.5 in coverage, and +0.8 as a pass rusher with two hurries on his three rushes. He beat running back Marshawn Lynch for his two pressures and he continues to make enough plays in coverage to make people forget his first few years in the league.

Signature Plays: McClain’s game-clinching interception is his most notable play as he ran the seam and made a nice play on the ball to secure the turnover at the end of the game. But for those who love hard-nosed football, there wasn’t much better than watching him working downhill on fullback Derrick Coleman at the 4:46 mark of the third quarter, as McClain blew him up, re-directed the run, and shed the block to get in on the tackle.

Zack Martin, RG: +4.1 and Ronald Leary, LG: +2.1

Breakdown: It was a strong game for both guards, particularly in the running game. Both players played extremely well on the move, whether pulling out in front, or securing blocks at the second level. Martin and Leary were also solid in pass protection, combining to surrender three hurries on the day to go along with a Leary holding penalty. It’s a good sign for the Dallas offense as Martin has now posted his third straight game in the green while Leary is working on four straight positive grades of his own.

Signature Plays: Nothing sums up the guard play like watching Martin and Leary working in tandem out in front of the play. On the first play from scrimmage in the third quarter, together they pulled in front, discarded of strong safety Kam Chancellor, and then Martin peeled off the block to secure the backside by sealing linebacker K.J. Wright. It was a thing of beauty and it lead to an 8-yard gain in which running back DeMarco Murray didn’t even have to break stride.

Jeremy Mincey, DE: +3.1

Breakdown: For all the talk of Dallas being weak up front, Mincey has been a key cog in easing those concerns this season. He put in his best effort with a +2.0 pass rush grade and a +1.2 effort against the run. He finished with five hurries on his 24 rushes and added two stops in the running game.

Signature Plays: Mincey got inside LG James Carpenter at the 8:33 mark of the fourth quarter to force a Russell Wilson throwaway attempt that almost ended up in a Dallas interception. In the running game, he collapsed LT Russell Okung at the point of attack with 0:59 to go in the third quarter, forcing RB Marshawn Lynch to bounce outside into McClain’s waiting arms.

Seattle Seahawks – Performances of Note

Russell Wilson, QB: -2.4

Breakdown: The Seattle offense was out of sync throughout much of the game, and Wilson continued to play with fire with regard to taking care of the football, though he only had one turnover to show for it. First, the good, which included a pretty deep ball down the sideline on a rub route with 12:04 to go in the first quarter and then an absolute laser that somehow managed to get to WR Doug Baldwin’s hands, only to be tipped away by FS Barry Church at the end of Seattle’s first drive.

Beyond that, Wilson nearly turned over a few times, first when he fumbled unprompted on a scramble early in the first quarter. He then made two poor decisions, both while trying to make a play while in the grasp of the defense. He didn’t see LB Kyle Wilber and threw one right into his hands in order to avoid a sack at the 4:09 mark of the third quarter and then made a similarly poor choice when he tried to throw the ball away at the 8:33 mark of the fourth quarter but the ball didn’t get out of bounds and nearly landed in LB Justin Durant’s lap.

Signature Plays: While the near-interceptions were bad, Wilson’s final throw was his worst as he forced the ball down the seam to Luke Willson and into McClain’s waiting arms.

Brandon Mebane, DT: +2.3

Breakdown: Mebane’s battles with Cowboys center Travis Frederick went back and forth throughout the game and Mebane forced the Cowboys to adjust their game plan a bit. Mebane proved difficult for Frederick’s patented reach block that usually opens up the Dallas zone running attack. The Cowboys adjusted by running more to the outside and when they wanted to come back inside, Frederick pushed Mebane out of the way to set up the cutback rather than working around him for the difficult reach block. Overall, Mebane made a positive impact, both blowing up running plays, and forcing Dallas to make in-game adjustments.

Signature Plays: On near-identical plays at the 10:05 mark of the first quarter, then at the 9:12 mark of the second quarter, Mebane stood Frederick up at the point of attack and easily shed him for the tackle.

Richard Sherman, CB: +1.2

Breakdown: Speaking of fun battles, Sherman against WR Dez Bryant pitted two of the league’s best against each other. Bryant was targeted five times when lined up against Sherman, catching two passes for 39 yards and while also drawing a pass interference penalty. Bryant lost Sherman on the crossing route with 1:10 to go in the second quarter and later outmuscled him for a 16-yard gain on a back shoulder throw with 6:55 to go in the game. Sherman won his fair share as well, even doing so from an unfamiliar spot at right cornerback. He was draped all over Bryant on an errant third down pass by QB Tony Romo early in the third quarter. It was fun back-and-forth battle between two superstars.

Signature Stat: Sherman lined up at RCB on 27 snaps, the most he’s done so since Week 15 of 2012. He lined up there on just three snaps last season.

 

PFF Game Ball

Rolando McClain was on his way to a strong game, but his game-ending interception clinched both the game and the PFF Game Ball all at the same time.

 

Follow Steve on Twitter.

 

| Senior Analyst

Steve is a senior analyst at Pro Football Focus. His work has been featured on ESPN Insider, NBC Sports, and 120 Sports.

  • Chris

    Great performance by Romo – easily outplayed Wilson.

    • Troll Chris

      Shut your mouth

      • Chris

        LOL!!!

        • Troll Chris

          Byron Leftwich> Chris

          • Chris

            I don’t see what that has to do with Wilson being a game manager, but I agree.

          • [email protected]

            If anybody was a game manager Sunday it was Tony Romo.

          • Dohkay

            LOL, really?

          • [email protected]

            He only threw a few times, his team dominated the line of scrimmage. Isn’t that what people call a game manager?

            Also that was a joke, i don’t believe in that term.

          • Dohkay

            He threw the ball 32 times, a number RW has eclipsed 6 times in his 42 games. You think 32 is “a few times”?

          • [email protected]

            If you add Russell Wilson’s scrambles to his passes he does that quite often.

          • Dohkay

            Good point. Rises to 20 games out of 42. That’s actually an interesting point. It would be interesting to break out “touches” so to speak. That being said, his rushes are less efficient than passing so scrambling isn’t always ideal but he does shoulder the load a bit more accounting for rushing.

          • [email protected]

            That is one of my complaints against using stats. A lot of the definitions are arbitrary. He drops back on a pass play, all the receivers go out and he sees a big open spot and runs for a first down. Now that is a ‘run’ play.

            I disagree about scrambles being less effecient than passes. There are many advantages to that over passing.

          • Dohkay

            Went back and updated my stats. Wilson averages 31 “touches” per game compared to Luck’s 43. Wilson’s RB/WRs average 26 rushes compared to Luck’s RB/WRs averaging 23. Luck’s usage is much higher than Wilson’s either way.

            I can see your point on rushing being an effective play in situations where there isn’t anyone open, but you can scramble too much as well. I like to use yards per dropback (accounts for passes, sacks, and rushes), Luck is at 6.22 and Wilson is at 6.60 for their careers.

          • [email protected]

            Now go back and adjust for how many plays each team averages per game.

          • Dohkay

            Or you can add those two numbers… Seattle – 57, Indy – 66. Wilson passes/runs on 54% of plays compared to Luck at 65%. On the 26 rushes per game, Wilson gets 4.4 YPC and for Luck, the 23 rushes per game average 3.8 YPC.

          • Jefferson

            This entire ridiculous exchange of 100+ posts is driven by your axe grinding effort to diminish Wilson and elevate your ‘fave’, Andrew Luck. In support of this you make one valid but extremely limited point that defense performance affects quarterback performance and should play a role in qb evaluation. Wow, what an insight.

