There are 85 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Russell Wilson VS Colin Kaepernick

Originally posted by GNielsen:
At the combine, Kaepernick had a high 40 time of 4.53 and a low of 4.43.

Wilsons high was 4.64 and his low was 4.48.

I think it's pretty remarkable that Kaepernick, at his size, can move at the same speed or better than Wilson. They're both great athletes, but Kaepernick is kind of off the scale for QB's. He's a mutant.

Ok, so were did you get that info, i googled it and all i could find was the one official 40 time.. it was 4.53 for Kap and 4.55 for wilson.
Originally posted by ninerfan1984:
thats your full answer to my question?

well i can tell talking even somewhat rationally with you about this is a waste of time.

lol, settle down my man.. you asked me a question, i answered it.. truth of the matter is, i don't know who has the most potential, they both really only played a portion of the season... next season should shine more light on this.. they're both too close to answer one or the other.. i chose wilson because he plays for my team..that's all i got at this point. we can argue stats and iq tests and off season preperation , physical attributes, but in the end, they'll have to show it on the field... for more than half a season.. so till then my choice is RW.
[ Edited by hawker84 on Mar 27, 2013 at 1:21 PM ]
im a big time niner fan but i gotta say that Kap doesnt apperar to see the field yet quite as well as wilson. Wilson just seems tø be a little cooler and understand what the D is trying to do to him a little better. I do think Kap has more physical potential but still gets that deer in the headlight look when the heat is on. They are both way to close to call tho.. def need another season of playing to properly evaluate
Originally posted by GNielsen:
One has beaten the rest of the NFC and gotten to the Super Bowl and the other hasn't.

well you can't argue with that, except for those pesky , viking, giant, rams (2), and seattle game... but other than that you are correct.
Originally posted by hawker84:
Originally posted by GNielsen:
One has beaten the rest of the NFC and gotten to the Super Bowl and the other hasn't.

well you can't argue with that, except for those pesky , viking, giant, rams (2), and seattle game... but other than that you are correct.

Lmao. This is sad. so very sad. What do you mean he can't argue that? The NFC Championship crowns the king of the NFC, we won it. there for we surpassed the rest of the NFC. Get over yourself.
the comment said one has beaten the rest of the NFC... you didn't beat the vikings, giants, rams, and only beat us once.. and you didn't play all the NFC teams, so you didn't beat the rest of the NFC to win the crown, you beat the NFC and AFC teams on your schedule... and i said it's true one has won the NFC and played in the superbowl.. so what exactly do i need to get over... little touchy in the web today..
[ Edited by hawker84 on Mar 27, 2013 at 1:43 PM ]
Lol. Teams with nothing to brag about try to diminish better teams' accomplishment.
Originally posted by hawker84:
the comment said one has beaten the rest of the NFC... you didn't beat the vikings, giants, rams, and only beat us once.. and you didn't play all the NFC teams, so you didn't beat the rest of the NFC to win the crown, you beat the NFC and AFC teams on your schedule... and i said it's true one has won the NFC and played in the superbowl.. so what exactly do i need to get over... little touchy in the web today..

He stated we beat the rest of the nfc to make it to the super bowl. You know what he meant. No team in history plays every other teams.

You argued semantics just because you got touchy after reading that.

"Nuh uh you said you beat every team. No you didn't"
[ Edited by Young2Rice on Mar 27, 2013 at 2:01 PM ]
i do like the fact that they both mobile QBs, with badass Defense's and good running games on very evenly matched teams playing in the same division, rival coaches.. It will make for a very even , fair and accurate compairison come the end of this year.
Originally posted by hawker84:
the comment said one has beaten the rest of the NFC... you didn't beat the vikings, giants, rams, and only beat us once.. and you didn't play all the NFC teams, so you didn't beat the rest of the NFC to win the crown, you beat the NFC and AFC teams on your schedule... and i said it's true one has won the NFC and played in the superbowl.. so what exactly do i need to get over... little touchy in the web today..

It's nitpicky silly little comments like this that make it hard to actually take you seriously. You know exactly what he meant, yet you want to by pointing out "well you didn't beat _________". The truth is, the 49ers were in the Super Bowl, the rest of the NFC wasn't. Therefore, "the 49ers beat the NFC" is a general term.

P.S. It doesn't matter that the 49ers beat the Seahags only once. The Falcons also beat the Seahags only once, too.
[ Edited by Beeker on Mar 27, 2013 at 2:31 PM ]
Okay, okay. Why don't we say one has led his team to an NFC championship and a Super Bowl appearance and the other has not. Hawker? Will that work for you?

Or, how about, one has gotten his team to the Super Bowl and the other has not. Or how about, one can reach the wine glasses on the top shelf without a stool and the other cannot. How about one can throw a football 70 yards and the other cannot.
Originally posted by hawker84:
This is debatable.... and again i ask the question how can you take one over the other at this point? what has either done that the other hasn't at this point...

One won the NFC west and the NFC championship.

The other didn't.

Seahawks fans are the worst. Never before in my decades of football have I seen a fanbase get so excited about splitting a series. It's ridiculous.

WE BEAT YOU ONE TIME OUT OF THE LAST FIVE HERR DERR

Well, I sure am happy that you avoided closing out a five game series without a win. Get out of my house. If the goddamn seahawks were so good, they would have beaten the falcons, like we did. They didn't. Their massively overrated secondary was full of drug-users, and one of them is a public embarrassment, to boot. I read a thread on their boards predicting they win 3-5 superbowls in the next ten years, because their rookie is clearly the best QB to have ever played, in the history of ever. Not a damn thing about how their star RB is probably going to be the most affected back by the new RB running rule. Nor a thing about how they're spending money in FA like its going out of style.

TLDR: Snap out of your goddamn delusions, Seahawk fans.
[ Edited by xtm059 on Mar 27, 2013 at 3:41 PM ]
Originally posted by GNielsen:
Okay, okay. Why don't we say one has led his team to an NFC championship and a Super Bowl appearance and the other has not. Hawker? Will that work for you?

Or, how about, one has gotten his team to the Super Bowl and the other has not. Or how about, one can reach the wine glasses on the top shelf without a stool and the other cannot. How about one can throw a football 70 yards and the other cannot.
yes!! i love it
Originally posted by hawker84:
Originally posted by GNielsen:
One has beaten the rest of the NFC and gotten to the Super Bowl and the other hasn't.

well you can't argue with that, except for those pesky , viking, giant, rams (2), and seattle game... but other than that you are correct.

So you're not the king till you're undefeated, is what you're saying? That's a strawmans argument if I have ever seen one.