If London and G-Wilson were both to have top 10 seasons, which one would u rather have going forward?
London, QB situation is probably better long term. Also a year younger for Dynasty.
gwil lol hes been better his whole career
London all day because of QB situation. People say Wilson has been better but they’ve both done virtually the same thing. London had more target competition and played in a run first offense. I’ll never understand people putting them in separate tiers
In my opinion GW is flat out the better WR - I don’t get the narrative of London having a better long term QB situation - as if the Jets can’t bring in a QB of Kirk’s caliber after Rodgers
London. Younger QB is the tie breaker
bro kirk is 36 lol
hes not young
Coming off an Achilles tear
and london is sharing with pitts and mooney
london being top 10 is if bijan and pittas gets hurt
gwil clears no debate
All the respect to Kirk but people out here acting like he’s a young elite qb
Like he made JJ and Diggs - not that they were elite WRs to begin with
Kirk is an upgrade to what London had - but Rogers is also an upgrade to the garbage Wilson has had and both of these guys are short term QBs in the careers of London and Wilson Anyway
yea and atls weapons are insane london will never be top 10 without an injury
Just one was a couple months earlier
yea but ur discrediting rodgers but not kirk even when both off an imnjury and both old as dirt
One is 4 years younger with a offensive scheme from the McVay tree. Could be a whole new regime in NY. It's a no brainer to me.
The context of the question is important. Who am I going to value higher with similar production? Obviously the one tied to the younger QB in a more stable regime
London’s QB doesn’t do anything for me - Wilson is the better WR
kirk and arod both have 1-2 years left
ur acting like kirk will also go to 41 lol
Especially with the trajectory of QBs coming in the next couple years and NIL having guys stay an extra yr or two