            From this one reasonable but utterly banal observation, you leap to the conclusion that Luck >> Wilson, a conclusion that however much COULD be justified is certainly NOT demonstrated by your smoke and mirrors of spurious correlations.

            Let me add another comparably valid but banal point to this pointless (i.e. trolling) discussion. Defense has an indirect but still significant effect on qb performance, yes, but offensive line and receiving core have an even GREATER impact on qb passing performance (which seems to be your only measure of a good quarterback)! Wow, how about that!

            Having made that uncontroversial point it would be easy to demonstrate that even though the Seahawks’ receiving core has been somewhat underrated, it has also been clearly inferior to that of the Colts (even with injuries factored in). The Seahawks’ OL has been a joke and any and every advanced metric and credible analysis would evaluate the Colts’ OL higher.

            If I were a troll like you, I would throw out a smokescreen of statistical nonsense to justify the above comparative evaluation, which would be easy as pie, and then hastily and illogically declare QED that I have proven that Luck is obviously endowed with greater assets in the passing game and thus ‘obviously’ is not as good as Wilson who comparatively overperforms in the face of adversity in the passing game.

            The general debate around Luck vs Wilson has become something of a joke. Your illusory attempt to elevate the discussion with ‘objective’ statistics completely fails, as others have demonstrated above. You begin with totally unscientific and self-serving concepts like ‘game manager’ and you base your case on a limited and tenuous relationship which you unsuccessfully support with cherry picked statistics. The truth of the matter is that every aspect of this team sport, even the punting game, has an direct or indirect impact on QB performance, and if I were a troll I would post in the Colts ReFo that Luck ‘rides’ the quality of his offensive line and receiving core whereas Wilson proves week in and week out that he can overcome the severe limitations of these Seahawks units to win.

            But I’m not a troll and Andrew Luck is awesome. Anyone who begins a ‘discussion’ with the claim that Russell Wilson is a ‘game manager’ loses all credibility (i.e. is almost certainly a troll). Anyone who has actually watched all of Wilson’s games, Seahawks fan or not, could not credibly make the claims you make except as a troll.

          • Dohkay

            Do you feel better having gotten that off your chest? Let me retort without 7 paragraphs of nonsense.

            Offensive Lines ranked by PFF
            2012 – Indy 31st, Seattle 20th
            2013 – Indy 25th, Seattle 27th
            https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/01/13/2013-offensive-line-rankings/

            Offensive Lines ranked by Football Outsiders
            2012 – Indy 26th (run) and 17th (pass), Seattle 4th (run) and 20th (pass)
            2013 – Indy 15th (run) and 6th (pass), Seattle 9th (run) and 32nd (pass)
            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2012
            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2013

            Now those rankings don’t seem to indicate that one is markedly better than the other as Wilson had the better line in 2012 and Luck had the better line in 2013.

            As for receivers…

            FO rated Sidney Rice and Golden Tate higher than any Colts WR in 2012 and rated Doug Baldwin and Golden Tate higher than any Colts WR in 2013.
            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr2012
            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr2013

            PFF rated Wayne 10th, Tate 16th, Rice 17th, Baldwin 47th, and Hilton 83rd in 2012. They rated Tate 16th, Baldwin 19th, Hilton 25th, and Wayne 27th in 2013.
            https://www.profootballfocus.com/data/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2012&pos=WR&stype=r&runpass=&teamid=-1&numsnaps=25&numgames=1
            https://www.profootballfocus.com/data/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2013&pos=WR&stype=r&runpass=pass&teamid=-1&numsnaps=25&numgames=1

            Strange. It actually appears that Wilson has better WRs and that the OLs are pretty similar (though I’ll grant you Luck’s is trending up while Seattle’s is trending down).

            Do you have any other excuses?

          • Jefferson

            Your ‘retort’ again confirms you are a troll and not serious about the ‘facts’, not even the facts that you cherry pick. I will mention just one item, since we all know feeding a troll never satisfies his hunger.

            The troll debate that you started here is about passing performance, Luck versus Wilson. You raised a plausible but nevertheless indirect and subordinate factor in the role of the defense. I retorted with another plausible factor, one with an obvious direct and significant impact, the role of OL pass protection.

            Your retort to my retort references, among other things, a Football Outsider metric that ranks the pass protection of the Colts’ OL better than that of the Seahawks in both 2012 and 2013 — dramatically so in 2013. You neglect to cite FO’s metric for 2014 which shows the same trend (a metric that can’t capture just how reliant SEA has been on pass pro support from tight ends). Of course anyone who actually watched BOTH the Colts and Seahawks would not need advanced metrics to confirm this ranking.

            And yet somehow FO’s clear and unmistakable ranking which contradicts your argument gets forced through your special ‘troll filter’ and leads you to preposterously claim that have just demonstrated that the two team’s OLs are ‘pretty similar’!

            It’s a joke. There is no point in debating with you since you begin with closed mind and unscientific and unverifiable concepts like ‘game manager’. You proceed to simply bandy around miscellaneous and selective statistics, some of which directly contradict your argument.

            Interestingly, if you had dug further at FO, you might have found their deep analysis of ‘true sack rate’ which is also suggestive of how much Luck has benefited, relatively speaking, from better OL protection.

            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2014/2013-quarterbacks-true-sack-rate

            The same article attempts to isolate one interesting variable which is relevant to the second ‘obvious’ factor affecting QB performance which I raised. FO claims that in 2013 Wilson had the 6th highest percentage of ‘coverage sacks’ in the NFL. The Seahawks WRs, especially down their #1 and #2 WR, were not getting open.

            This by the way was also the obvious conclusion the Seahawks organization, with the benefit of a bit of extra knowledge about their players, arrived at when they made their first draft pick in 2014. This pick was not an offensive lineman despite the expectation of many analysts after the complete gong show of pass protection 2013 that anyone with a passing knowledge of the Seahawks would know about. That first draft pick was a WR (even though both Harvin and Rice appeared ready to play in 2014). Their second pick of course was an offensive lineman. Both OL pass protection and receiving core ability to get open have been serious obstacles which Wilson has overcome to remain among the best passers in the league and to win games consistently (exact QB ranking is troll bait and something I could care less about).

            Your last question was do *I* have ‘any other excuses’. The truth is that you are the one replete with excuses, excuses for the fact that the very advanced statistics sites you cite so selectively and self-servingly (PFF + FO) for troll purposes, BOTH rank Wilson decisively over Luck in 2012 and 2013. In fact for both years Wilson pretty much runs the table of PFF signature stats: not just QB rating but even renown ‘game manager’ metrics like deep passing and under pressure performance.

            But I am finished here. A troll will always get the last word.

          • Dohkay

            I cherry pick stats? You look solely at 2013 FO and 2014 FO rankings because 2012 FO and 2013 PFF say something you don’t want to admit: Their OLs were both ranked closely. I did cite that Indy is trending in the right direction in my previous comment, too. How very trollish of me!

            If you read my comment history I’ve actually used that very link you shared before in a similar discussion. I like it because it shows that 71% of Luck’s sacks were simply blown blocks and he couldn’t do anything to avoid those negative plays. Wilson only had 46% of his sacks on blown blocks meaning he could have scrambled (something people love to use as a positive for him and something I am willing to grant) rather than take coverage sacks.

            I also like how you ignore my comment regarding WRs even though BOTH PFF and FO agree that Wilson had better WRs. You cite the 2014 draft as an indicator that they know they need WR help. Uh, yeah, they lost Golden Tate to my Detroit Lions in free agency (and I can confirm he is damn good for my team as well!).

            Fun fact, by the way, the Colts selected an OL and WR with their first two picks as well. Why did you neglect to mention that? It appears Indy recognizes they need help in those areas as well!

