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

[TheGreatGatsby]

I don't care if Russel Wilson wins more titles. He is no Peyton Manning. And regardless of any number you want to throw out there (if such numbers exist), it's an absurd notion.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

 

[BluePhantom]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Seattle has the #1 running offense and the #10 passing offense. They are #6 in offensive DVOA as a whole and 10th in offensive points per game. It wasn't the defense that scored 394 offensive points. I will be happy if they improve on offense but it wont give anyone else much of a chance. You should really educate yourself before you pop off

 

[Treeshepherd]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Clayton and Duper were pedestrian?

Underthrow it to the back shoulder, let his WR adjust before the DB could react. That was Marino's legacy. Throw it up and hope the WR wins the battle. Clayton and Duper usually didn't disappoint.

 

[BluePhantom]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Clayton and Duper were pedestrian?

Underthrow it to the back shoulder, let his WR adjust before the DB could react. That was Marino's legacy. Throw it up and hope the WR wins the battle. Clayton and Duper usually didn't disappoint.

WORD!

 

[GHook93]

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

Terry Bradshaw had 4 superbowl rings, but I don't consider him in the same boat as Manning! But I will admit his less than stellar post-season performance hurts him.

Top 5 QB:
1. Tom Brady
2. Joe Montana
3. Peyton Manning
4. John Elway
5. Aaron Rodger (this coming from a Bears fan. When all is said and done, he cracks the top 5)

 

[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

Terry Bradshaw had 4 superbowl rings, but I don't consider him in the same boat as Manning! But I will admit his less than stellar post-season performance hurts him.

Top 5 QB:
1. Tom Brady
2. Joe Montana
3. Peyton Manning
4. John Elway
5. Aaron Rodger (this coming from a Bears fan. When all is said and done, he cracks the top 5)

For me...no disrespect to your call, but for me it depends on what you have in place, what you are willing to do, etc. Think of it like this...You are the GM of the 2014 Seahawks...great defense, great running game, efficient receivers, and a completely terrible offensive line.You are drafting and can pick Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, or Russell Wilson. No lets add in that you can see their NFL abilities in advance. Who do you take? If you take Manning or Brady you are insane because both those quarterbacks have the mobility of the statue of liberty and with a terrible o-line your QB has to be mobile. Wilson is the call in that situation because if you take either of the other two you will have to scrap your team and build another team built around their skill set.

On the other hand if you have a great o-line in place and great receivers, then sure...take your pick between Manning or Brady. When Manning was a free agent there was talk about him signing with Seattle and Manning completely dismissed the idea. In retrospect it makes sense...he knew Seattle's o-line couldn't protect him so he went to a team that could protect him...Denver. That was his best chance for success.

So who were the top 5 QBs? Boy that's hard to say because it depends on the situation, the rulebook, and the team around them. For me I would have to say Elway was the best (closely followed by Marino) even though, as a Seattle fan, I hate him like poison. Why? Because Elway (and Marino) were one of the few QBs who could do it without a team around them. Yes Marino never won a SB and Elway only won rings when he had Terrell Davis, but those two consistently and single-handedly led their teams to better seasons than they really should have had.

Just my opinion

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Seattle has the #1 running offense and the #10 passing offense. They are #6 in offensive DVOA as a whole and 10th in offensive points per game. It wasn't the defense that scored 394 offensive points. I will be happy if they improve on offense but it wont give anyone else much of a chance. You should really educate yourself before you pop off

Ooo #10 passing offense! Wooopdy freaking do! Russell Wilson doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Marino.

 

[Treeshepherd]

Lots of great points made in this thread. Peyton Manning has a lot of career passing yards and holds the all time TD record. But the guy is a conehead from outer space. Statswise, he's the Rafael Palmeiro of football. The greatest ever? What are you, a bean counter?

If you don't see the greatness of Russell Wilson right now, and you don't recognize his greatness, you might as well be any other ESPN pundit who makes the safe and uncontroversial choice every week.

Russell Wilson is head and shoulders above Manning in every way but actual height. Is he Montana? Is he Unitas? Let's not get ahead of ourselves. He isn't close to that. But is he already better than Manning? No question.

