This Week's Enemy Fan Forums: The Indianapolis Colts

[twisted_steel2]

Wow Scottemojo, nicely done. :bow:

 

[OffensivelyPC]

This board is the only place I've ever heard anyone debate Wilson vs Luck.

That's because Luck was annointed as an NFL messiah when he was a freshman, bloodlines, size, talent. Wilson started 5th on the depth chart as a freshman, and took the job. He makes people doubt when they see him, most people aren't comfortable questioning their own notions, which is how he lost his job to Mike Glennon. Even now, you would do nothing but quote spoon fed media slobber in telling me how Luck had to do so much more and that is why he was better. Half truth, he did have to do more. He was not better.

Like most Luck fans, you dismiss this with an Only You Guys wave of the hand. You quote Lynch, defense, yada yada yada. Drink the narrative.

I have seen every snap of both players. I find it difficult to compare them, they are very different flavors. Nobody starts a conversation about Johnny U by talking about Fran Tarkenton, and few will start a conversation about Luck with Wilson.

But there are reasons to question your narrative. The popular story is that Luck is asked to do much more. Stats clearly support that. But when asked to do it all, like vs Baltimore, Luck crumbled. When the Seattle D failed, and Lynch could not run (the popular narrative is Wilson has D and run game, Luck didn't, right?) vs the Falcons last year, Wilson put the team on his back and came back from 20 down, twice. Ultimately, the defense failed in the clutch, but that only demonstrated even more that the popular narrative is crap.

Luck is supremely gifted. Despite those gifts, not because of them, I watched him put 7 balls on the hands of Jaguar players in the first half last week. How could an objective football fan see that and not wonder if he tries to do too much? Luck has a pattern of trusting his arm too much, guys that track these things report that in his rookie season, he had 14 would be interceptions dropped by defensive players. Luck, indeed. Every QB has a few of those, but that is an outlier of a number. Wilson is a better playmaker than Luck while playing a safer passing game. Wilson get better as the field compresses, he is not a yard machine, he is a red zone touchdown machine.


The simple truth is that the media and fan love of Luck is driven by what he will be, which he shows glimpses of quite often, not what he actually is. Right now, Luck is a talented and smart QB who gambles too much. Just like his freshman year, Wilson started last season at the bottom and forced people to notice. It will probably always be that way, Wilson will never fit the standard profile.

Fortunately for Seattle fans, Wilson only seems like a nice guy, there are plenty of indicators that he tracks these perceived slights and fuels his drive with them. I expect him to be on point this weekend as he attempts to take his record vs the young guns of the NFL (Newton, Kaepernick, RGIII, and Luck) to 6-0.

Seems to me that you are overgeneralizing quite a bit. We've had talks about all the young QBs and after Luck, the consensus pick is RW. But with regard to your football analysis in comebacks and gambling. You're taking the parts that make your argument and ignoring the rest. Both guys have a great comeback track record. And while you seem to think that a QB can "do it all" is appropriate, it's also inaccurate. I don't care how much credit you give to a QB, if everything is falling down around him and he has to "do it all" by himself, it won't happen. He has to rely on 10 other guys on the field so he can help his team get back into the game. And if he does make a comeback, there's still other players making that possible for him to make that comeback, including the defense. Your defense shut down Ryan and the Falcons in the 4th quarter, whether it was 3 and outs or one 1st down and then punt. Wilson couldn't have engineered a 21 point comeback without the help of your defense. It's just that simple.

As for the drops, you're taking one game against the Jaguars (and really, those drops were primarily in 2 drives) and appling it to the whole. Last year this would have been an appropriate argument, but not this year. While he started 7/16 in that game, was out of sorts in the first quarter, he finished the game 15/20. He's been much more accurate this year and doesn't take near as many gambles as he did last year, and when he does, they are smarter gambles - i.e. putting it in a place where only our recever can reach it. He's done that time and time again, and it's refreshing to see given his sometimes mind boggling decisions he made last year. QBs have rough patches in games. Just this past week, RW threw a pick late in the 4th that should have sealed the game but for your defense bailing him out to take it into OT. One drive doesn't make RW worse than Luck. So as a fan, I don't think you should be making the same argument by pointing out to one or two drives against hte Jags to make the opposite point that Wilson is better than Luck.

