Will Luck get more than Wilson

[RolandDeschain]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

 

[Escamillo]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Well, this might not please you then:
Whose the best running QB in the NFL? "Andrew Luck", says MMQB

:|

 

[ctrcat]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Agree 100%. RW has won the big game and there is zero objective reason Cam isn't seen as better past, present, and future too-stats, measurables, college and nfl accolades, etc. with a worse supporting offensive cast. The one playoff win Luck has was littered with his own boneheaded plays in the wild card round against the Chiefs minus Jamaal Charles after playing in the AFC South. Nauseating.

 

[ctrcat]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Well, this might not please you then:
Whose the best running QB in the NFL? "Andrew Luck", says MMQB

:|

LMAO! He shouldn't even BE on the list. The kid can do NO wrong!

 

[HawkGA]

I blame Cutler for all of this. Once you give a mid level QB $18million/yr, you condemn any team with a better QB to $20+

Not to argue with some very well made points . . . but isn't Tony Romo to blame more than Cutler?

 

[Hasselbeck]

Of course Luck will get more. Especially since Wilson's deal will likely get done first. The Colts don't have to worry about extending Luck until 2016.

 

[Evil_Shenanigans]

I blame Cutler for all of this. Once you give a mid level QB $18million/yr, you condemn any team with a better QB to $20+

Not to argue with some very well made points . . . but isn't Tony Romo to blame more than Cutler?

I would throw Flacco into that conversation but he at least has a SB ring!

 

[Hasselbeck]

I blame Cutler for all of this. Once you give a mid level QB $18million/yr, you condemn any team with a better QB to $20+

Not to argue with some very well made points . . . but isn't Tony Romo to blame more than Cutler?

I love joking about Romo being a choke artist as much as the next guy, but hes a far superior QB to Jay Cutler.

 

[Cartire]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Well, this might not please you then:
Whose the best running QB in the NFL? "Andrew Luck", says MMQB

:|

Man,this article alone needs its own thread. What exactly does he qualify as a QB fault for a sack? I will admit that I havent watched all of Lucks games, but I would be hard pressed to believe that 0 of his sacks were his fault, or if that is the case, then I cant imagine how the others could be so much more egregious in the same regard.

Its one thing to note the quantifiable statistics, but I dont understand how any analysis or journalist can say with 100% whos fault it is on any play without knowing the exact play called and who was out of position or missed a block.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Nearly 9000 yards of total offense, 55 total TD's, a playoff win .. all with a terrible defense and no running game (you know, the same things Wilson doesn't have)

Andrew Luck is an outstanding quarterback. Why so many people on this board choose to basically hate the guy because he was drafted the same year as Russell Wilson is beyond me.

I have no doubt that if Luck were swapped for Wilson straight up back in 2012, that he'd have a Super Bowl ring right now too. I also think Wilson would still be a very good player, but would probably be falling short because of his supporting cast.

 

[HawkGA]

I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say far superior. Maybe suprerior, I won't quibble. But I don't know about far. Romo was, if I'm not mistaken, the first of the "they paid how much to who? Are you kidding me?" contracts.

 

[seedhawk]

I blame Cutler for all of this. Once you give a mid level QB $18million/yr, you condemn any team with a better QB to $20+

Not to argue with some very well made points . . . but isn't Tony Romo to blame more than Cutler?

I would hazzard to put blame where it belongs. Players attempt, all the time, to get paid as much as they can. Owners and GM's that can't see the trees for the forest overpay.

 

[Hasselbeck]

Wilson will get a new contract next year while Luck may not be extended until 2016 since the Colts have a fifth year option on him. So, yes, I think Luck will get a bigger contract since the salary cap will be higher by then.

RG3 will probably get a crazy deal, then Luck will break that.

 

[HawkGA]

I would hazzard to put blame where it belongs. Players attempt, all the time, to get paid as much as they can. Owners and GM's that can't see the trees for the forest overpay.

I don't think anybody is putting the "blame" on these other quarterbacks in the sense that they did something wrong. Just more that their contracts were the first to set off the crazy. More power to them individually. I'm just glad I'm not a Cowboys or Bears fan!

 

[Anthony!]

And at the end of the day, I hate these huge contracts QBs are getting. I personally think they're vastly inflated when compared to the player's value. Not trying to dog Russell's skills or his value to the team, but a QB doesn't function without everyone else on the team, and the way contracts are going, teams are now almost being forced to put 15% into one player. It's nuts. I blame Cutler for all of this. Once you give a mid level QB $18million/yr, you condemn any team with a better QB to $20+

Totally know what you mean about inflated prices.

Somewhat justified though:

QBs are also one of the least replaceable positions and a highly technical position. Not saying that other positions aren't technical, just saying that a QB has to be able to anticipate, read, read again, scramble, read, throw a ball in a spiral and accurately, etc.

Another exercise: take a position like QB, safety, linemen, etc. and take him out for a game so the next in line has to fill in. How big is the drop-off? QBs tend to have a pretty big drop off from 1st string to 2nd string compared to other positions. Each team will be different, but when you're talking about the market, you have to take the league as a whole.

