Russell Wilson vs. Peyton Manning - Can Wilson Best Manning's Legacy?

[BluePhantom]

I have to admit the title of the thread seems ludicrous. But humor me for a moment. First I have to say that Manning is among the best quarterbacks to ever play the game. I think that had he won another Super Bowl he would be atop the conversation for the best ever. But nine times he has gone "one and done" in the playoffs against single Super Bowl victory. I don't think there is any argument that Peyton Manning is probably the best regular season quarterback to play the game, but can anyone even try to argue anymore that he can't win the big game on a consistent basis? Personally, my feeling is "pressure Manning = win the game". That's what Seattle did in the Super Bowl last year. My conclusion is that if Manning has protection he is almost unbeatable, BUT put shoulder pads into Manning and he will crumble like a cheap paper napkin. Can THAT be considered the best ever?

I think in some ways Manning best quality is the biggest detriment to his legacy. Take any season in the NFL and make a comparison. Track the win/loss records of teams when their quarterback passes for 300 yards against when they have 30 or more carries as a team. I have done this countless times and what you will find is that when a quarterback throws for 300 yards the team wins about 35% of the time. When a team runs 30 times they win about 65% of the time. Despite the love of passing by NFL fans the statistics are clear that passing makes headlines but rushing wins games. But why would anyone try and run when you have Peyton Manning throwing the ball? The numbers say "run" but Manning's abilities demand a passing attack even though it is a strategy that fails more than it succeeds.

Think of some great quarterbacks; Dan Marino (never had a running game and never won a title), John Elway (never won a title until he had Terrell Davis running the ball)...Terry Bradshaw had Franco Harris. Joe Montana had Roger Craig, Jim Kelly (although they didn't win a title) had Thurmond Thomas....and as a segue....Russell Wilson has Marshawn Lynch.

Now when it is pointed out that Wilson is 5-1 in career playoff games a lot of people will say "yeah but he has Lynch and a great defense". Well...guess what....so did almost every other quarterback that won titles. In fact quarterbacks who won titles without a running game or a defense (or both) are few and far in between. But here's what intrigues me. According to STATS Inc...the quarterback with the best quarterback rating in the playoffs in NFL history is not Manning, nor Marino, nor Elway, Fouts, Montana, or Young.....it's Russell Wilson at 109.6. The second best is Bart Starr at 104.8. Is this to say that Wilson is a better quarterback than Manning? Pfft....no...let's not get silly...at least not yet. But is he more "clutch"? Well the numbers suggest he is and it makes me wonder hat the future has in store for Wilson.

I think if the Seahawks repeat as Super Bowl champions this year that Wilson has made a strong case for the Hall of Fame provided he demonstrates longevity...but the rings would be there, the efficiency stats are certainly there, the leadership is there, the star power is there......quite a bit of "ifs" remain....but let's ask this...which would you rather have? A QB who destroys all records in the regular season and collapses in the playoffs, or a guy that doesn't light up the stats but explodes in the playoffs? The stats are clear....in the big game Manning chokes and Wilson explodes.

Again I am NOT arguing that Wilson is better than Manning. That's absurd. I am looking at legacy and big picture considerations

8220 Impeccable 8221 Russell Wilson in rare company after another strong postseason performance HeraldNet.com - Seattle Sidelines

 

[william the wie]

Yeah, generally speaking the best regular season players are the least likely to have superbowl rings.

 

[BluePhantom]

Yeah, generally speaking the best regular season players are the least likely to have superbowl rings.

So what does that mean for Manning's legacy? I don't think he can be considered the best quarterback ever at this point because he has shown a history of collapse when it matters. Would you agree? But if that is the criterion then here we have Wilson who (so far) has been totally clutch in the playoffs. How do you reconcile the two?

 

[Manonthestreet]

I have always wondered why they never paired a decent back with Manning .... .....

 

[BluePhantom]

I have always wondered why they never paired a decent back with Manning .... .....

They couldn't afford one

 

[Manonthestreet]

Wilson will never set any records....he may be the best QB Seattle will ever see........long way to go to be mentioned among the Greats

 

[Manonthestreet]

Indy better find a way to pair one with Luck or his career might follow same path. Think Manning might be done......

 

[william the wie]

I have always wondered why they never paired a decent back with Manning .... .....

They couldn't afford one

You've answered the question you asked of me. In order to have all the starters needed for all sets in all three phases plus competent back up would take game day rosters of 70 something players. A winning team requires the 16th best players in the league +/- 5 places at every position. New England and Seattle do the best job of eliminating the top and bottom 1/3 of players and that is why they are better teams. As counter-intuitive as it seems the emphasis must be on eliminating the high salaries of the top 1/3 so there is cap room for eliminating the bottom 1/3 players who slip through and replacing injured starters.