Bottom line is, both guys are very good young QBs and with time may be considered cream of the crop. There's nothing either fanbase should be discouraged about at this point.

 

[Scottemojo]

This board is the only place I've ever heard anyone debate Wilson vs Luck.

That's because Luck was annointed as an NFL messiah when he was a freshman, bloodlines, size, talent. Wilson started 5th on the depth chart as a freshman, and took the job. He makes people doubt when they see him, most people aren't comfortable questioning their own notions, which is how he lost his job to Mike Glennon. Even now, you would do nothing but quote spoon fed media slobber in telling me how Luck had to do so much more and that is why he was better. Half truth, he did have to do more. He was not better.

Like most Luck fans, you dismiss this with an Only You Guys wave of the hand. You quote Lynch, defense, yada yada yada. Drink the narrative.

I have seen every snap of both players. I find it difficult to compare them, they are very different flavors. Nobody starts a conversation about Johnny U by talking about Fran Tarkenton, and few will start a conversation about Luck with Wilson.

But there are reasons to question your narrative. The popular story is that Luck is asked to do much more. Stats clearly support that. But when asked to do it all, like vs Baltimore, Luck crumbled. When the Seattle D failed, and Lynch could not run (the popular narrative is Wilson has D and run game, Luck didn't, right?) vs the Falcons last year, Wilson put the team on his back and came back from 20 down, twice. Ultimately, the defense failed in the clutch, but that only demonstrated even more that the popular narrative is crap.

Luck is supremely gifted. Despite those gifts, not because of them, I watched him put 7 balls on the hands of Jaguar players in the first half last week. How could an objective football fan see that and not wonder if he tries to do too much? Luck has a pattern of trusting his arm too much, guys that track these things report that in his rookie season, he had 14 would be interceptions dropped by defensive players. Luck, indeed. Every QB has a few of those, but that is an outlier of a number. Wilson is a better playmaker than Luck while playing a safer passing game. Wilson get better as the field compresses, he is not a yard machine, he is a red zone touchdown machine.


The simple truth is that the media and fan love of Luck is driven by what he will be, which he shows glimpses of quite often, not what he actually is. Right now, Luck is a talented and smart QB who gambles too much. Just like his freshman year, Wilson started last season at the bottom and forced people to notice. It will probably always be that way, Wilson will never fit the standard profile.

Fortunately for Seattle fans, Wilson only seems like a nice guy, there are plenty of indicators that he tracks these perceived slights and fuels his drive with them. I expect him to be on point this weekend as he attempts to take his record vs the young guns of the NFL (Newton, Kaepernick, RGIII, and Luck) to 6-0.

Seems to me that you are overgeneralizing quite a bit. We've had talks about all the young QBs and after Luck, the consensus pick is RW. But with regard to your football analysis in comebacks and gambling. You're taking the parts that make your argument and ignoring the rest. Both guys have a great comeback track record. And while you seem to think that a QB can "do it all" is appropriate, it's also inaccurate. I don't care how much credit you give to a QB, if everything is falling down around him and he has to "do it all" by himself, it won't happen. He has to rely on 10 other guys on the field so he can help his team get back into the game. And if he does make a comeback, there's still other players making that possible for him to make that comeback, including the defense. Your defense shut down Ryan and the Falcons in the 4th quarter, whether it was 3 and outs or one 1st down and then punt. Wilson couldn't have engineered a 21 point comeback without the help of your defense. It's just that simple.