 

[BluePhantom]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Seattle has the #1 running offense and the #10 passing offense. They are #6 in offensive DVOA as a whole and 10th in offensive points per game. It wasn't the defense that scored 394 offensive points. I will be happy if they improve on offense but it wont give anyone else much of a chance. You should really educate yourself before you pop off

Ooo #10 passing offense! Wooopdy freaking do! Russell Wilson doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Marino.

Yeah you are right. Wilson = 1 Super Bowl ring. Marino = 0

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Seattle has the #1 running offense and the #10 passing offense. They are #6 in offensive DVOA as a whole and 10th in offensive points per game. It wasn't the defense that scored 394 offensive points. I will be happy if they improve on offense but it wont give anyone else much of a chance. You should really educate yourself before you pop off

Ooo #10 passing offense! Wooopdy freaking do! Russell Wilson doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Marino.

Yeah you are right. Wilson = 1 Super Bowl ring. Marino = 0

Robert Horry = 7 rings Michael Jordan = 6.

What's your point?

 

[BluePhantom]

Russell Wilson is head and shoulders above Manning in every way but actual height. Is he Montana? Is he Unitas? Let's not get ahead of ourselves. He isn't close to that. But is he already better than Manning? No question.

Harrumph! Harrumph!!!!

 

[BluePhantom]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Seattle has the #1 running offense and the #10 passing offense. They are #6 in offensive DVOA as a whole and 10th in offensive points per game. It wasn't the defense that scored 394 offensive points. I will be happy if they improve on offense but it wont give anyone else much of a chance. You should really educate yourself before you pop off

Ooo #10 passing offense! Wooopdy freaking do! Russell Wilson doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Marino.

Yeah you are right. Wilson = 1 Super Bowl ring. Marino = 0

Robert Horry = 7 rings Michael Jordan = 6.

What's your point?

Well I will take Russell Wilson and the 2013 -2014 Seahawks over Marino's Dolphins any day of the week. Wilson wins titles...Marino only even gets to the Super Bowl once. Just stop. You are embarrassing yourself

 

[HUGGY]

AWWWWWwww... He's a fyuckin midget !!! So what if he wins another ring in his third season. Lotsa QBs could have done THAT with the Seahawks defense just handing the ball over as pretty as you please.

As for Wilson leading the league in plays over twenty yards. SO WHAT !?!?

His AVERAGE to BELOW AVERAGE receivers have all fyuckin day to get open for Wilson's rainbows.

CHRIST ONNA CRACKER !!! Those receivers don't even have to break stride to get their TDs. Willson, Baldwin and Kearse got those passes handed to them on a silver platter in Saturday's game. And why? Because when Wilson breaks outta contain he is under NO pressure. He has all the time in the world to flip those hay makers out there into the wild blue yonder without a care in the world. A REAL clutch QB would stand strong in the pocket and rifle those darts like Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers or yes...even Andrew Luck. Or Tom Brady.

If it wasn't for the Hawk Defense That SHRIMP would be home licking his wounds like Newton and Kaepernick.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Well I will take Russell Wilson and the 2013 -2014 Seahawks over Marino's Dolphins any day of the week. Wilson wins titles...Marino only even gets to the Super Bowl once. Just stop. You are embarrassing yourself

Way to move the goalposts.

 

[Toro]

The OP notes Dan Marino..... He certainly wasn't a 35 percent winner even with no running back and pedestrian receivers. Anyone who wouldn't trade a prime Marino (or Manning) for Wilson is out of their freaking mind. And let's remember that Seattle wins because they are a defensive juggernaut. They have a hell of a lot of room for improvement on offense.

Seattle has the #1 running offense and the #10 passing offense. They are #6 in offensive DVOA as a whole and 10th in offensive points per game. It wasn't the defense that scored 394 offensive points. I will be happy if they improve on offense but it wont give anyone else much of a chance. You should really educate yourself before you pop off

Ooo #10 passing offense! Wooopdy freaking do! Russell Wilson doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Marino.

Yeah you are right. Wilson = 1 Super Bowl ring. Marino = 0

Robert Horry = 7 rings Michael Jordan = 6.

What's your point?