Thus the QBs inflated price.

When guys like Dilfer, Brad Johnson, and Flacco are able to win Super Bowls, maybe having an elite QB isn't as vital as is commonly believed.

Putting 15% of a team's salary into one guy has never resulted in a Super Bowl win. What's it take for people to understand that?

Now, if the "Cutler-market" is going to dictate that everyone put 15% into one guy, then fine, since everyone will be under that same handicap if tying up 15% into one guy, even if the guy is mediocre at best (like Cutler). I wonder, though, if one team will have the guts to say "no", let their QB walk, and put the saved money into creating a well-rounded team, and thus have an advantage over most of the teams that wasted 15% of their salary into mediocre QBs. Well rounded teams win Super Bowls. Teams wint 20+mil QBs do not (not yet, at least).

BTW, Luck will get way more than RW.

so you want to be one of the 15% and 0% then? Meaning only 15% of the SB winners did not have a franchise QB, and of them 0% made it back to the SB any time soon with that QB. The teams that have won the SB, and stayed in contention for a long time had a franchise QB and Franchise QBs are paid. I want to be in contention for a long time to come and the facts say you need a franchise QB do it, As to Luck and Rw given RW will sign first Lucks will be bigger, but not by that much. IF you compare performance it should be less but who knows.

 

[Anthony!]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Well, this might not please you then:
Whose the best running QB in the NFL? "Andrew Luck", says MMQB

:|

Yay but you have to consider the source it Peter King he has been all over Luck since day one and very anti Rw

Also this says a lot of what he says is crap

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/seahawks/ ... crambling/

For Seattle’s Russell Wilson, the breakdown looks like this:

20 for what it terms a “blown block.”

14 for good coverage in the secondary

8 for a rusher coming in untouched (so meaning the blame more on scheme or assignment than a physical error).

And one each for it describes as other pressure and “quarterback fault.”


I think I will by into Footballoutsiders then Peter King who always has an agenda

 

[Anthony!]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Nearly 9000 yards of total offense, 55 total TD's, a playoff win .. all with a terrible defense and no running game (you know, the same things Wilson doesn't have)

Andrew Luck is an outstanding quarterback. Why so many people on this board choose to basically hate the guy because he was drafted the same year as Russell Wilson is beyond me.

I have no doubt that if Luck were swapped for Wilson straight up back in 2012, that he'd have a Super Bowl ring right now too. I also think Wilson would still be a very good player, but would probably be falling short because of his supporting cast.

Hmm really let me help you a little

Indy had a defense ranked 9th in scoring so top 10, not so bad are they now
Indy had a running attack that avg 4.3 YPA guess what the same as us, the difference is we ran 100 times more then they did, that is the difference in the offenses.
Indy and Luck have a HOF WR, and another WR who is top 20, Our best Wr is not even in the top 30
Indy plays in the AFC a far less defensive orientated conference
Indy and Luck have a o-line ranked 6th, while we and RW have an o-line ranked 32nd in pass blocking

I do not hate Luck I am just tired of people giving every excuse why luck is better, and really do not have a clue. Rw has had more obstacles to his greatness than Luck and has out performed luck in every category but yards,

 

[SoulfishHawk]

None of it matters. The only thing that matters is SuperbOwl Titles

Wilson - 1
Luck - 0

 

[DavidSeven]

Luck will get a new contract at 38 years of age down the road that makes him the new highest-paid QB in the league based on his future potential, too.

I'm so tired of the Luck hype train. I wish it'd derail over a cliff and explode on impact. Potential is worthless, what matters is what you do.

Nearly 9000 yards of total offense, 55 total TD's, a playoff win .. all with a terrible defense and no running game (you know, the same things Wilson doesn't have)

Andrew Luck is an outstanding quarterback. Why so many people on this board choose to basically hate the guy because he was drafted the same year as Russell Wilson is beyond me.

I have no doubt that if Luck were swapped for Wilson straight up back in 2012, that he'd have a Super Bowl ring right now too. I also think Wilson would still be a very good player, but would probably be falling short because of his supporting cast.

Luck played with DPOY candidate and a superior receiving corps. I take nothing away from him as a player, but I take exception to the statement that he and Wilson are interchangeable for us. Wilson's decision-making, ability to scramble and run on the edges are unique to him and are now part of the essence of this team. How would Luck fare with Paul McQuistan as his left tackle? How would our defense do if the QB was stressing it with multiple INTs?

Here is a fact: Wilson and Luck played in similar offenses as seniors in college. Both had great supporting casts. Wilson still put up better numbers and guided his team further than Luck's that year.

That doesn't mean "Luck sucks." But as Richard Sherman likes to say, "never confuse potential for production." By numbers and wins, Wilson has a better career thus far.

 

[edogg23]

I would take our pedestrian receiving core over Indy's any day of the week, especially with Wayne being out most of the year last year.