            My entire argument is that Wilson benefits from the talent around him and it’s easier to play QB at high level when you’re not asked to do much. You tried to boil down my argument to strictly defense but apparently you haven’t read many of my comments. I have been citing the running game as a major factor as well. I don’t think even you can try to argue that Luck has better RBs than Wilson but I’m sure you can selectively point to something (maybe they drafted a RB in the 7th round last year?).

            So to recap: Wilson has a better running game, better WRs (unless you care to show my why PFF/FO are wrong), and a better defense. Luck has a better OL, especially now and in 2013 but in 2012 both ranked them as a wash. I think it’s fair to assume Wilson has it much easier than Luck and is asked to do less with more.

            Troll ya later, Jeff.

          • Jefferson

            Did I really come back and read this? Why does trolling suck us in so easily? Where to begin…

            Let me find a semi-positive re-entry point to the discussion. Your final recap of factors is almost agreeable to me and at least provides some basis for dialogue. Unfortunately the factors you list are unweighted and incomplete, and your conclusion is completely unfounded.

            (1) Wilson does have a somewhat better running game. If I subscribed to your Slapdash School of Statistics I could easily characterize this ‘a wash’. In 2013 PFF ranked Brown #10 in the composite run metric and on the simple, objective measure of YPC Brown bested Lynch. In 2014 PFF has Bradshaw #7 in run metric, #1 ‘overall’, and has a higher YPC than Lynch. And so on. But I will refrain from declaring it a wash in this case and instead grant you that this factor favors Wilson, especially when all aspects are considered (e.g. SEA does have better run blocking).

            (2) In pass protection, I am glad you now concede. I would add that the team differential in this category is greater than the team differential in the run game. Again, anyone who actually watches Seahawk and Colts games, as I do but you apparently do not, would not need the ‘authority’ of a statistic (even though they are out there) to confirm the obvious.

            (3) As for receiving corps (not just WRs), I simply disagree with you and so I believe would a preponderance of analysts looking at the whole picture. While addressing a different point I already mentioned one indicator, comparative Coverage Sacks, which together with Time in the Pocket and other stats support the qualitative studies people have done of coaches film to conclude: SEA receivers comparatively have had trouble getting open (this was true for Tate in SEA too by the way), given the SEA passing scheme, absence of true #1 WR and other variables. Overall I think the IND WRs + TEs have been better in the passing game and the metrics provide no definitive evidence to refute this (e.g. in 2012 and 2014 to date PFF puts IND receivers in the very top 5 of all receivers; from 2012 to 2014 IND WRs have done better in Yards Per Route Run). It is no easy task to grade a receiving corp overall based on various contradictory metrics for individual receivers. Is having a dominant #1 WR attracting double coverage most important Or having a strong duo more important? Or is it best to have minimum quality across the board with no weak link in the chain? What about the passing role of TEs (most defensive linemen could outrun Zach Miller in pads). And so on. Let me do you a solid, against my better judgement, and call this one ‘a wash’.

            (4) Defense: I won’t belabor the point even though there is much that can be said about this. SEA >> IND.

            If we stopped here, this would be my own summary in comparison with yours: SEA > IND in run game; IND >> SEA in pass pro; SEA = IND in receiving corp; and SEA >> IND in overall defense. Here is the problem for your argument.

            First, I have been overly generous above.

            Second, this list of factors, if they really were equivalent on some theoretical score sheet, would probably add up to advantage Luck or at best ‘a wash’.

            Third and more importantly, in practical terms these factors are NOT even remotely comparable in weight, insofar as they impact QB passing performance. I grant that in a complex interconnected game like football, every part affects the whole which in turn affects every other part. A QB’s defense impacts his performance! But the passing performance of a QB is impacted far more directly and significantly by his pass protection and his receiving corp, (and the interaction between the two), than it is by the less direct effects of his defense. You can dispute this ad nauseam but it would be silly.

            Fourth and finally, the above list of factors, which already on balance gives Luck better conditions for the passing game than it does Wilson, is radically incomplete. Let me just add one more big factor, which is almost embarrassingly obvious. You have been so preoccupied with the convoluted task of building up the effect of a QB’s defense on his performance, that you have neglected the more direct factor of THE ACTUAL DEFENSES OF OPPONENTS who face the QB, in particular the pass defenses of those opponents.

            This too involved a discussion but here is a taste. FO’s ranking of pass defense within division: in 2012 SEA’s division opponents were ranked #2, #6, #8 while IND were ranked #4, #19, #29; in 2013 SEA faced #5, #10, #15 within division while IND faced #16, #24, #26.

            Life is too short to demonstrate this point further. Suffice to say that Andrew Luck routinely faces opponents with weaker pass defenses on average, and this factor has a more direct and significant impact on measurable QB performance than the comparative weakeness of his own defense. The pass rush of Luck’s division opponents has also been weaker according to FO, but that’s another story.

            The larger message is this. Misuse of statistics is easy. In football, as in many objects of statistical analysis, every element affects every other on some level. The difficulty then is to isolate the player/unit performance to be evaluated, in this case QB performance, ‘as best you can’ since this can only be achieved on a limited and provisional basis.

            FO and PFF, the source of most of your metrics, have attempted to do just that. Both websites decisively conclude that Wilson has been better than Luck in measurable performance. Furthermore, PFF’s detailed set of metrics reveal that Wilson basically runs the table of QB stats! These findings also definitively refute the ridiculous charge that Wilson is a game manager, a charge that no consistent observer of Seahawk games would even dream of making in the first place (e.g. ‘deep passing’ and ‘under pressure’ performance, not to mention that little ‘metric’ we can call playoff performance).

          • [email protected]

            And how does that work out for them? Luck is 4-8 in games where he throws 40+ times.

          • Dohkay

            There’s 18 games where he’s thrown in 40+ and he’s 8-10 for the record. The average score is 24-31 and Luck averages 20 rushes for 71 yards from his RBs (3.4 YPC)

            In games where Wilson throws 30+ he is 5-4 and the average score is 23-19 and his RBs average 23 carries for 92 yards (3.9 YPC).

            It’s almost as if he doesn’t have to throw it more because the score is lower and his running game is more effective… but one can’t be sure!

          • [email protected]

            So what you’re saying is:

            A) Andrew Luck is better because he throws more.
            B) The Colts lose games when he throws a lot.

            Makes sense to me.

          • Dohkay

            Wow, Scott. How you got that from my comment above is mind-boggling.

            I’m suggesting that the reason the Colts throw so much is due to an ineffective run game and a defense that gives up a lot of points. They lose games when he throws a lot because they average 31 points allowed. Teams that allow 31 PPG tend to lose.

            The reason the Hawks don’t throw so much is due to an effective run game and a defense that doesn’t give up a lot of points. They win more than they lose (barely) because they allow 19 PPG. Teams that allow 19 PPG tend to win.

          • Fernando Sanchez

            Let’s start by saying that RW is a very athletic QB who usually makes good decisions, that in my opinion, would make him a top 10-12 QB.

            But your insistence to refuse to admit the obvious is infuriating.

            How can you pretend that supporting cast has no implications on QB efficiency?

            Eli Manning is a very good QB that won two superbowls, back when he had an elite D and powerful offensive lines and running backs backing him up. Since then, they guy has become erratic, and sometimes looks horrible. But it is not that he suddenly forgot how to play. It is just that trying to overcome an awful defense while constantly flying for your life, is not something that even good QBs can overcome.

            John Elway was a fantastic QB who was going into NFL history as one of those “flashy stats but not a winner” narrative, until his team got him dominant offensive lines and running backs.

            Dan Marino was arguably the best QB in all history, to the point that he is in that conversation, even without a ring. But could never win it all, because the rest of his team was never on his level.