Well I will take Russell Wilson and the 2013 -2014 Seahawks over Marino's Dolphins any day of the week. Wilson wins titles...Marino only even gets to the Super Bowl once. Just stop. You are embarrassing yourself

"Title"

Not "titles."

At least not yet.

Marino was one of the best all time. Right now, I'd choose Marino over Wilson.

Jeff Hostetler has won as many Super Bowls as Russell Wilson. Is he just as good?

 

[rightwinger]

Damn could have swore Gannon had ring...........never mind.........

Even after the tuck rule debacle, the Raiders got the ball back and had a chance to ice that game. Gannon overthrew a wide open guy on third down and they punted back to NE. Next year, Gannon played bad in the Super Bowl.

Even so, Gannon and Jeff Garcia with SF proved that you can pick a QB off the scrap heap, pay him $3-$4 million and have success. It's not always the right formula draft a 1st rounder. Sam Bradford comes to mind. Johnny Football. Gabbert. Alex Smith #1 overall?
Sometimes it's better to use that $ elsewhere.

Grab the best QB from Canadian football, like Warren Moon. Kurt Warner came from the Arena league.

I have never looked it up but I would wager that most first round quarterbacks have been busts. Some of the greatest to ever play were taken later. Bart Starr: 17th round. Tom Brady: 6th round. Dan Fouts: 3rd round, Johnny Unitas: 9th round, Joe Montana: 3rd round, Brett Favre: 2nd round, Roger Staubach: 10th round....and just to be an incredible homer...Russell Wilson: 3rd round.

I wouldn't go that far....
Elway, Marino, Peyton Manning and a slew of others were first rounders

So was Rick Mirer, Dan McGwire, Ryan Leaf, Jason Campbell, Matt Leinart, Rex Grossman, Byron Leftwich, Patrick Ramsey, Chad Pennington, Mark Malone, Brady Quinn, Richard Todd, Kyle Boller, J.P. Losman, Tommy Maddox, Vince Young, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Kelly Stouffer, Jim Druckenmiller, Tim Couch, Cade McNown, David Klingler, Todd Blackledge, Akili Smith, Andre Ware, Heath Schuler, JaMarcus Russell, and Todd Marinovich.

You can get a list just as long of wasted QB picks taken in the second through seventh round
You can also get a list of busts taken in the first round at every other position

The draft is a crap shoot. But without question, players taken in the first round tend do do better than players taken in later rounds

Look at HOF players and see which round they are generally taken in

 

[rightwinger]

Lots of great points made in this thread. Peyton Manning has a lot of career passing yards and holds the all time TD record. But the guy is a conehead from outer space. Statswise, he's the Rafael Palmeiro of football. The greatest ever? What are you, a bean counter?

If you don't see the greatness of Russell Wilson right now, and you don't recognize his greatness, you might as well be any other ESPN pundit who makes the safe and uncontroversial choice every week.

Russell Wilson is head and shoulders above Manning in every way but actual height. Is he Montana? Is he Unitas? Let's not get ahead of ourselves. He isn't close to that. But is he already better than Manning? No question.

No way do I consider Wilson to be a better QB than Manning. Put Manning on Seattle with that defense and you wouldn't lose a game

But I look at Wilson as a very good QB that does what is asked of him and more. Not being Peyton Manning is not a knock against a QB

 

[Iceweasel]

Manning and Wilson are two different quarterbacks, Peyton doesn't have the moves Russell does and that helps win games too. Looking a passing yards doesn't tell the whole story.

 

[Papageorgio]

Wilson is one of the best decision makers in the game, he is smart and is very athletic. Manning is also a very smart and athletic QB, he did not have the talent surrounding him that Seattle has. The Colts never had the defensive teams that Seattle, New England, Baltimore and on and on. The year before Manning's injury the Colts were 10-6, the following season 2-14, the team was virtually the same. Take Wilson out of Seattle and put in the backup and Seattle will suffer they would probably fall to 8-8. Wilson has support in Seattle. Wilson is a special QB, he is not the pocket passer that most of the greats are.

If the players were all in their prime, I'd take Montana, Elway, Manning, Brady, Rogers, Favre and several others over Wilson. Not a knock against Wilson he is good QB but I need to see if he has the longevity of the greats.