As for the drops, you're taking one game against the Jaguars (and really, those drops were primarily in 2 drives) and appling it to the whole. Last year this would have been an appropriate argument, but not this year. While he started 7/16 in that game, was out of sorts in the first quarter, he finished the game 15/20. He's been much more accurate this year and doesn't take near as many gambles as he did last year, and when he does, they are smarter gambles - i.e. putting it in a place where only our recever can reach it. He's done that time and time again, and it's refreshing to see given his sometimes mind boggling decisions he made last year. QBs have rough patches in games. Just this past week, RW threw a pick late in the 4th that should have sealed the game but for your defense bailing him out to take it into OT. One drive doesn't make RW worse than Luck. So as a fan, I don't think you should be making the same argument by pointing out to one or two drives against hte Jags to make the opposite point that Wilson is better than Luck.

Bottom line is, both guys are very good young QBs and with time may be considered cream of the crop. There's nothing either fanbase should be discouraged about at this point.

I only used the example of the Jags to illustrate a trend with Luck. He gambled last year, and he still gambles. You in a round about way really just make my point for me. Confine his gambling to two drives if you must, there was no reason to force issues with the Jags. In the first quarter, no less.

I have never contended that Russell was perfect. View another thread, you will see me shushing some who want to lay that late interception vs the Texans on the WR. It was all Russell. But down 7 with 5 minutes to go is gambling time.

Of course both fanbases should be happy. I would say they are. I simply question the narrative that you fall back on, as you just did. I have seen Colts fans debate who the 2nd best of the young guns is, Wilson or RGIII. They do not question the story that has been in place for 6 years now. The story is bullshit. They are only as good as what they do. People keep trying to frame the result with a context like Luck was asked to do more. Yes, he was asked to do more. Yet, he didn't do more. He did less.

 

[aawolf]

For my money, I'd rather have Wilson or Luck when my team is down by 6 with the ball in their hands with 2 minutes left to go than any other QB in the NFL outside of Tom Brady....for both to be in only their second season, that is saying something.

But, if forced to choose between the two; give me Russell Wilson.

 

[CallMeADawg]

Lots of Colts fans are posting trying to discredit the Hawks victories in some sort of effort to make themselves feel better about their chances on Sunday. So, how about we put your games under the scope and have you explain to us what happened:

Oakland? At home? http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=330908011
Mind explaining to us how you almost lost to OAKLAND in your house? OAKLAND for the love of god. You gave up over 100 yds rushing to their QB and somehow you guys are going to magically contain RUSSELL WILSON?!

Miami? At home? http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=330915011
Again, what happened? No 100 yd rusher for the Fins and they still beat you. The same Fins that went to New Orleans and got their lunch handed to them. Note the goose egg you guys put up in the 4th quarter. Can't finish eh?

So good job beating the bi-polar, identity crisis stricken, post-Seahawks abused 49ers and good job beating the bye-week Jaguars. Likewise, nice work dispatching the AFC West's yearly doormat. Somehow through all of this "electric" play, you guys are now world beaters.

Seattle is a far greater football team than SF, Miami, Oakland, and Jax. You guys don't just have to play well, you guys have to play the game of your lives to win this one.

 

[OffensivelyPC]

I only used the example of the Jags to illustrate a trend with Luck. He gambled last year, and he still gambles. You in a round about way really just make my point for me. Confine his gambling to two drives if you must, there was no reason to force issues with the Jags. In the first quarter, no less.

I have never contended that Russell was perfect. View another thread, you will see me shushing some who want to lay that late interception vs the Texans on the WR. It was all Russell. But down 7 with 5 minutes to go is gambling time.

Of course both fanbases should be happy. I would say they are. I simply question the narrative that you fall back on, as you just did. I have seen Colts fans debate who the 2nd best of the young guns is, Wilson or RGIII. They do not question the story that has been in place for 6 years now. The story is bullshit. They are only as good as what they do. People keep trying to frame the result with a context like Luck was asked to do more. Yes, he was asked to do more. Yet, he didn't do more. He did less.