            Dohkay splits show are a good way, perhaps the only one, to measure a QBs, contribution to team wins.

            They alsho show the obvious, that QBs who can rely on their D and in their running game play the game differently than those who are not in that situation. They can be patient, and only throw it when things are there, because you know your team will keep you there till the end.

            And it is funny that you mention Romo, as a bus driver. He completely outplayed your RW yesterday. The difference is that this time, he was not running for his life all the time. He made some very good plays, but he only had to make a few of them, because this time, the rest of the team had his back.

            Look, maybe a day wil come in which we’ll see RW regularly winning shootouts, or scoring 17 point in the fourth quarter to win. But for the time being, it doesn’t look like he could do that.

          • [email protected]

            Russell Wilson scored 21 in the 4th quarter of a playoff game. I guess that doesnt count because his defense gave up a last second field goal? I thought he was being carried by his defense?

          • Fernando Sanchez

            It seems that on top of it all, you are unfamiliar with the concept of averages.

            But I will give out a tip.

            They are helpful to describe the general appearance of related events, instead of picking the ones you remember or the ones you like.

            And besides, what is your deal? I think most people here think RW is a good QB.

            Are you going to stump your feet unless everyone says that he is the best one?

          • [email protected]

            Can you read? All i did was make a joke that Tony Romo was a game manager because he was riding a dominant team on Sunday like everybody accuses Russell Wilson.

          • Fernando Sanchez

            I read your comment on Romo. Good joke. Who cares.

            It is your other 20? 30? posts, that make one question your rationality.

          • [email protected]

            Apparently everybody does because they couldnt wait to talk about it.

          • Guest

            I’m sure a game manager could make the 3rd and 20 play to Terence Williams. Not! Don’t be a homer, Scott. Romo is a fine QB.

          • [email protected]

            So what you’re saying is that making big plays means you’re not a game manager?

  • Dohkay

    Wilson’s record in games where his defense gives up 17 or less: 24-2.

    Wilson’s record in games where his defense gives up 18 points or more: 7-9.

    Wilson’s record in games where the defense surrenders 24 points or more: 1-6 (lone win was in OT against TB last season).

    • Chris

      This can’t be possible.

      • Dohkay

        To really fuel the fire…

        Luck’s record in games where his defense gives up 17 or less: 16-0.

        Luck’s record in games where his defense gives up 18 or more: 11-14.

        Luck’s record in games where his defense gives up 24 or more: 8-12.

        The key difference of course is the average PPG allowed in those situations…

        17 and under games: SEA – 11.2 (26), IND – 11.6 (16)

        18 and over games: SEA – 23.9 (16), IND – 31.4 (25)

        24 and over games: SEA – 28.6 (7), IND – 34.0 (20)

        • [email protected]

          You’re a Wilson hater, we get it. Yawn.

          • revellyre

            On a site typically inhabited by a somewhat more intellectual breed of NFL fan, your obtuse commentary sticks out like the Space Needle on the Seattle horizon.

          • [email protected]

            I wouldn’t call idiots who think that statistics mean something more intellectual.

          • [email protected]

            I find your post shallow and pedantic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxANht7yBV4

    • Troll Chris

      Dohkay’s record in games he’s played in the NFL: 0-0

      • Dohkay

        Source?

        • Troll Dohkay

          Your mother who wants you to get out of her basement.

          • Dohkay

            My own personal troll!!! Now I know I’ve made it!

            😉

    • Jason Williams

      I think Russell Wilson is an extremely average quarterback who throws on the run better than most. Once teams learn to keep contain on him, he’ll be out of the league.

      • Barron Buc

        Ha ha, no way

      • [email protected]

        I’m sure when Russell Wilson is around 37 or 38 and slows down a bit teams will learn to contain him.

      • Jordan

        Have to agree with that Jason. I really like watching Wilson play, he has a good arm and obviously is fast as hell. But he was a good second baseman before the NFL that I think people forget about, which is a skill he utilizes as a qb. He can scramble on plays that aren’t designed to be scrambles, and that extra time on the play more often than not is the difference where even good cb’s lose their man and the d breaks down a little ;or someone comes off a block and release (like Lynch) and Wilson can make that throw better than most. But can he consistently hang in there without running away from the first sign of pressure and make good decisions/throws game in and out like the best qb’s do? Nah

      • shaeto

        I think Peyton Manning is an extremely average average quaterback who is smart at calling audibles. Once teams figure out how to stop that, he’ll be out of the league.

        • Jason Williams

          I actually have long thought that Peyton Manning is an average quarterback but the difference is that Peyton Manning has proven me wrong.

          • shaeto

            My point is that if you take away the thing he is really good at, he’s not that good anymore. You can’t just discount a particular skill because it doesn’t fit your narrative. Yes, once teams learn how to contain Russell Wilson, he’ll be out of the league. Well much better players and coaches then you have been trying for 3 years now and haven’t really been able to do it, so it may not be quite as simple as you think.

          • shaeto

            Is three seasons not enough to prove that Russell Wilson is not a fluke?

    • Dohkay

      One more fun split… Alex Smith since 2011:

      Smith’s record in games where his defense gives up 17 or less: 25-1

      Smith’s record in games where his defense gives up 18 points or more: 7-11-1.

      Smith’s record in games where the defense surrenders 24 points or more: 2-8-1

      Oddly similar to someone else, eh?

      • Barron Buc

        What’s your obsession with trying to prove Wilson is a game manager? He’s a good QB

        • Dohkay

          The media’s constant fawning over him as the second coming of Jesus?

          There’s a stat you may have seen a few hundred times… his record against Brees, Brady, Manning, and Rodgers as if he’s the reason they won those games. Hint: He’s not.

          • [email protected]

            You just posted 3 different times his win and loss splits. So QB wins and losses are only important when they support your bias?

          • Dohkay

            You have really missed my point. You can drop several QBs onto Seattle and they may not lose more than handful of games over 3 seasons. The defense is the reason Wilson has won his games. Luck is the reason the Colts have won theirs.

          • [email protected]

            Thats your opinion. I disagree. There are very few QB’s who make as few turnovers as Russell Wilson. The offense is just as much a part of a number 1 defense as the defense is. You need an offense that doesn’t turn the ball over and runs clock just as much as an elite defense.

            There are few QB’s who make plays when needed and don’t make critical errors.

          • Dohkay

            How about Alex Smith? Since 2011 he has 21 INTs in 51 games. Wilson has 22 INTs in 42 games. Are you saying Alex Smith would flourish in Seattle, too?

          • [email protected]

            He’s good at limiting turnovers, but he doesn’t make the big plays that Wilson makes. I’d rather have Alex Smith than Jay Cutler.

          • Dohkay

            Agreed so the blowout wins wouldn’t be as big of blowouts but his record in the breakouts I provided above are very similar (and his defenses averaged giving up more points than Seattle’s so he’d probably win at least a few more of those games needing less points…

          • [email protected]

            What are you talking about? Big plays win close games. Tony Romo won the game in Seattle with the play on 3rd and 20.

          • Dohkay

            Then why can’t Wilson win games at a better rate than Smith???

          • [email protected]

            He does, what are you talking about? His career win% is vastly superior.

          • Dohkay

            I’m comparing Smith from 2011 forward when his defense became a top 10 unit. Gotta keep it fair for both QBs.

          • [email protected]

            Lol, yeah thats fair. Just ignore the 8 years where Alex Smith was terrible.

          • Dohkay

            Win % is 72% for Smith and 74% for Wilson. Wilson has had the number 1 defense in both of his full seasons. Not the case for Smith the last 3 full seasons. Not too shabby, eh?

