The Russell Wilson Conundrum

So my pops is a die-hard Badger fan. An alumn, he always monitors Badger players in the league and will back them at all costs. He's even argued in favor of Jim Sorgi having carved out a nice niche for himself and how that bodes well for the program. The point being, he's hoping the Packers win, but wants Wilson to do well and wouldn't mind seeing them win for that sake. This is patently absurd to me. I'm curious to see what others think.

Madness.

I liked him as a badger (wilson), but I'll be damned if I want him to do well tonight, hellz no. Tonight he is the enemy, and should be delt with accordingly. On Monday, I will like him again.

Seriously. Tell Pops he has 15 other opportunities this year to hope Wilson does well. Just not tonight. For the love of God, not tonight.

I find myself in your father's position.

My first loyalty is to the Packers but, as an alumnus, I like to see former Badgers succeed in the NFL, NBA and NHL.

I doubt one can understand such conflicting loyalties unless they've really gotten behind a college sports program or attended a school...

They've got Wilson on such a short leash in Seattle, that I doubt his performance is really determinative (re: they will continue to be conservative with the ball and ask him to manage the game). I suspect this match up comes down to whether our offense gets its sh*t together and manages some points against that D...

Tonight, Clay hunts Badger.

Unless Russell Wilson is going to purposely give us 4 interceptions and 2 touchdowns so we win the game, I say no mercy!

That's a fair point since I graduated from a D3 school and clearly don't have such an allegiance at play. And, though I grew up in Madison, I still don't have that connection to UW like an alumn would. Maybe that's the missing piece and why I can't truly understand how one can be that connected to a player at their school to root for him when they play the Packers.

I would root against my own child if he played the packers. Rooting against someone I followed closely for a year? Yeah not a problem.

poor kid.

Tell your Dad that since he's a Badger alum ... I assume he's an intelligent, stunningly handsome and intuitive man that all women dream about. However, in this particular case, he needs to be told that he's naughty and that he's potentially bringing down "the wrath of the thing" and needs to step outside, spin three times and curse and spit. Failure to do so will result in my having to call down the onus of the Rufus "The RoadRunner" Ferguson curse upon his household. Such nonsense MUST be nipped in the bud and I am not afraid to bring down a pox upon him.

Not sure how you define "national stage" and "sub par," but I would generally disagree with this, at least with regards to Wilson's time at UW. See here.

Wilson's decision-making / passing efficiency were always excellent and the offense was so high-powered that his raw totals were always impressive. He started 14 games at Wisconsin; I never recall thinking that Wilson was anything short of "great" in every one of them.

I think it's more accurate to say the defense had a number of sub par games that season- they rarely made plays.

If you want to analyze the weekly statistics and argue that he had a down game one weekend or another, I'm sure you could. I just don't think any objective observer would describe any Wilson performance in a UW uniform as "sub par."

Now I can't speak to his time at NC State but I think that's far less relevant.

Be nice if Wilson could duplicate the performance of Cam Newton against the Giants last Thursday.

There's a logical problem here: We perceive these as big games and they're widely televised because the opponents are better. Did Wilson fail to put up gaudy numbers because the game was on the "national stage" or because the opponent was better? -I think the latter makes more sense. Most Badger games were available for very large national audiences last year anyway, so I think the performances you've highlighted had more to do with the opponent than the popular significance of the game. It's a mistaken perception of causality.

Also, I think you are nitpicking.

The first Michigan State game was on the road in a very hostile environment. Wilson still completed 66% of his passes and you neglected to mention that he scrambled for a third TD. When Wisconsin later faced MSU in the Big Ten Championship, a much larger game by any objective measure, Wilson was the game MVP with a 3/1 TD to INT ratio.

Against Oregon, I thought Wilson did well carrying the offense all day against a top 3 team. The one interception and the attempted spike at the end of regulation were the only blemishes on a 19 for 25 passing, 2 TD, and 1 rushing TD performance. Rewatch the highlight package and tell me whether you still think that performance was "sub par." If Abby hadn't fumbled that ball, Wiscy was in the driver's seat for the win.

I just think the suggestion that Wilson shrinks on the big stage is a bit manufactured. But if he does tonight, then great.

I don't think Wilson is going to beat Green Bay.

If Seattle wins, it's because the Seattle offense puts up 20 or so odd points and their D stalls out our offense.

Edit: I am getting sick of ESPN analysts humping Wilson's leg. Can we see him put together an impressive body of work in the NFL before we start giving him the Favre treatment?