All QBs gamble. And I guess that's my point. Luck does it. Russell does it. It doesn't matter when it occurs during the game. It happens, but you seem to define the decision making based on what could have happened, when all that really matters is what actually happened. Both guys got two interceptions, so despite whatever gambles they may take, they've lost on 2 of them apiece. That's the facts. So while you talk about what may have actually happened, it's simply another way to downplay what actually happened on the field (which this narrative you keep mentioning seems to criticize that very notion, yet here you are doing it - the only difference is, I'm using it in defense of my QB, you're using it as an attack). It doesn't matter if the defenders dropped it, you can say that for every QB. And their paly on the field isn't defined by it, it never has. What defines a QBs play on the field is how well they do in spite of it. Luck or Wilson could have a 20/30 250 yards and 3-0 TD/INT day and have 5 dropped INTs. No one is going to care about those dropped INTs or how much he gambled except people looking for any wiggle room for criticism. And even if it's an appropriate criticism (which I don't think it is), it will be overshadowed by how well he played in spite of it. Same thing with the Jags game. The first two drives, that you're using as a criticism is outweighed by what he did the rest of the day.

 

[OffensivelyPC]

For my money, I'd rather have Wilson or Luck when my team is down by 6 with the ball in their hands with 2 minutes left to go than any other QB in the NFL outside of Tom Brady....for both to be in only their second season, that is saying something.

But, if forced to choose between the two; give me Russell Wilson.

And naturally, we'd choose Luck. Honestly, both franchises are in good hands. But if both teams were to trade Wilson/Luck straight up, despite my being beffuddled, I wouldn't complain.

 

[CallMeADawg]

For my money, I'd rather have Wilson or Luck when my team is down by 6 with the ball in their hands with 2 minutes left to go than any other QB in the NFL outside of Tom Brady....for both to be in only their second season, that is saying something.

But, if forced to choose between the two; give me Russell Wilson.

And naturally, we'd choose Luck. Honestly, both franchises are in good hands. But if both teams were to trade Wilson/Luck straight up, despite my being beffuddled, I wouldn't complain.

And this year, when you were down with the ball and ~2 mins left in the game, Luck did NOT come through. See Miami game for evidence to support this. Goose egg in the 4th Quarter. That is not how you finish in the NFL. The Seahawks learned how to finish in 2012, and have proven that already this year.

 

[OffensivelyPC]

For my money, I'd rather have Wilson or Luck when my team is down by 6 with the ball in their hands with 2 minutes left to go than any other QB in the NFL outside of Tom Brady....for both to be in only their second season, that is saying something.

But, if forced to choose between the two; give me Russell Wilson.

And naturally, we'd choose Luck. Honestly, both franchises are in good hands. But if both teams were to trade Wilson/Luck straight up, despite my being beffuddled, I wouldn't complain.

And this year, when you were down with the ball and ~2 mins left in the game, Luck did NOT come through. See Miami game for evidence to support this. Goose egg in the 4th Quarter. That is not how you finish in the NFL. The Seahawks learned how to finish in 2012, and have proven that already this year.

I don't see how one game against a quality opponent that he didn't bring us back in overshadows all the other 4QCs and GWDs he has already had. Wilson has 6 4QCs and 7GWDs, Luck has 5 and 8 respectively. They're both about equal when it comes to being clutch.

 

[Sarlacc83]

This will be interesting to revisit after Sunday, but given Luck's track record and Seattle's ability to bait the QB, I would not be at all shocked if his stat line has 2 or 3 interceptions on it.

Also, Avril is the master of the strip-sack. Luck's put the ball on the turf more than enough that Colts fans ought to be wary of that. Last year, he had what, double-digit fumbles that Indy recovered?

 

[razgriz737]

This will be interesting to revisit after Sunday, but given Luck's track record and Seattle's ability to bait the QB, I would not be at all shocked if his stat line has 2 or 3 interceptions on it.

This is what I think will be the difference maker in this game. Our secondary feeds off of QB's who gamble.

 

[CallMeADawg]

For my money, I'd rather have Wilson or Luck when my team is down by 6 with the ball in their hands with 2 minutes left to go than any other QB in the NFL outside of Tom Brady....for both to be in only their second season, that is saying something.

