Russel Wilson or Bob

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Maybe last year.

You have a very negative view of RG3, and you constantly post your negative opinions about him. I'm certainly not talking about this thread in particular, but all over the WP. What's the point? I get that you don't like him, and although that's very stupid, everyone has a right to their opinions. But why are you constantly posting negative things about him? Are you trying to convince yourself of something?

[SmootSmack]

I think you're confusing Firstdown with someone else

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by mredskins

The point is you get Wilson in the 3rd round. Luck and RGIII cost us 3 first rounders (to trade up to get them). Imagine you have Wilson and 3 more 1st rounders. I am asking is that better then having just RGIII.

2 first rounders. They just swapped positions the first year.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Bishop Hammer

Not to mention RGIII outperformed Wilson, despite might mouse having a superiour defense; more compotent receivers; and a stable offensive line.

Wilson had 4-5 more TD passes.

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

If RW was drafted by the Browns I don't think this thread exists.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Wilson had 4-5 more TD passes.

And RG3 made up that difference in rushing td's. Why does it matter as long as he's getting into the end zone?

[skinsfaninok]

Mooby because people always want to be downers. So now RG3 isn't better than Wilson... But last year everyone here was all over Griffin. He's actually not even having a bad year.. and Wilson has had 1 good game so far and that was against Jax.. get real people, he's not better than Griffin

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Mooby because people always want to be downers. So now RG3 isn't better than Wilson... But last year everyone here was all over Griffin. He's actually not even having a bad year.. and Wilson has had 1 good game so far and that was against Jax.. get real people, he's not better than Griffin

As stated earlier Wiilson is the top rated qb since week 9 last yr.
His total qbr last yr was 71.7 ,Rg3's was 73.2,not a very big difference is it?
This yr qbr for Wilson is 61.9,Rg3's is 26.6 ,HUGE DIFFERENCE

If he's not better than Rg3 he's damn close to being AS good as him

Im not really down on RG3,I think he's great.Unlike a lot of people on here I had realistic expectations of his play this yr coming off of knee surgery.
But as much as I like RG3 I'd rather have Wilson and get those 3 number 1 picks back.

Lets say RG3 was healthy and didnt hurt his knee last yr and was playing like he did last yr but the skins want to deal him.You control the team that has Russell Wilson.Would you trade Wilson to the Skins for Rg3 and throw in 3 #1 picks on top of that? Do you think any team would?

A lot of people in this thread keep forgetting about the picks! This isnt about whether RG3's better than Wilson,its about whether RG3 is better than 3 #1 picks and Wilson

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

2 first rounders. They just swapped positions the first year.

We spent 3 first rounders and a second rounder to get Bob. Now that we know RG3 is actually that good when healthy, it remains to be seen if the trade was good to us.

[Skinzman]

Originally Posted by htownskinfan

As stated earlier Wiilson is the top rated qb since week 9 last yr.
His total qbr last yr was 71.7 ,Rg3's was 73.2,not a very big difference is it?
This yr qbr for Wilson is 61.9,Rg3's is 26.6 ,HUGE DIFFERENCE

If he's not better than Rg3 he's damn close to being AS good as him

Im not really down on RG3,I think he's great.Unlike a lot of people on here I had realistic expectations of his play this yr coming off of knee surgery.
But as much as I like RG3 I'd rather have Wilson and get those 3 number 1 picks back.

Lets say RG3 was healthy and didnt hurt his knee last yr and was playing like he did last yr but the skins want to deal him.You control the team that has Russell Wilson.Would you trade Wilson to the Skins for Rg3 and throw in 3 #1 picks on top of that? Do you think any team would?

A lot of people in this thread keep forgetting about the picks! This isnt about whether RG3's better than Wilson,its about whether RG3 is better than 3 #1 picks and Wilson

I have said this before and will say it again. Put RG3 on the Seahawks last year and they win the SB. Put Wilson on the skins, and they are lucky to win 6 games. The Seahawks havent had close to 19 mil less cap space each of the last two years and could sign just about anyone they wanted to.

The cap hit is done this year. If we can sign a good RT and some secondary help, then lets see how good this team can be. I dont think people understand what you can do with 38 mil in cap space for two years. Lets see how good RG3 can be when he doesnt have to carry half the team unlike Wilson who doesnt have to carry anything. Doesnt have to worry about scoring a ton of points with that defense. Can make a mistake and not have to care because the defense will help him out.

Of course you do realize that you are comparing a guy coming off of major knee surgery to a guy who isnt, dont you? A guy who didnt do much of anything in the offseason except rehab his knee over someone who had a full offseason to work with his team. At least make equal comparisons. Look at the playoff game when RG3 was only playing on a half gimpy knee and not a full gimpy knee. Wilson wasnt doing much against our defense and RG3 shredded their defense the first two drives. When both are healthy, RG3 is a better QB.

Look at the bright side, at least we dont have Gabbert, who a lot wanted the year prior. That was huge to not waste a pick that a lot were screaming for. If we draft him, we dont have RG3 or Wilson and are still stuck at the most important position in sports. If we had drafted Gabbert, the firing Shanahan talks would be a lot more justified.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

We spent 3 first rounders and a second rounder to get Bob. Now that we now RG3 is actually that good when healthy, it remains to be seen if the trade was good to us.

We gave away 2 first rounders and swapped with them on the other first rounder.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

We gave away 2 first rounders and swapped with them on the other first rounder.

We still traded that third "swapped" pick with the Rams, along with the others, to get the pick we drafted RG3 with. We still used 3 1sts and a 2nd on RG3.

Put another way, we could have drafted 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder thru 2014, instead of drafting RG3.

I like RG3, the trade could work out for us. But please don't sugarcoat it or make it look like we can't do 3rd grade math.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

We still traded that third "swapped" pick with the Rams, along with the others, to get the pick we drafted RG3 with. We still used 3 1sts and a 2nd on RG3.

Put another way, we could have drafted 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder thru 2014, instead of drafting RG3.

I like RG3, the trade could work out for us. But please don't sugarcoat it or make it look like we can't do 3rd grade math.

I don't remember calling it third grade math at all but at the end of the day it costs us two first rounders to move up to get him along with a second rounder.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

I don't remember calling it third grade math at all but at the end of the day it costs us two first rounders to move up to get him along with a second rounder.

We traded our 2012 1st rd pick, our 2012 2nd rd pick, our 2013 1st rd pick, and our 2014 1st rd pick to the Rams. Four picks.

About the Rams 2012 pick we got in exchange, we spent it drafting RG3.

Our cost in this trade was four picks, 3 1sts and a 2nd. We could have drafted four players with those picks, instead of getting RG3.

[That Guy]

we used a pick on RGIII, taking a player costs a pick. if you trade 4 picks for 1 pick, that means you gave away 3 extra picks in the trade.