          • [email protected]

            I actually like Alex Smith, at least the good version. He was really awful for a long time and his teams were not lacking talent. I like how he’s playing now, i’d take him over a lot of QB’s but he doesn’t compare to RW.

          • Dohkay

            The only difference between the good and bad version is defense. The bad Alex Smith had defenses that allowed 25 PPG. The good Alex Smith had defenses that allowed 16 PPG.

          • [email protected]

            Please, a defense doesn’t make you throw 1 TD vs 11 Int’s in a season.

          • Dohkay

            What changed?

          • [email protected]

            How should i know? Might have been Jim Harbaugh. He turned into a different kind of QB.

          • Dohkay

            Or the reduced pressure of not having to score many points to win a game…

          • [email protected]

            No chance.

          • Dohkay

            So he sucks and suddenly he becomes remarkably efficient. You think it happened out of thin air I guess.

          • Barron Buc

            It was mostly Harbaugh’s coaching that made him better.

          • Dohkay

            Yet he’s continued his efficient play now at KC. I’d say it was a system that used him as a game manager rather than a play maker. Having a capable defense and running game allows you to install that system. The 49ers from 2011 forward were an excellent defensive team and KC is as well. Both feature great RBs. Both allow Smith to play to NOT lose the game rather than to WIN the game, something Wilson is afforded as well.

            Don’t get me wrong, Wilson is better than Smith, but both are still game managers as proven by their awful records when they need to score more points to win (i.e. the team relies on them rather than defense and running the ball).

      • [email protected]

        So you’re saying wins and losses is a QB stat? Just saying, thats probably not a path you want to go down if you don’t like Wilson.

        • Dohkay

          No, merely pointing out that in games where Wilson is the QB and his defense performs like a league average defense they don’t have a winning record. It’s almost as if the Seattle defense is the main reason they have been so successful the past 3 seasons…

          • [email protected]

            So you admit you are just trolling? If not we can discuss Wilson’s win and loss record vs other QB’s.

          • Anonymous

            I don’t think it’s trolling. I think it’s a pretty fair assessment to say that Seattle’s defense is the strength of the team. The record speaks for itself. When their defense hasn’t played well, they have been a sub .500 team in the Russell Wilson “era”.

            Is that all Wilson’s fault? No. They don’t have outstanding receivers and they aren’t built to play from behind.

            But I don’t think anyone can argue that Andrew Luck isn’t better then Russell Wilson.

          • [email protected]

            If QB wins and losses are a valid argument then Russell Wilson is the best QB of all time through 2 seasons. You can’t have it both ways. No QB ever went 16-3 with a superbowl in his second year.

          • Anonymous

            The idea is to win the game. So it is PART of a valid argument.

            Which unit is helping Seattle win games more, their offense or their defense? And then look toward Indy, their offense or their defense?

            Russell Wilson is an excellent QB, but he’s not better then Andrew Luck no way no how and if you can’t admit that then I have nothing more to say.

          • [email protected]

            Good. Don’t say anything else. Fine with me.

          • Anonymous

            Great. Just don’t go calling people trolls if you don’t want to engage in a healthy debate surrounding facts.

          • [email protected]

            What do you consider a fact? This will be amusing.

          • Anonymous

            1. That Russell Wilson has a below .500 record when their defense doesn’t play well (above 18 points per game).

            2. That Andrew Luck has more comeback victories, and that Andrew Luck has won a higher percentage of games when the defense gives up 24+ points which in Indy’s case is much more often then in Seattle’s case because they have a bad defense (20th in total defense last year).

            3. And that Andrew Luck has better passing statistics.

            4. And that Seattle’s defense is the strength of their team (1st in total defense last year, 18th in total offense)

            http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total/year/2013

            Nothing that hasn’t already been stated.

          • [email protected]

            Statistics are not facts. I can bring in 100 statistics that say the exact opposite.

          • Anonymous

            You can bring in 100 statistics that show Seattle’s offense was better then their defense in 2013? Or that Seattle has a winning record when their defense gives up 18+ points per game with Russell Wilson at QB? This will be amusing.

          • [email protected]

            Seattle’s offense was top 5 in DVOA in both 2012 and 2013. In the advanced stats the defense and offense were nearly equal. They were 9th in the league in scoring with the fewest possesions of any team.

            Not that i think that means anything, like i said you can find a statistic for anything.

          • Anonymous

            In 2013 They were actually 7th in DVOA on offense, and on defense…

            They were first.

            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff2013

            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2013

            So again, the defense is the strength of their team and when the defense gives up more then 18 PPG, they have a losing record (fact).

          • [email protected]

            Points scored has nothing to do with defense. In a lot of those games Luck scored points for the other team by throwing picks.

            You don’t think 7th is pretty good? That is not the 7th most talented offense.

          • [email protected]

            I looked up 2012 i didnt remember the exact number. They were 4th on offense and 4th on defense.

          • Anonymous
          • [email protected]

            Thats not what the page i saw said, maybe it was including playoffs. Regardless. It says that the offense was very good and most of the Seahawks talent is on defense.

            But its just a silly statistic and doesn’t mean anything.

          • Anonymous

            Being “very good” and being “the strength of the team” are not the same thing. Their defense is better then their offense and in the few games they haven’t been, they have a losing record.

            End of story.

          • [email protected]

            Every team has a losing record when their defense doesn’t play well. You do realize this is a team sport not a duel between QBs?

          • Anonymous

            Depends how you define “playing well” badly and “playing badly”. For Seattle, playing badly is surrendering 18+ PPG, for Indy, it’s giving up 28-35 PPG. Giving up 18 points is playing well for the Colts and they’re undefeated in that scenario with Luck at QB. Giving up 18 points for Seattle results in a losing record.

            A lot easier to win when you’re in situation 1.

          • [email protected]

            Seattle plays a lot tougher schedule. Giving up 18 points to the 49ers is different than giving up 18 points vs the Jags.

          • Anonymous

            EXACTLY. The Colts D is so bad they give up 18+ to the Jags. And they still win double digit games and win playoff games.

            So again, Seattle’s strength of their team is their defense.

          • [email protected]

            When you give up 18+ to the Jags its still easy to win because their defense is so bad. When you give up 18+ to the 49ers or Cardinals its a loss.

          • Anonymous

            You can’t have your argument both ways. You present DVOA, which is a schedule adjusted ranking system, that clearly indicates Seattle’s defense is better than their offense, then you say “well they play a tougher schedule”.

            Well it works the other way too then. They’re playing against better offenses this year and giving up more points, and their offense isn’t scoring enough points for them to win (they’re 1-2 when their defense gave up 18+ this season, same record as the Colts).

          • [email protected]

            I’m not arguing any such thing. I am just saying that statistics don’t mean a thing. Who is better? Unless you have a time machine so that you can have them play for the same team in the same year we’ll never know.

            I don’t even care if you think that Luck is better. I think Wilson is better. I only argue when you say that its PROVEN that Luck is better when clearly it isnt. There are a lot of easy arguments to made as to why Wilson is better.

          • Anonymous

            And you haven’t made a single one yet.

          • [email protected]

            Playoffs.

          • Anonymous

            1. So playoffs are all that matter?

            2. I think we’ve very clearly established it’s been easier for RW to succeed with the defense he has.

            3. You only want to look at INT’s, but how about yards, TD’s, and points scored? And how about WHEN those INT’s were thrown. Again for the 10th time. Down 31-10 before an INT was thrown against the Chiefs, down 24-9 (the final score) against Baltimore. So really he’s had one game where he threw INT’s that had a direct result in his team losing the game.

            By your logic, Ben Rothlesburger and Eli Manning are better then Peyton Manning because they have more playoff success.