But, if forced to choose between the two; give me Russell Wilson.

And naturally, we'd choose Luck. Honestly, both franchises are in good hands. But if both teams were to trade Wilson/Luck straight up, despite my being beffuddled, I wouldn't complain.

And this year, when you were down with the ball and ~2 mins left in the game, Luck did NOT come through. See Miami game for evidence to support this. Goose egg in the 4th Quarter. That is not how you finish in the NFL. The Seahawks learned how to finish in 2012, and have proven that already this year.

I don't see how one game against a quality opponent that he didn't bring us back in overshadows all the other 4QCs and GWDs he has already had. Wilson has 6 4QCs and 7GWDs, Luck has 5 and 8 respectively. They're both about equal when it comes to being clutch.

How many this year?

 

[OffensivelyPC]

This will be interesting to revisit after Sunday, but given Luck's track record and Seattle's ability to bait the QB, I would not be at all shocked if his stat line has 2 or 3 interceptions on it.

Also, Avril is the master of the strip-sack. Luck's put the ball on the turf more than enough that Colts fans ought to be wary of that. Last year, he had what, double-digit fumbles that Indy recovered?

Last year he had a ton of fumbles for sure. This year its' the opposite though. Luck has 1 and lost 0. Wilson has 4 and lost 2. Career wise, Luck has more fumbles but less fumbles recovered. Luck - 11 fum 2 lost; Wilson 10 fum 5 lost.

I think the biggest explanation (for Luck, I can't speak for Wilson since I haven't watched all his games), is the fact that Luck was a rookie but also that his line was bad. 9 of his fumbles last year were while he was passing. Our OL hasn't been that great in pass protection, but it's been better nonetheless and Luck has a bit more experience and feel for the pocket. I wish he didn't run so much though.

 

[OffensivelyPC]

How many this year?

He has 1 to Wilson's 2.

 

[aawolf]

How many this year?

Luck's had 1 4Q and 1 GWD vs. Oakland. Wilson's had two.

 

[OffensivelyPC]

How many this year?

Luck's had 1 4Q and 1 GWD vs. Oakland. Wilson's had two.

Speaking of which. I thought the difference between 4QC and GWD is that the latter includes OT and the former does not. Am I wrong on this, because Pro FB Reference has Wilson as 2 for both?

EDIT: My point is that, since he won one in OT, the 4QC should be 1. Or maybe it includes ties? That would make more sense, I suppose.

 

[aawolf]

How many this year?

Luck's had 1 4Q and 1 GWD vs. Oakland. Wilson's had two.

Speaking of which. I thought the difference between 4QC and GWD is that the latter includes OT and the former does not. Am I wrong on this, because Pro FB Reference has Wilson as 2 for both?

EDIT: My point is that, since he won one in OT, the 4QC should be 1. Or maybe it includes ties? That would make more sense, I suppose.

Good question. It appears that a GWD is where the drive wins the game. A 4th quarter comeback is when the team is down to start to fourth quarter and the QB comes back. Here is the site I got it from:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... r=WilsRu00

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... r=LuckAn00

 

[OffensivelyPC]

How many this year?

Luck's had 1 4Q and 1 GWD vs. Oakland. Wilson's had two.

Speaking of which. I thought the difference between 4QC and GWD is that the latter includes OT and the former does not. Am I wrong on this, because Pro FB Reference has Wilson as 2 for both?

EDIT: My point is that, since he won one in OT, the 4QC should be 1. Or maybe it includes ties? That would make more sense, I suppose.

Good question. It appears that a GWD is where the drive wins the game. A 4th quarter comeback is when the team is down to start to fourth quarter and the QB comes back. Here is the site I got it from:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... r=WilsRu00

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... r=LuckAn00

Yeah, there's a good explanation on it in that website and it's soo long winded I can't even begin to describe. But you basically have it right. And depending on who scores and when, it will be classified as one or another, or both. It's a tricky definition. The reason the Houston game was considered a 4QC is because they overcame the deficit (i.e. sending it into overtime. Had they lost in OT, they'd have a 4QC but no GWD. Since they won in OT, they have both.

