Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ NFL NATION ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 154 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:25 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:22 am
Posts: 198
LotsOfLuck wrote:
cesame wrote:
No sensible Colts fan can look at their careers to this point and honestly say Luck has been the better player.

Again, Luck was the anointed one coming out and hyped so much that people will always just naturally say Luck is better because ESPN told them so. When you actually look at their careers you see Luck really hasn't done anything to separate himself from Wilson. Russell Wilson put up better numbers in their final year of college and so far Wilson has better career NFL numbers than Luck. Wilson has consistently outperformed Luck. That's a fact.

Tell me why I should think Luck is better than Wilson? I've seen no argument for it thus far.


2-14

11-4


2009 14-2
2010 10-6
2011 2-14
2012 11-4

looks more like they couldn't handle having a bad QB more than anything. And yes I know they dumped a lot of their players, but that's not a team/program that had been tanking for years and rebuilding from actually nothing.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:01 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:17 pm
Posts: 47
lobohawk wrote:
LotsOfLuck wrote:
cesame wrote:
No sensible Colts fan can look at their careers to this point and honestly say Luck has been the better player.

Again, Luck was the anointed one coming out and hyped so much that people will always just naturally say Luck is better because ESPN told them so. When you actually look at their careers you see Luck really hasn't done anything to separate himself from Wilson. Russell Wilson put up better numbers in their final year of college and so far Wilson has better career NFL numbers than Luck. Wilson has consistently outperformed Luck. That's a fact.

Tell me why I should think Luck is better than Wilson? I've seen no argument for it thus far.


2-14

11-4


2009 14-2
2010 10-6
2011 2-14
2012 11-4

looks more like they couldn't handle having a bad QB more than anything. And yes I know they dumped a lot of their players, but that's not a team/program that had been tanking for years and rebuilding from actually nothing.


Tell that to the 38 million in dead cap space last year's team was built around because of all the players they let go so the team could rebuild.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:02 pm 
* Report Button *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:08 pm
Posts: 9923
This makes me miss the Kap vs Wilson threads.

Irony...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:08 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm
Posts: 1308
LotsOfLuck wrote:
cesame wrote:
No sensible Colts fan can look at their careers to this point and honestly say Luck has been the better player.

Again, Luck was the anointed one coming out and hyped so much that people will always just naturally say Luck is better because ESPN told them so. When you actually look at their careers you see Luck really hasn't done anything to separate himself from Wilson. Russell Wilson put up better numbers in their final year of college and so far Wilson has better career NFL numbers than Luck. Wilson has consistently outperformed Luck. That's a fact.

Tell me why I should think Luck is better than Wilson? I've seen no argument for it thus far.


2-14

11-4


And the Seahawks were a 7-9 team after going 2-6. They easily could have laid down and went 4-12 at best. But the young talent that had to step-up in the midst of about 15 or so injuries refused to be that team, they refused to be the Colts... who did everything in their power to flop the season as best they could.

And I'm glad the 2011 Seahawks refused to lay down because I rather have Irvin, Wagner, and Wilson than Ryan Tannehill.

_________________
#3 taught Doubters, GREATNESS can be a product of HARD WORK.
#25 taught America, that we're ALL just CLASSLESS jerks.
#24 taught the Media, to REAP what you SOW.
#12 taught the NFL, TO BE LOUDER.

YOU WANTED THIS NOISE, AMERICA.
DON'T PLAY WITH DYNAMITE, IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE BOOM.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:42 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:17 pm
Posts: 47
Anyone who claims the Colts intentionally tanked 2011 pretty much proves they have no idea what they're talking about. Let's see. Clearly the owner, Jim Irsay, was not happy with the season as he fired the GM, the coaches, and then let go several well-paid veterans. Do you honestly believe these people were tanking and jeopardizing their careers so the team could attain a future benefit that most of them would not be around to see?

Let me guess they were tanking so badly that they were 0-13 and then won 2 games so that if they had won the last game of the season in Jacksonville they would not have ended up with #1 pick.

Finally, remember that we also had a fairly good QB that was coming back the next year had we not been in a position to draft Luck. Perhaps you've heard of him. His name is Peyton Manning. He was, and still is, a pretty big deal here in Indiana.

So congrats on being better than us in 2011. You had plenty of company. We sucked but it is pretty evident we didn't tank in an effort to get Luck. That's just what happens when you build your whole team around one great player and them remove that player from the equation. We're incredibly fortunate to have had Manning and then have Luck fall into our laps but it's not even questionable if we tanked.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 12:46 am 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm
Posts: 1308
No the team was pretty much all Peyton Manning. Everyone knew that, without him, no one put in the extra work to be competitive. And the Colts did a lot to repair the damage to move on, nope, that's why half the coaches and that team lost their jobs because their will to be a competitive team was lost the day it was announced that Manning wouldn't play that season.