 

[HUGGY]

Here in Seattle of course we are all in love with our Russell Wilson.

He seemingly is a gift to the team and our town in South Alaska straight from the gods.

He came in dirt cheap. He says all the right things. Even in his home life he handles events decisively and properly. He never takes credit. He never blames anyone but himself for failures that do come along in football and life. THEN he immediately sets his path on learning from his mistakes and rarely repeats them. A lot of professional athletes talk about learning from mistakes and few make good on that promise. Wilson is the most profoundly dedicated to finding a way to "get it right" that I have ever seen.

As was pointed out in the OP he is clutch. He is more clutch consistently in big games and big moments than any QB I have ever seen and I've been watching Pro football for about 60 years.

I bragged on Wilson pretty heavy in his first season. I'm an insufferable Seattle homer so I backed off for a while because I saw the writing on the wall and figured I would just enjoy the ride and let the media catch up to what I already knew.

Russell set his sights pretty high. He hasn't been shy that he is going to try to be the best ever. That is quite a lofty goal. Who knows if he will enjoy the longevity. I think it depends on how long his leg strength holds out.

Let's say Wilson continues to play at his present level for 5 more years. AND for 5 more years Carroll and Schneider can keep the players on defense to remain near or at the top. AND they can develop a replacement for Lynch to keep the run game strong for the next five years.

If Russell Wilson can enjoy the same nurturing team environment that he has had since becoming a Seahawk he could very well win it all more often than not. If he wins the Super Bowl this season and 3 out of the next five including an unprecedented third consecutive next season he will definitely make it to the HOF just on the strength of three straight.

Will he ever be considered in the conversation of the best ever? I don't know. That's a long way off in the future.

I was watching Andrew Luck today and at times he looked amazing. BUT as was said in the OP winning is the most important stat. I don't know that Luck can play good enough to beat the Patriots this season's playoffs next weekend. I doubt any team in the AFC can beat the Seahawk Defense the way they are playing right now.

I see no Offense on any team left..meaning Green Bay or the Colts or New England that can score enough or possesses the Defense to prevent Wilson and our offense from scoring enough to win the next two games.

Aaron Rodgers looked stiff today. It doesn't appear he will be healed in one week. The Green Bay Defense cannot contain Wilson. To me it is almost a certainty that the Hawks will be in this upcoming Super Bowl.

It is way too early to include Wilson in any conversation as best ever or even the best in today's game.

 

[Toro]

Wilson isn't Manning. He never will be. He's Fran Tarkenton with a Super Bowl.

 

[Toro]

I have always wondered why they never paired a decent back with Manning .... .....

Edgerrin James was a great running back.

 

[HUGGY]

Wilson isn't Manning. He never will be. He's Fran Tarkenton with a Super Bowl.

I seriously doubt that Wilson is trying to be a Manning OR Tarkington.

He is MUCH better than Tarkington. Wilson almost ran for 900 yards this season. Fran's best season was 376.
Tarkington averaged an 80 rating. Wilson is close to 100 so far with a playoff rating near 110.

I've seen Tarkington play. He was exciting but for the most part he was just running for his life.

 

[Papageorgio]

Andrew Luck with a good line and a good RB would be a thrill to see.

The guy is more impressive each year but unless they get him some help...his career will be a short one.

Luck is carrying that team, the same way Manning carried that team.

If Wilson is a HOFer with two Super Bowl wins, so would Eli Manning and Joe Flacco?

I think Wilson and Luck have a long way to go to be in the same category as Montana, Manning, Brady, Starr, Staubach, Bradshaw, Marino, Elway or any number of QBs.

But both of these QBs are young and have great potential.

 

[rightwinger]

If he wins one more ring he will beat Peyton Manning

He will not match him for carreer numbers or MVPs

 

[rightwinger]

Wilson isn't Manning. He never will be. He's Fran Tarkenton with a Super Bowl.

I seriously doubt that Wilson is trying to be a Manning OR Tarkington.

He is MUCH better than Tarkington. Wilson almost ran for 900 yards this season. Fran's best season was 376.
Tarkington averaged an 80 rating. Wilson is close to 100 so far with a playoff rating near 110.

I've seen Tarkington play. He was exciting but for the most part he was just running for his life.

Wilson is a different scrambler than Tarkington. Wilson will break out of the pocket to run upfield while Fran would double back trying to buy more time. Tark was more exciting but I think Wilson is a better QB

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Yeah, generally speaking the best regular season players are the least likely to have superbowl rings.

exactly.Manning is a clone of Dan Marino.Marino was lights out amazing in regular season games but in the Big game though,like Manning,he always went into panic mode and choked.The thread title of this SHOULD read can Wilson best Bradys legacy.

Brady is like Montana,a big time quarterback who wins big games.He SHOULD have five superbowl trophys now and would had his teammates not let him down in the games against the Giants.