          • Dohkay

            Even in that NE game, his INTs led to 14 of the 43 total points scored by the Pats. The only time Wilson’s defense allowed more than 29 points in the playoffs he lost.

          • [email protected]

            In the playoffs they are.

          • [email protected]

            Actually i agree with that. Rothlisburgher and Eli Manning are better when it counts. And it counts more when it counts.

          • Ajit

            The Peyton Manning sucks in the playoffs is just never going to go away, is it? This despite the fact that his performances in the playoffs have actually been quite good.

            http://www.footballperspective.com/the-best-playoff-quarterbacks-in-the-super-bowl-era/

            Even then, anyone with any knowledge of statistics knows that the playoffs represent a small sample size.

          • [email protected]

            Statistics are garbage. Statistics were invented to show that black people are inferior to white people. They measured the head size of the differnet races and then used statistics to prove that white people are smarter.

          • Anonymous

            Points scored by who? How many points a team allows is directly proportional to who well the team’s defense plays.

            Also, Luck has thrown 13 more career INT’s on 500+ more attempts than Wilson.

            Assuming all 13 of those INT’s resulted in a TD for the other team (which is clearly not true), that’d be an average of 2.4 PPG allowed more per game.

            Look man Seattle’s defense is the strength of their team. As a Seattle fan I don’t understand how you’re trying to deny this.

            If you put Luck on the Seahawks you think they’d be any worse then they are now?

          • [email protected]

            No, points can be scored in a lot of ways. If you make turnovers that is going to cause your defense to give up points even if theyre playing well.

          • Dohkay

            INT rates for RW and AL are pretty similar: 2.1% to 2.6% (Wilson is lower)

            In games decided by a score or less: 2.7% to 2.3% (Luck is lower)

            In 15+ wins: 1.5% to 1.6% (Luck is lower).

            In 15+ losses : 5.3% to… nothing (Wilson has never lost by 15+)

            That’s the key difference. In those 15+ blowout losses the defense has given up an average of 40 PPG. That’s not on Luck.

          • [email protected]

            Luck has thrown 8 interceptions in 3 career playoff games. Wilson has thrown 1 in 5 games.

          • Dohkay

            Average PPG allowed by the defense: 16.8 along with 2 DST TDs and 12 turnovers forced.

            For Luck? 37 PPG along with 3 turnovers forced.

            Luck averaged 25.3 PPG in his losses. Wilson averaged 25.4 PPG. Still want to blame Luck??????

          • [email protected]

            Absolutely, you’re not going win playoff games throwing 3 or 4 picks. If you look at every QB in history the winning % when you throw 3 picks is what? Maybe 8%. (guessing) Whatever it is its LOW.

          • Anonymous

            Except they did win…by scoring 45 points, when they were down 31-10 before a single INT was thrown.

          • Dohkay

            He throws INTs because he has to take risks to win!!! He can’t rely on his run game because he needs to score 37 PPG to win. You don’t score that much when you run it 40 times. He can’t throw 5 yard slants and dink and dunk his way downfield. It wastes precious time and they need points. You are an absolute fool if you think Luck is the reason they lost those games. Let Luck play a playoff game where he only needs 10 points to win a Super Bowl. I think he’d be capable.

          • [email protected]

            What does how many points he ‘needed’ have to do with it? The fact is that they scored 43 points. It could have been 60.

          • Anonymous

            It has everything to do with it. Is it easier to win when you only 10 points on offense or 32 points?

            As a matter of fact, Seattle could have one the SB by a full touchdown, against the best offense in history, even if their offense hadn’t gained a single yard. Meaning they could have put you or I under center and won the game.

          • [email protected]

            Andrew Luck would never need only 10 points to win because he scores more than that for the other team.

          • Anonymous

            Like when they were down 31-10 before he threw a single INT against the Chiefs, as has been stated 4 times now. Or like when they were down 24-9 (the final score) when he threw the INT against Baltimore?

            Who’s trolling now?

          • Dohkay

            Wilson has needed only 17 PPG to outscore his opponents in the postseason. Luck has needed 38 PPG to outscore his opponents in the postseason.

            Stay with me here. You need to outscore your opposition to win the game. Who had a harder time outscoring their opposition? Wilson or Luck?

          • [email protected]

            Its easy for the other team to score when you throw 8 picks in 3 games.

          • Anonymous

            So what was the reason the Chiefs scored 31 points in the first half BEFORE he threw a pick?

          • Dohkay

            Game by game cause you’re an idiot.

            Playoffs against BAL: Down 24-9 with 5:35 remaining in the game throws his only INT. Didn’t account for any of the 24 points scored by Baltimore.

            Playoffs against KC: Down 31-10 with ):35 remaining in the first half, throws INT number one. Doesn’t lead to points on the TO (end of half). Down 31-10 with 15:00 minutes remaining in 3rd quarter, throws INT. KC scores to make it 38-10. That’s 7 points. Down 38-24 with 5:50 remaining in 3rd quarter, throws INT. KC kicks a FG to make is 41-24. In this game, Luck accounted for 10 of the 44 points allowed, although none until they were trailing by 21.

            Playoffs against NE: Throws his first INT on the opening drive, NE scores a TD. Down 12-21 with 1:00 left in the first half, throws INT number 2. NE doesn’t score as the half ends. Down 22-36 with 13 minutes remaining in 4th quarter, Luck throws INT. NE scores TD. Down 22-43 with 1:00 remaining in the game, Luck throws INT. Game over. Luck accounted for 14 of the 43 points via his turnovers.

            So, in his 3 playoffs games, 24 of the 111 points scored against Indy came on drives immediately following Luck INTs. That lowers the points per game from 37 to 29 which still is almost double that of Wilson’s PPG allowed by his defense.

            Also, Luck has exactly one INT while tied (never had a lead and threw a pick). The other 7 came when he was trailing by 9, 14, 21, 21, 21, and 14 points.

          • DAN SLAUGHTER

            Because Wilson’s offense runs the ball more…duh. How can this be explained to you differently? Stop having a clear bias and an agenda. Such a tool.

          • [email protected]

            So playing for a bad team makes you a better QB? When he’s forced to carry the load by himself he can’t do it.

          • [email protected]

            When you throw 18 interceptions in a year, your defense is going to have a long year.

          • Anonymous

            And when you’re able to run the ball 30-40 times a game, you’re going to throw less and thus throw less INT’s. Their percentage of INT’s to attempts is equal. Except Luck has 500 more attempts in 2.5 years.

          • [email protected]

            And Wilson has double the TD percentage.

          • Anonymous

            It’s actually 6% to 4% (not double), and again, more attempts = lower TD%.

          • [email protected]

            Its double if you use stats that include playoffs.

          • Chris

            DVOA is an efficiency statistic. The entire argument is that Wilson is an efficient game manager who isn’t asked to do much and is carried by a great running game and defense.

            DVOA is literally catered to Wilson.

          • [email protected]

            Points scored has nothing to do with defense. If you throw 8 interceptions in 3 playoff games the other team is going to score a lot of points against you.

          • Anonymous

            They were down 31-10 before he threw a single INT against the Chiefs. Their defense can’t stop a nose bleed. And they still won the game. You think Luck had a little something to do with that?

            What did Luck throwing INT’s have anything to do with the Chiefs scoring 31 points in the first half?

          • Dohkay

            That’s the nail in the coffin right there. In the first half they gave up points on 5 of 6 drives. They allowed 31 points in 30 minutes and Wilson’s defense has given up over 31 in an ENTIRE game only once. Guess who it was? 34 to… ANDREW LUCK!

          • Brian Hendricks

            Actually, Luck does NOT have more. Including Playoffs Luck has 9 GWD and 12 4QtrCBs. Wilson has 10 GWD and 12 4QtrCBs. If you are going to claim Luck has more you should present actual facts, not guesses.