Its just funny how you Colts fans assume the Seahawks would have been good in 2012. You Colts fans know nothing about the make-up of our team, only citing what little the media coverage talking heads gave us.

And that's all you have... Luck isn't the only reason you guys went 2-11 from 11-5, period. The Colts coaching staff and FO found cheap, solid options with better players at replacement level. But you guys still held onto your core of stellar veteran talent namely Reggie Wayne and the always underrated Robert Mathis. A player I wanted on the Seahawks so badly before he re-signed with the Colts. Antoine Bethea. Adam Vinerteri. Dwight Freeney. Antonio Johnson. Most those players are household names. You also kept a lot of your higher picks over the years as well.

Grabbing serviceable players in the draft like Canstanzo and Angerer in 2011. Hitting big on most of your 2012 draft with Luck, Fleener, Allen, Ballard, Hilton and winning a jackpot with Jerell Freeman, who is quietly has become one the best MLBs in the game after 1 year.

Not to mention you guys picked up a lot a cheaper veterans that are solid players that were high pick cast offs from other teams as teams tried to shed some cap:
Donnie Avery, Corry Redding, Samson Satele, Winston Justice, Matt McGlynn, Darius Butler, Trai Essex, Vontae Davis, Mewlewde Moore, Tony Hills, Justin King, and Tom Zbowski.

That 12 players the Colts signed or traded for that had 4 or more years of experience. Not a bad rag-tag group that would become a team behind Pagano's illness.

Quit acting like the Colts came out of nowhere, and that Luck is the only reason why they are winning games, they got a good group and had the right mixture of veteran talent going all out to earn a pay check and a right mixture of younger players trying to prove they belong in the league.

And quit acting like the 2011 Seahawks were vastly superior team to the Colts. The only reason the Seahawks were remotely competitive was because the young players who took over as injury replacement refused to drop dead. Tarvaris Jackson refused to give up, even with a Pec injury slowing him down.

The 2011 Seahawks weren't good but they were tough and they competed. 2011 Colts laid down , it had nothing to do with the Coaching, their team laid down because they knew they sucked without Manning and there was no use in trying. That's why they flopped it per say.

_________________
#3 taught Doubters, GREATNESS can be a product of HARD WORK.
#25 taught America, that we're ALL just CLASSLESS jerks.
#24 taught the Media, to REAP what you SOW.
#12 taught the NFL, TO BE LOUDER.

YOU WANTED THIS NOISE, AMERICA.
DON'T PLAY WITH DYNAMITE, IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE BOOM.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:15 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 3972
Bartmuley wrote:
DTexHawk wrote:

If you read the post above mine, he was basing his argument on their "beginnings in the NFL" which equates to "entire careers".

I was breaking it down further to this year and trends.

So sorry that this confused you.


It didnt confuse me, it made me laugh.

"Entire career" for guys who have played about a season and a quarter?

"Entire career" lol.


With the average NFL career being about 3 - 3.5 seasons, 1.3 seasons isn't that far off.

_________________
And this post is not directed at anyone personally.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 4:01 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:17 pm
Posts: 47
Pandion Haliaetus wrote:
No the team was pretty much all Peyton Manning. Everyone knew that, without him, no one put in the extra work to be competitive. And the Colts did a lot to repair the damage to move on, nope, that's why half the coaches and that team lost their jobs because their will to be a competitive team was lost the day it was announced that Manning wouldn't play that season.

Its just funny how you Colts fans assume the Seahawks would have been good in 2012. You Colts fans know nothing about the make-up of our team, only citing what little the media coverage talking heads gave us.

And that's all you have... Luck isn't the only reason you guys went 2-11 from 11-5, period. The Colts coaching staff and FO found cheap, solid options with better players at replacement level. But you guys still held onto your core of stellar veteran talent namely Reggie Wayne and the always underrated Robert Mathis. A player I wanted on the Seahawks so badly before he re-signed with the Colts. Antoine Bethea. Adam Vinerteri. Dwight Freeney. Antonio Johnson. Most those players are household names. You also kept a lot of your higher picks over the years as well.

Grabbing serviceable players in the draft like Canstanzo and Angerer in 2011. Hitting big on most of your 2012 draft with Luck, Fleener, Allen, Ballard, Hilton and winning a jackpot with Jerell Freeman, who is quietly has become one the best MLBs in the game after 1 year.

Not to mention you guys picked up a lot a cheaper veterans that are solid players that were high pick cast offs from other teams as teams tried to shed some cap:
Donnie Avery, Corry Redding, Samson Satele, Winston Justice, Matt McGlynn, Darius Butler, Trai Essex, Vontae Davis, Mewlewde Moore, Tony Hills, Justin King, and Tom Zbowski.

That 12 players the Colts signed or traded for that had 4 or more years of experience. Not a bad rag-tag group that would become a team behind Pagano's illness.

Quit acting like the Colts came out of nowhere, and that Luck is the only reason why they are winning games, they got a good group and had the right mixture of veteran talent going all out to earn a pay check and a right mixture of younger players trying to prove they belong in the league.

