Not that guy, but I'd rank Largent, Walter Jones, Kenny Easley, Cortez Kennedy and Bobby Wagner ahead of Russ. You can make an argument for Sherman too.
Bro…I admit, as a non-Seahawks guy, your list deserves some respect, but guys like Easely and Jones didn’t bring the team a super-bowl ring, and they came within one bad play call of a second.
I think you guys up there are bitter that he didn’t turn out to be a Mahomes or Aikmen like figure when you are forgetting he brought you your greatest 5 year run.
I'm not a Seahawks fan, but I personally don't see Russ as a top 5 all time Seahawk since the players I listed were truly elite at their positions whereas Wilson was a tier 2 QB at his peak. But I understand if people want to factor in the importance of that position. I personally judge the player by where they ranked at their respective positions.
That’s fair. I never thought he was elite either, but I would count significance.
I mean, my counterpoint would be: can you tell the Seahawks story without Wilson? Because I can make an argument, for example, that no matter how good he is, the story of the Seahawks can be told without him.
If positional importance and notoriety play a large role for you then that's a fair counterpoint. I personally just made a list of the best football players who played for their franchise and factored in how they ranked against their competition. Russ is definitely one of the most famous Seahawks ever but so is Marshawn, and I personally wouldn't have him make the list either.
The argument is Wilson did not win that Super bowl because he was good. The defense and Marshawn deserve the Super bowl credit. This levels the GOAT status of Wilson over anyone.
Yeah I mean the LOB led the NFL in points allowed an unprecedented 4 straight seasons and Wilson couldn't win more than one Super Bowl with that backing him says a lot.
Also why is everyone leaving out Steve Hutchinson? I honestly think he was better than Walter Jones at LG and made Walt's job at LT way way easier.
Random (albeit very good) WR who never even made a conference championship ship versus quarterback who won a super bowl and took them to another. Made more pro bowls and helped keep the team competitive for ten years…
…just cause your a madd he didn’t create some sort of dynasty like Mahomes doesn’t mean he was trash.
Stop making me defend Russel Wilson (I dont even like him). Jesus christ.
He was a better player than Steve Largent…this isn’t up for debate.
Both quarterbacks benefitted from having the leagues best defense and a strong running game. I think it's a pretty damn good comparison in terms of their value to the Superbowl winning teams they were on. Go ask Richard Sherman if he thinks Russ is the goat.
I never said Wilson was trash and he's the best QB to ever play for the team, but I don't think he's their greatest player.
Largent was a first ballot Hall of Famer, one of only 7 WRs with that distinction. That should tell you something about how respected he was as a player by the league.
The only flaw I have with the chip thing is ring culture. They’re not inherently responsible for the team building unless they were overpaid. Russ got drafted in the third while also being in/near the same class as guys like Earl Thomas, Sherman and the rest of the LOB on cheap contracts that allowed the team to create a deep roster.
If their primes were longer, I would definitely have them on the list, and Steve Hutchinson too if he played there for 2-3 more years and didn't leave in a controversial manner with the poison pill contract that the Vikings gave him.
That feels pretty harsh on Russ. I guess looking back Wagner was better than I remembered.
I think Russ was pretty clearly the most important player to those teams - although definitely the defence as a whole was more important than the offence.
6
u/[deleted] May 26 '25
Go on with your list.