The last one they lost,they lost because his recievers let him down dropping key third down passes they easily should have caught at the worst times possible and not recovering turnovers by the Giants.

the first one of course,they lost because of a miracle one in a million catch a player is never going to make on 4th and 10 somehow catching it against his helmet.

 

[antiquity]

Russell Wilson had a passing rating of 149.2 against Carolina. Not to bad for a second rated passing quarterback.
Will Russell go down in the same class the Manning, Brady or Rodgers...probably not.... but Seattle is not a passing team. Its a run first to set up the pass while the others I mentioned are a pass first to set up the run..

Its a 'team' game in Seattle and Russel is just a member of that team instead like Manning, Brady and Rodgers being the center and their teams being built around them.

 

[rightwinger]

I think Wilson will be known for his fine playoff record and doing what is necessary to win big games

Peyton Manning will be known for being a disappointment in the playoffs. Losing home games that he was favored to win and never delivering that big fourth quarter drive to win the big game. Great fantasy football player but never came up big in a big game

 

[Treeshepherd]

I have to admit the title of the thread seems ludicrous. But humor me for a moment. First I have to say that Manning is among the best quarterbacks to ever play the game. I think that had he won another Super Bowl he would be atop the conversation for the best ever. But nine times he has gone "one and done" in the playoffs against single Super Bowl victory. I don't think there is any argument that Peyton Manning is probably the best regular season quarterback to play the game, but can anyone even try to argue anymore that he can't win the big game on a consistent basis? Personally, my feeling is "pressure Manning = win the game". That's what Seattle did in the Super Bowl last year. My conclusion is that if Manning has protection he is almost unbeatable, BUT put shoulder pads into Manning and he will crumble like a cheap paper napkin. Can THAT be considered the best ever?

I think in some ways Manning best quality is the biggest detriment to his legacy. Take any season in the NFL and make a comparison. Track the win/loss records of teams when their quarterback passes for 300 yards against when they have 30 or more carries as a team. I have done this countless times and what you will find is that when a quarterback throws for 300 yards the team wins about 35% of the time. When a team runs 30 times they win about 65% of the time. Despite the love of passing by NFL fans the statistics are clear that passing makes headlines but rushing wins games. But why would anyone try and run when you have Peyton Manning throwing the ball? The numbers say "run" but Manning's abilities demand a passing attack even though it is a strategy that fails more than it succeeds.

Think of some great quarterbacks; Dan Marino (never had a running game and never won a title), John Elway (never won a title until he had Terrell Davis running the ball)...Terry Bradshaw had Franco Harris. Joe Montana had Roger Craig, Jim Kelly (although they didn't win a title) had Thurmond Thomas....and as a segue....Russell Wilson has Marshawn Lynch.

Now when it is pointed out that Wilson is 5-1 in career playoff games a lot of people will say "yeah but he has Lynch and a great defense". Well...guess what....so did almost every other quarterback that won titles. In fact quarterbacks who won titles without a running game or a defense (or both) are few and far in between. But here's what intrigues me. According to STATS Inc...the quarterback with the best quarterback rating in the playoffs in NFL history is not Manning, nor Marino, nor Elway, Fouts, Montana, or Young.....it's Russell Wilson at 109.6. The second best is Bart Starr at 104.8. Is this to say that Wilson is a better quarterback than Manning? Pfft....no...let's not get silly...at least not yet. But is he more "clutch"? Well the numbers suggest he is and it makes me wonder hat the future has in store for Wilson.

I think if the Seahawks repeat as Super Bowl champions this year that Wilson has made a strong case for the Hall of Fame provided he demonstrates longevity...but the rings would be there, the efficiency stats are certainly there, the leadership is there, the star power is there......quite a bit of "ifs" remain....but let's ask this...which would you rather have? A QB who destroys all records in the regular season and collapses in the playoffs, or a guy that doesn't light up the stats but explodes in the playoffs? The stats are clear....in the big game Manning chokes and Wilson explodes.

Again I am NOT arguing that Wilson is better than Manning. That's absurd. I am looking at legacy and big picture considerations

8220 Impeccable 8221 Russell Wilson in rare company after another strong postseason performance HeraldNet.com - Seattle Sidelines

The title of Mr. October is only great in baseball. Somebody should tell Manning that.

During Russell Wilson's 3 year career, he's turned the ball just over once per game. He had some fumblitis earlier this year while his OL was in turmoil. In the postseason, he's 5-1 throwing a total of one interception. I don't know his postseason fumble number but it's probably close to zero. He's as steady as they come. What separates him is his ability to improvise when necessary and make something out of nothing.