And quit acting like the 2011 Seahawks were vastly superior team to the Colts. The only reason the Seahawks were remotely competitive was because the young players who took over as injury replacement refused to drop dead. Tarvaris Jackson refused to give up, even with a Pec injury slowing him down.

The 2011 Seahawks weren't good but they were tough and they competed. 2011 Colts laid down , it had nothing to do with the Coaching, their team laid down because they knew they sucked without Manning and there was no use in trying. That's why they flopped it per say.


As I showed earlier, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to Luck and the Colts. Nobody here said the turn around was 100% Luck, but he was a huge, essential part of it. Your attempts to minimize it are admirable but silly.

Furthermore, you're pretty much admitting I was right about the Colts being built around Manning and sucking without him. In other words, the organization didn't tank to get Luck. They just were built around one essential player that they lost and were horrible without him. Your theory, that all the other players just laid down and quit, is another silly notion that doesn't hold water. Veterans like Kerry Collins, Dwight Freeney and Dallas Clark didn't gain their stature by quitting. Other players like Curtis Painter and Joseph Addai needed to perform to keep their contracts or earn new ones. They weren't laying down with their NFL careers on the line.

Like I said before, congrats on being better than the 2011 Colts. You had 30 other teams as company.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2013 4:44 pm 
*SILVER SUPPORTER*
*SILVER SUPPORTER*
User avatar
Online

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:40 am
Posts: 4378
Location: Southern CA
DavidSeven wrote:
My thoughts: Russell Wilson is Pete Carroll's dream QB.

He's a guy who can play behind a run-oriented line because of his ability to scramble, and he doesn't have to throw the ball away when pressured. He can also complete "explosive" passes and protects the ball with his life. Pete Carroll's entire philosophy is built around three things: 1) protect the football; 2) establish the run; and 3) hit on explosive passes. Russell's unique skill set plays into all three of these things.

Do you guys think it's a coincidence that PC just signed a Russell Wilson clone to be his back-up? An elusive, cannon-armed, ball-protecting QB is the guy Carroll has looked for his entire coaching career, even if he didn't realize it until Russell came along.

It's not just the on-field stuff either. Their personalities and approach mesh so perfectly.

_________________
Help bring peace to the South LA / Puget Sound communities. Are you in?
http://www.abetterla.org | http://www.abetterseattle.com


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 2:49 am 
NET Practice Squad
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 79
Only on a Seahawks forum would anyone legitimately try to argue that Russell Wilson is better than Andrew Luck


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 3:25 am 
* NET GIF Master *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:48 am
Posts: 850
drastik wrote:
Only on a Seahawks forum would anyone legitimately try to argue that Russell Wilson is better than Andrew Luck


Your team, the Redskins, are in 3rd place in a division where the best record is 2-3. Shouldn't you be more focused on that rather than the qb of a team you won't face this year.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:51 pm 
NET Practice Squad
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 79
bigtrain21 wrote:
drastik wrote:
Only on a Seahawks forum would anyone legitimately try to argue that Russell Wilson is better than Andrew Luck


Your team, the Redskins, are in 3rd place in a division where the best record is 2-3. Shouldn't you be more focused on that rather than the qb of a team you won't face this year.

What is there to focus on?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Thu Oct 10, 2013 5:09 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm
Posts: 1609
drastik wrote:
bigtrain21 wrote:
drastik wrote:
Only on a Seahawks forum would anyone legitimately try to argue that Russell Wilson is better than Andrew Luck


Your team, the Redskins, are in 3rd place in a division where the best record is 2-3. Shouldn't you be more focused on that rather than the qb of a team you won't face this year.

What is there to focus on?


The stats clearly show that Wilson has been the better player thus far in their careers.

I'm waiting for the evidence that shows Luck is clearly better than Wilson. Right now it's just hype.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
 Post Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2013 12:09 am 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am
Posts: 665
cesame wrote:
drastik wrote:
bigtrain21 wrote:
drastik wrote:
Only on a Seahawks forum would anyone legitimately try to argue that Russell Wilson is better than Andrew Luck


Your team, the Redskins, are in 3rd place in a division where the best record is 2-3. Shouldn't you be more focused on that rather than the qb of a team you won't face this year.

What is there to focus on?


The stats clearly show that Wilson has been the better player thus far in their careers.

I'm waiting for the evidence that shows Luck is clearly better than Wilson. Right now it's just hype.


isnt it obvious. Stats be damned, the Colts were a worse team obviously so that means luck is better than Wilson...dont you know that?

Even though alot of NFL fans think our WRs and TEs suck and none of them are #1 WRs or Allstars. Tired of this freaking argument. Can we just wait until the season is over before talking about it please.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 154 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Board index » SEAHAWKS.NET - THE VOICE OF THE 12TH MAN » [ NFL NATION ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lawke and 18 guests

 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.