          • [email protected]

            You can’t have a invalid half to a valid argument. Either QB’s win and lose games or they don’t.

          • Anonymous

            They are PART of a team winning and losing games.

            It is easier for a team to win (specifically the QB to help their team outscore the opponent) when the defense only gives up 14 points per game (see: Sanchez, Mark on the Jets from 2009 to 2012) then it is to win when the defense gives up 28 points per game. This is another fact.

          • Brandon

            So that’s what it’s all about. No one can argue that Luck has more ints in the playoff than Russell has had in anyone of his seasons.

          • Dohkay

            He dominates elite QBs. Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Manning are all winless in 7 games vs Wilson.

            Now, let’s make a few things clear. 6 games were at home, 1 on neutral field. The average points scored by the elite QBs was 14 points and they averaged 1.6 turnovers per game. I’m going to take a guess and say that in games against teams not named Seattle they average slightly more PPG, would you agree?

            Don’t get me wrong, Wilson has played great in those games. 14 TDs against 1 INT. He’s also benefited from 3 DST touchdowns, 2 safeties, a whopping 11 drives started within the opponent 35 (i.e. already in FG range), and an average LOS at the SEA 34. Short fields, playing with a lead, and getting 113 YPG from your RBs will make it pretty easy to go 7-0 when you only need 2 TDs to win.

          • [email protected]

            Thats not what i mean, i mean he’s won more games than any QB in history through 2 seasons.

          • Dohkay

            He’s won more games because of his defense. That’s my entire point in showing his record in games broken down by defensive points allowed. Put him on Indy where the majority of the games he’d need more than 18 points to win and there’s no way he wins as many games as Luck. He’s had 7 chances to show he’s capable and he’s fallen short in 6 of them.

          • [email protected]

            Wilson has been trailing in games by 15+ points 3 times in his career. He won 2/3. The other he should have won.

          • Dohkay

            What are the three games?

          • [email protected]

            Tampa Bay(2013), Houston(2013), Atlanta(2012, playoffs). The only one he lost was Atlanta and he put up 21 in the 4th to take a 2 point lead with 44 seconds to go.

          • Dohkay

            LOL hold on cowboy. The Houston game was aided by a 58 yard INT return TD by Richard Sherman with 2:40 remaining in the game and Houston ball at the SEA 40. If Houston runs the ball and doesn’t convert 3rd and 4 Seattle burns TO number 2 and gets the ball back inside their own 20 with about 2:15 remaining and 1 TO. Not an insurmountable comeback but let’s not credit him for a comeback he didn’t actually make on his own…

            The TB comeback was legit (albeit against an 0-8 TB team on the road in Seattle) and the Atlanta game is probably his best game he’s ever played. I was thoroughly impressed with that performance.

            Still, that goes to show how fortunate he’s been in his career. He has 40 pass attempts when trailing by 9+ points compared to Luck who has, wait for it, 193. Luck has played from behind by two scores or more much more and it’s much harder to come from behind in those scenarios.

          • [email protected]

            Russell Wilson also put himself in a position to not be down by double digits. Andrew Luck put himself into some of those situations.

          • Dohkay

            If you care to provide examples of that please prove it. You tried that in the playoffs and as I showed below that’s just not the case. He was down 24-9 and 31-10 before throwing INTs in two of his games. That’s not his fault yet you keep pretending it was.

          • [email protected]

            Its not his fault he threw picks? If you want to talk about picks that are not his fault look at Russell Wilson’s picks in 2012. Those are some of the most freak plays you will see.

          • Dohkay

            You said he put himself in those positions and yet he had no turnovers in those games until they were already down 15 and 21 points. Hence it wasn’t his fault he was trailing so much in those games.

          • [email protected]

            He could have scored points, thats one of the ways you keep from being behind.

          • Dohkay

            Like going 9 for 18 for 100 yards and no TDs in RWs win over the saints in the 2013 playoffs?

          • [email protected]
          • Ajit

            My two cents:
            Both Luck and Wilson are overrated by the media:

            As a colts fan I say this: Luck is really great, but he’s still error prone in ways his predecessor was not. He takes more sacks than idea, throws too many picks, and his accuracy can be scattershot at times.

            Wilson is overrated because he gets mentioned as an mvp. He’s not. Hes really good. A brilliant scrambler, but he’s also in an ideal situation. Not only has his defense completely shut down great offenses, they get turnovers and their special teams are awesome. Wilson also has a reliable run game so his conditions are more favorable.

            In the end, assessing who is better is too hard right now. I like Luck better, but I am biased.

          • [email protected]

            Yeah i agree with you Ajit. I am not arguing that Wilson is better. I’m just saying that Luck is not inarguably better.

          • Dohkay

            Not in the first half…

          • [email protected]

            Watch the video. It was raining and windy so bad that Drew Brees had 34 yards passing, they had a 19 yard punt. They missed two field goals. Just hanging on to the ball was a victory. Russell Wilson played well.

          • Dohkay

            Drew Brees struggled just as badly against that defense 2 months earlier. Was it the weather or the LOB? I’m going to guess LOB since they dominated Manning too.

          • [email protected]

            So you’re saying it wasnt windy and rainy and almost impossible for anybody to throw the ball?

          • Dohkay

            Actually Brees player BETTER in that game. A month earlier he was 23-38 for 147 yards. In the playoffs he was 24-43 for 309 yards.

            The “monsoon” didn’t seem to impact him. Weird.

          • [email protected]

            This is yet another reason why you can’t understand a game looking at box scores. There was a long pass that bounced off of Earl Thomas and was caught. He was visibly having trouble throwing the ball, you could see it wobble off course.

          • Dohkay

            Ok so he throws for 250 yards instead? He still played better than he did a month earlier and completed over 60% of his passes and he did it it mostly on the second half when the rain was actually a factor.

          • [email protected]

            Are we talking about real football? Or fantasy football? This is a serious question.

          • Dohkay

            You’re acting like the weather made throwing a ball an impossible task yet Brees seemingly had no issues completing passes at a good rate for good yardage against a defense that ranked number 1 against the pass.

            Do you realize how silly your argument is? Brees played BETTER in a rainy windy game than he did a month earlier against the exact same defense.

            Every time I make a point you bring up some BS insult to try and invalidate it. I watched that game just like you did. I watched the video highlights you linked. I’m not sure why Wilson gets a pass here.

          • [email protected]

            I’m done with you.

          • Dohkay

            Why? That monsoon game suddenly didn’t appear to be such a monsoon once I pointed out how effective the other QB was?

          • [email protected]

            Nice try.

          • http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wordpress/about/ EC Thompson, MD

            Russell Wilson doesn’t have the weapons that he needs to be great. He doesn’t have a true #1 receiver. Basically, he has a tight end who is good but not great and a bunch of #2’s. I think that the fact that he has had as much success has is pretty remarkable.

      • Matt Owsley

        How many of those Losses did RW score a go ahead score in to have the defense give up points to lose?

        • Dohkay

          9/9/12 at ARI – Starts drive at ARI 16 and scored go ahead FG with 9:25 remaining, defense gave up a score, lost 16-20. Wilson got the ball back 4:40 remaining and failed to score.

          10/28/12 at DET – Starts drive at SEA 25 and scored go ahead TD with 5:34 remaining, defense gave up a score, lost 24-28.

          1/13/13 at ATL – Starts drive at SEA 39 and scored go ahead TD with 0:34 remaining, defense gave up a score, lost 28-30.

          12/8/13 at SF – Starts drive at SF 27 and scored a go ahead FG with 6:25 remaining, defense gave up a score, lost 17-19.

