Why is Russell Wilson a better quarterback than Cam Newton? - Seattle Times

[electro's horse]

man this article very badly wants to say ****** 

[CarolinaPanthers8789]

If you read the article and you get the impression the author is attacking Cam, there is nothing else I can say.

 

I've read through the article three separate times.

 

I really think it's you that is struggling with the reading comprehension of this article.

 

First, the title of the article is "Why Russell Wilson is a better quarterback than Cam Newton". That leads me to believe that the article is indeed written about why Russell Wilson is a better Quarterback.

 

The author of the article begins the article by labeling the two quarterbacks based on their perceived persona's and makes no mention in the article that he believes other wise.

 

What he says is that (paraphrasing) "you can't say that Wilson is better than Newton based simply based on the premises that came is crazy, erratic, spoiled, and a loafer." That doesn't mean that he doesn't believe that those things are true. In fact, he references these characteristics three separate times, so they must hold some weight to this particular individual who wrote the article. In fact at the end of the second paragraph, he even says it's easy to just draw the conclusion that Wilson is better based on the premise of Cam= bad attitude, Wilson = good attitude. 

 

What the author is truly saying is that Russell is better than Cam. Not because Cam has a bad attitude and Russell has a good attitude, but because Russell is in a better situation.

 

It's clearly a writing tactic to try to appeal to both sides (more so one than the other) but it's quite easy to see through honestly.

 

It's just shoddy journalism.

[teeray]

Who was the pocket passer in his analogy?

 

I have watched Seattles last 6 games, it is a bunch of screens, roll outs, and one read and run plays

 

Wilson bails on the pocket more than just about anyone in the NFL.  IF his first read isn't open he starts running around

[Jackofalltrades]

Didn't want to give it clicks.

Not your choice, as it stands now it's plagiarism and copyright infringement without a link.

[PantherFanOne]

I had to laugh at the writer and his off base, outlandish remarks. If i was starting a team and my QB choice was between Cam Newton and Russell Wison,I would chose Cam everytime.

[teeray]

Not sure if yall are reading the same article. Dude is saying that it's unfair to call Cam "crazy, lazy, spoiled''.

 

No he isn't.  The next paragraph he makes the point that it is unfair to say "Wilson is better than Newton merely because of their different attitudes".  He is making a reference to his previous paragraph, basically saying those things are true, but that isn't the only reason Wilson is better

 

In the very next paragraph he makes the point that it is unfair to say Wilson is better merely because he is a "tireless worker" and Cam is the "erratic, spoiled, loafer"

 

 

[Cary Kollins]

Meh I was ready to release the hounds based on the OP. Then I read the article. Nothing in there worth the trouble.

[CarolinaPanthers8789]

Who was the pocket passer in his analogy?

 

I have watched Seattles last 6 games, it is a bunch of screens, roll outs, and one read and run plays

 

Wilson bails on the pocket more than just about anyone in the NFL.  IF his first read isn't open he starts running around

 

I was going to point to that in my post but it didn't really flow with my whole agenda.

 

It's a pretty well known fact that Wilson is way better outside the pocket than inside the pocket. 

 

He has a terrible sense of pressure (or even phantom pressure) and often leaves the pocket way to soon, but he gets away with it because he can throw on the run.

 

He's also not that great against the zone.

 

The real key to stopping him is having the corner's play off the wide receivers (Wilson is deadly in play action), play a zone scheme on the back end (Wilson struggles against the zone) use a spy on Wilson (this keeps him from taking off if there's nothing available), getting pressure up the middle, and playing contain on the ends (keep him in the pocket).

 

That's how you expose Russell Wilson.

[Ricky Spanish]

I've read through the article three separate times.

 

I really think it's you that is struggling with the reading comprehension of this article.

 

First, the title of the article is "Why Russell Wilson is a better quarterback than Cam Newton". That leads me to believe that the article is indeed written about why Russell Wilson is a better Quarterback.

 

The author of the article begins the article by labeling the two quarterbacks based on their perceived persona's and makes no mention in the article that he believes other wise.

 

What he says is that (paraphrasing) "you can't say that Wilson is better than Newton based simply based on the premises that came is crazy, erratic, spoiled, and a loafer." That doesn't mean that he doesn't believe that those things are true. In fact, he references these characteristics three separate times, so they must hold some weight to this particular individual who wrote the article. In fact at the end of the second paragraph, he even says it's easy to just draw the conclusion that Wilson is better based on the premise of Cam= bad attitude, Wilson = good attitude. 

 

What the author is truly saying is that Russell is better than Cam. Not because Cam has a bad attitude and Russell has a good attitude, but because Russell is in a better situation.

 

It's clearly a writing tactic to try to appeal to both sides (more so one than the other) but it's quite easy to see through honestly.