 

[LotsOfLuck]

Not to blow the long-winded attempt at minimizing Luck, but he didn't arrive at Stanford as the annointed one. He was a 3-star recruit who picked between Stanford, Rice, and Purdue. In spite of being from Texas, none of the large Texas schools wanted him. He also didn't pick a traditional powerhouse program in Stanford. What Stanford football is now, he helped build.

So when you say, "Luck was annointed as an NFL messiah when he was a freshman", you couldn't be more incorrect. He was annointed after he started producing and winning in college. In other words, he earned it.

Finally, the reason it's only discussed here is because you guys are Seahawks fans so you like to view your players as better than they actually are. Wilson holds his own but he has a great team around him. That has alot to do with his success as well. Let's look at the game-winning drive from last week against Houston as an example. First of all, the only reason he was in position was because of Sherman making the play to tie it up in regulation.

In Seattle's first OT possession, we saw:

1-10-SEA20
(12:27) (Shotgun) R.Wilson pass short right to M.Lynch to SEA 33 for 13 yards (D.Sharpton). PENALTY on HOU-D.Sharpton, Horse Collar Tackle, 15 yards, enforced at SEA 33.
1-10-SEA48 (12:03) R.Wilson sacked at SEA 38 for -10 yards (B.Reed).
2-20-SEA38 (11:24) (Shotgun) R.Wilson pass incomplete short left to S.Williams.
3-20-SEA38 (11:21) (Shotgun) R.Wilson scrambles up the middle to HOU 47 for 15 yards (E.Reed).
4-5-HOU47 (10:38) J.Ryan punts 34 yards to HOU 13, Center-C.Gresham, fair catch by K.Martin. (The punt hang time was 4.6 seconds.)

So a penalty on the first play got him 1-10 at midfield and he took a sack that ended up causing them to punt. Had Seattle's defense not held, there would be no game-winning drive later.

The next Seahawks possession, the game-winning drive, looked like this:

1-10-SEA31 (6:46) M.Lynch left tackle pushed ob at SEA 37 for 6 yards (E.Reed).
2-4-SEA37 (6:16) (Shotgun) R.Wilson scrambles left end pushed ob at SEA 44 for 7 yards (D.Sharpton).
1-10-SEA44 (5:42) M.Lynch right guard to SEA 42 for -2 yards (J.Watt).
2-12-SEA42
(5:00) (Shotgun) R.Wilson pass short right to D.Baldwin to SEA 49 for 7 yards (K.Jackson). PENALTY on HOU-K.Jackson, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at SEA 49.
1-10-HOU36 (4:52) M.Lynch left tackle to HOU 33 for 3 yards (J.Mays, J.Watt).
2-7-HOU33 (4:16) M.Lynch up the middle to HOU 27 for 6 yards (W.Mercilus, D.Sharpton).
3-1-HOU27 (3:28) R.Wilson pass incomplete short right to G.Tate (J.Joseph).
4-1-HOU27 (3:23) S.Hauschka 45 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-C.Gresham, Holder-J.Ryan.

So the drive consisted of a big penalty, him making one 7 yard scramble, and handing off to Lynch, and then letting the kicker hit a 45 yard field goal.

In other words, this victory/drive wasn't exactly the Russell Wilson show. There's nothing wrong with winning games as a team but if Luck had the type of game Wilson had last week the Colts lose big time. Wilson was only in position for that drive because of the team around him and that drive consisted mostly of the team around him and a Houston penalty. I'd hardly use that as evidence of Wilson's greatness. Maybe evidence of how good the Seahawks are as a team .

I'm sure Wilson has his moments and you would know them better than me because I do not watch the Seahawks every week. By the same token, many of you obviously don't watch the Colts often or you would not be making some of the statements you are making.

 

[AF_Hawk]

Give me a break, if you would have watched the game you'd realize Wilson was really the only bright spot on offense all game. Without him the Hawks would not have even been in position to win.