          12/22/13 ARZ – Starts drive at SEA 39 and scored go ahead TD with 7:32 remaining, defense gave up a score, lost 10-17. Wilson got the ball back with 2 minutes remaining and failed to score.

          Wilson also had 4 other games with the chance to tie/win with a TD or less and over 4 minutes remaining in the game. 10/10/12 at SF, 11/25/12 at MIA, 9/14/14 at SD, and 10/12/14 DAL.

    • Brandon

      4 of those games were in his first season during the first 8 games when Seattle had the training wheels on. In Detroit Russell led a game winning drive to put them up. Same thing in Atl but the defense gave up the lead. In Miami as well. Anyone can throw stats out there but when you break it down was it all on him. No. So those are the kind of stats that are worthless. Russell also has more 4th quarter game winning drive than any one since he has been in the league. Seattle plays a ball control game. That’s Pete pholisophy. So that will limit the amount of points the offense will put up.

      • Dohkay

        Actually in his first 8 games he average 26.3 pass attempts per game. Since then (incl. playoffs) he’s averaged 25.3 pass attempts per game.

        As for the GWDs. Wilson has 4 of those that occurred with 7:20, 10:21, 11:26, and 13:52 remaining in the 4th quarters (i.e. the defense preserved one score leads in 4 of those games when the opposition had at least two possessions to tie/take the lead. In the Detroit game there was 5:34 remaining which is plenty of time for the opposition as well. I’m not sure where you get the Miami game… Leon Washington had a GW KR TD that the defense ended up blowing but otherwise Wilson didn’t score in the 4th quarter.

        The Atlanta game was definitely a bad loss for him though as there was only a minute remaining. Nevertheless, Wilson has had numerous opporutnities to lead GWDs due to his defense always keeping him in the game. He’s had 5 failed GWDs now as well (2012 @ AZ, at SF, at MIA and 2014 at SD, DAL). In all 5 he had the ball in the 4th quarter with at least 3 minutes remaining and down 7 points or less. When you account for failures it doesn’t look as good.

        • [email protected]

          We talk about game winning drives, but what about the reverse? Moving the chains and killing the clock and not giving the other QB a shot? That is just as important.

          • Dohkay

            Can you prove that RW is superior to others in that regard? How does that counter to anything I said above?

    • Chris

      People say his efficient numbers aren’t high volume because they don’t need him to. But every time the defense has an off game, his numbers might still be efficient, but he never steps up to do a lot more like people have said he would do when they need it.

      • Dohkay

        Agreed. He throws the ball 5 more times in games where the D surrenders 24 or more compared to 17 or less but his YPA falls, his TD rate falls, his INT rate doubles… his passer rating drops from 105 to 95. Still good, but clearly not enough to win.

        • Barron Buc

          Dohkay: I agree with everything Chris says!

          • [email protected]

            No kidding, i wonder how many accounts he logs in with to favorite his own posts and talk with himself.

          • Chris

            You werk’d up yet or nah?

          • Troll Chris

            This “joke” was absolutely cringe-worthy. Now go to bed.

          • Chris

            Soo…ye

          • Troll Chris-Dohkay

            We all know you’re Dohkay. Just admit it you bandwagon Bengals fan. How ’bout those Titans?

          • Chris

            What about them?

          • Dohkay

            Except I’m the one that’s by and large led this convo and have brought stats and game situations to back it up… but sure, I just parrot everything someone else says.

    • Jeff

      so defense allowing 18-23 is a 6-3 record, it’s sort of double counting to apply 24+ record, which certainly is poor, to both. It’s certainly a data point worth monitoring

      • Dohkay

        Agreed although he is 24-2 in 17 and under games and 6-3 in 18-23 games which is obviously a worse win %. The 24+ sticks out like a sore thumb though.

  • shitman

    Are PFF comments just PFT comments now?

    • Jason Williams

      PFT is just utter trash – at least we actually talk about stuff that happened on the field on this site.

      • [email protected]

        I do, everybody else just talks about statistics and passing yards.

      • Hendoz

        I agree, I’ll read the articles over there but only read the comments when I need a good laugh. Comments here are usually backed up with some data. Arguments here typically consist of more than a simple “oh yeah, well you suck! RULES!”.

    • Hendoz

      Its getting there.

  • Chris

    Dohkay

    I put the numbers for each of the 3 QBs into a chart where win percentages can be compared by how many points their defense allows:

    http://i.imgur.com/CpDLw0z.png

    • [email protected]

      At least pretend you aren’t the same person. You favorite each other posts in less than 1 second, always agree and ask each other leading questions. This is ridiculous. Chris = Dohkay

      • Chris

        We’re not the same person. Go ahead and click on my history and go back to when we first met each other and we argued about Kyle Fuller on the Bears picking off Kaep.

        • [email protected]

          If you aren’t then thats even sadder, but i don’t believe it.

          • Dohkay

            It’s true. He and I got into over Fuller and I conceded when he put together a damn good breakdown of the play that made me look like an idiot.

          • [email protected]

            Staged.

          • Chris

            Lmao

          • Anonymous

            We should just give up with this guy, he accuses people of people a troll and is the very definition of one himself.

          • [email protected]

            Please do.

    • Dohkay

      Good stuff and again, needs caveats because in the 18+ games Luck needs another TD to get his win. How anyone can argue that Luck wouldn’t have more success in Seattle is beyond me. In those 7 games where they gave up 24+, they’d at least win a handful and in the games under 17… well Luck’s never lost so I think you can erase those 2 losses…

  • Jonathan Bennett

    Dallas put up a terrific game against them, and showed enough trust in their run game to keep it up all the way through, eventually gashing the Seattle defense for a couple key gains, which really ended up being the difference. Seattle’s pass protection still varies from mediocre to awful, and Wilson just doesn’t look comfortable at all this year. After Kearse’s drop on 2nd down with Seattle being down 27-23, I knew the game was done. They’re still 3-2 in a close division, but a performance like this at home should be a wake-up call for them.

    • [email protected]

      Its hard to start guys you signed 3 weeks ago off of somebody else’s practice squad and expect to beat a good team.

  • Trent Edwards

    Russell Smith/Alex Wilson fraud is closer than ever to be revealed.

  • Fuck You

    lol you guys are completely incapable of grading russell wilson objectively. just stop trying. i’m pretty sure kaepernick has a 300 yard passing game where you’ve rated him lower than you did wilson in this game

    • [email protected]

      Ok, everybody listen the f up. Here is a 100% unbiased and objective quarterback ranking:

      1: Brady
      2: Brees
      3. Cutler
      4. Dalton
      5. Davis
      6. Flacco
      7. Hoyer
      8. Kaepernick
      9. Luck
      10. Manning (E)
      11. Manning (P)
      12. Newton
      13. Palmer
      14. Rivers
      15. Rodgers
      16. Romo
      17. Rothlisburgher
      18. Ryan
      19. Smith
      20. Wilson

      • Tim

        What?!?! No Tebow? That’s as biased as it gets.

        • [email protected]

          He’d be between Smith and Wilson.

  • Fuck You

    “Wilson made exactly two good plays all game, that grades out as only slightly worse than Andrew Luck’s worst performance of the season. Too bad Luck isn’t also a midget who wills dbs to drop sure interceptions with the sheer power of his grittiness.”

    • [email protected]

      You are clearly a missed opportunity for birth control.

  • Kap_Is_Better

    F stats for a moment, RW is trash. He can’t throw. Eye test….this guy is garbage. Pick apart a defense through the air one time. Just 1…c’mon….do it. Salary Cap and an aging Lynch will end this guy’s career sooner than later. He’s not a QB. He’s a slow RB running stupid option pass plays in between letting a hall of famer run the ball and eat clock.