A perfect illustration of the comparison was a third and 5 situation yesterday when Manning rolled out and had 20 yards of open space ahead of him. This is the playoffs, man! Lose and stay home. Manning could have walked for the 1st down. He made a good pass downfield but the WR got pushed out of bounds. Punt. Wilson would have tucked it and run out of bounds for a 15 yard gain, or juked the defenders and broke it for considerably more.

As a Niner and Raider fan, I'd love to see Seattle lose. As a Stanford and Cal fan, former USC coach Pete Carroll annoys me. Nothing would please me more than to see Wilson have a terrible meltdown game. But I think it's obvious to everyone that such hopes are far-fetched.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I have to admit the title of the thread seems ludicrous. But humor me for a moment. First I have to say that Manning is among the best quarterbacks to ever play the game. I think that had he won another Super Bowl he would be atop the conversation for the best ever. But nine times he has gone "one and done" in the playoffs against single Super Bowl victory. I don't think there is any argument that Peyton Manning is probably the best regular season quarterback to play the game, but can anyone even try to argue anymore that he can't win the big game on a consistent basis? Personally, my feeling is "pressure Manning = win the game". That's what Seattle did in the Super Bowl last year. My conclusion is that if Manning has protection he is almost unbeatable, BUT put shoulder pads into Manning and he will crumble like a cheap paper napkin. Can THAT be considered the best ever?

I think in some ways Manning best quality is the biggest detriment to his legacy. Take any season in the NFL and make a comparison. Track the win/loss records of teams when their quarterback passes for 300 yards against when they have 30 or more carries as a team. I have done this countless times and what you will find is that when a quarterback throws for 300 yards the team wins about 35% of the time. When a team runs 30 times they win about 65% of the time. Despite the love of passing by NFL fans the statistics are clear that passing makes headlines but rushing wins games. But why would anyone try and run when you have Peyton Manning throwing the ball? The numbers say "run" but Manning's abilities demand a passing attack even though it is a strategy that fails more than it succeeds.

Think of some great quarterbacks; Dan Marino (never had a running game and never won a title), John Elway (never won a title until he had Terrell Davis running the ball)...Terry Bradshaw had Franco Harris. Joe Montana had Roger Craig, Jim Kelly (although they didn't win a title) had Thurmond Thomas....and as a segue....Russell Wilson has Marshawn Lynch.

Now when it is pointed out that Wilson is 5-1 in career playoff games a lot of people will say "yeah but he has Lynch and a great defense". Well...guess what....so did almost every other quarterback that won titles. In fact quarterbacks who won titles without a running game or a defense (or both) are few and far in between. But here's what intrigues me. According to STATS Inc...the quarterback with the best quarterback rating in the playoffs in NFL history is not Manning, nor Marino, nor Elway, Fouts, Montana, or Young.....it's Russell Wilson at 109.6. The second best is Bart Starr at 104.8. Is this to say that Wilson is a better quarterback than Manning? Pfft....no...let's not get silly...at least not yet. But is he more "clutch"? Well the numbers suggest he is and it makes me wonder hat the future has in store for Wilson.

I think if the Seahawks repeat as Super Bowl champions this year that Wilson has made a strong case for the Hall of Fame provided he demonstrates longevity...but the rings would be there, the efficiency stats are certainly there, the leadership is there, the star power is there......quite a bit of "ifs" remain....but let's ask this...which would you rather have? A QB who destroys all records in the regular season and collapses in the playoffs, or a guy that doesn't light up the stats but explodes in the playoffs? The stats are clear....in the big game Manning chokes and Wilson explodes.

Again I am NOT arguing that Wilson is better than Manning. That's absurd. I am looking at legacy and big picture considerations

8220 Impeccable 8221 Russell Wilson in rare company after another strong postseason performance HeraldNet.com - Seattle Sidelines

The title of Mr. October is only great in baseball. Somebody should tell Manning that.

During Russell Wilson's 3 year career, he's turned the ball just over once per game. He had some fumblitis earlier this year while his OL was in turmoil. In the postseason, he's 5-1 throwing a total of one interception. I don't know his postseason fumble number but it's probably close to zero. He's as steady as they come. What separates him is his ability to improvise when necessary and make something out of nothing.

A perfect illustration of the comparison was a third and 5 situation yesterday when Manning rolled out and had 20 yards of open space ahead of him. This is the playoffs, man! Lose and stay home. Manning could have walked for the 1st down. He made a good pass downfield but the WR got pushed out of bounds. Punt. Wilson would have tucked it and run out of bounds for a 15 yard gain, or juked the defenders and broke it for considerably more.

As a Niner and Raider fan, I'd love to see Seattle lose. As a Stanford and Cal fan, former USC coach Pete Carroll annoys me. Nothing would please me more than to see Wilson have a terrible meltdown game. But I think it's obvious to everyone that such hopes are far-fetched.

you're only the second person I have ever heard of before who is BOTH a niner and raider fan.the first one I heard of was a few weeks ago.