 

It's just shoddy journalism.

 

I agree with Collins here dude. You're the one struggling. I agreed with your post on the first page but the dude that wrote this is saying that comparing the two based on size and attitude is the wrong way to do it. 

 

Also that part I put in bold. That right there is wrong. the title is "Why IS Russell Wilson a Better QB than Cam Newton?" That is puts the entire thing into a different perspective. It's not claiming he's better, it's asking why. 

[Cary Kollins]

I agree with Collins here dude. You're the one struggling. I agreed with your post on the first page but the dude that wrote this is saying that comparing the two based on size and attitude is the wrong way to do it. 

 

Also that part I put in bold. That right there is wrong. the title is "Why IS Russell Wilson a Better QB than Cam Newton?" That is puts the entire thing into a different perspective. It's not claiming he's better, it's asking why. 

 

 

 

yep

 

He is not debating the point. He is asking why Wilson is perceived to be better in the minds of everyone outside of Carolina.

[CarolinaPanthers8789]

I agree with Collins here dude. You're the one struggling. I agreed with your post on the first page but the dude that wrote this is saying that comparing the two based on size and attitude is the wrong way to do it. 

 

Also that part I put in bold. That right there is wrong. the title is "Why IS Russell Wilson a Better QB than Cam Newton?" That is puts the entire thing into a different perspective. It's not claiming he's better, it's asking why. 

 

It's clearly not me lol. Everyone except the two of you have come to same conclusion as I have.

 

It's really quite simple. The author is saying that you can't say that Wilson is better based on size and attitude "even though it's easy to" (paraphrasing), but you can say he is better based on the scenario that Wilson is in. The title is also a rhetorical question. He's telling us why Wilson is better not asking why Wilson is better.

 

The author gives you two premises and beliefs and basically says that it's easy to simply stop and say Wilson is better because of this. However, that wouldn't be giving Wilson (or Cam for that matter) enough credit. He goes on to say that what truly makes Wilson better is the scenario that he's in.

 

However, just because he is saying that Wilson isn't better than Cam based on attitude alone does not mean that he doesn't believe the two premises that he wrote. In fact, he even says that it's easy to simply say that Wilson is better than Newton based on attitude alone but then he begins to dive deeper and tries to back it up with a football basis.

[teeray]

I agree with Collins here dude. You're the one struggling. I agreed with your post on the first page but the dude that wrote this is saying that comparing the two based on size and attitude is the wrong way to do it. 

 

Also that part I put in bold. That right there is wrong. the title is "Why IS Russell Wilson a Better QB than Cam Newton?" That is puts the entire thing into a different perspective. It's not claiming he's better, it's asking why. 

 

Neither of us disagree that he is trying to say you shouldn't compare based merely off of size and attitude.

 

The issue is he puts a descriptor out their to define the different attitudes and does not ever say that the descriptor is wrong.  He just says "Can't judge them based merely off of their different attitudes"

 

Thus suggesting that the attitude description is correct, but it is unfair to evaluate them as QBs based merely on their attitudes

 

[usmcpanthers]

Nothing to see here. Author did his job...he got the opposing fans riled up because he knew most people don't read past 3 paragraphs.

Although their wasn't alot of good to say about Cam..it was just enough to keep the article from being trash.

Of course seattle articles will be biased towards their super bowl qb no matter what.

I still will take Cam over wilson anyday!!!!!! Super bowls change everything. Let's keep bird hunting and proceed to our own Lombardi!

[CarolinaPanthers8789]

yep

 

He is not debating the point. He is asking why Wilson is perceived to be better in the minds of everyone outside of Carolina.

 

He's clearly not as the title is a rhetorical question. In fact, look at the text below the title.

 

"Russell Wilson and Cam Newton, who meet Saturday in the NFC Divisional playoffs, are easy to contrast. But some of the success Wilson has enjoyed comes from the playoff-ready Seahawks team he plays for."

 

This screams rhetorical question.

 

Wilson isnt' better because of A & B (even though A&B are true), he's better because of C.

 

In fact, if you dive deeper into the article, the author explicitly says that Luck and Wilson are the premier quarterbacks of the young generation.

 

Wilson and Andrew Luck have distinguished themselves as the best of this crop of intriguing 27-and-under signal-callers.

 

Not to mention that this is a Seattle Times article, why in the hell would he try to make a point to say that Wilson is not clearly better than Newton?

 

Oh, and then he says this... (back to the even though A&B are true, I believe it because of C).

 

In the young quarterback derby, Wilson is ahead of Newton. But it’s not just because Wilson is a perfect study, and Newton is flawed and freewheeling.

 

 

I mean my heavens, do I need to just read the article for you?