Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. RATING: PG-13
Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:25 pm
  • 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.
    lobohawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 264
    Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:22 am


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:01 pm
  • 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.
    LotsOfLuck
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 47
    Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:17 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:02 pm
  • This makes me miss the Kap vs Wilson threads.

    Irony...
    User avatar
    pehawk
    * Report Button *
     
    Posts: 10253
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:08 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:08 pm
  • 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.
    If I seem too passionate, it’s because I care. And if I come on too strong, it’s because I feel strongly. And if I push too hard, it’s because things aren’t moving fast enough. This is my home, you are my family, and I promise you, I’m not going anywhere.” - L.K.
    Pandion Haliaetus
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2003
    Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:42 pm
  • 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.
    LotsOfLuck
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 47
    Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:17 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Wed Oct 09, 2013 12:46 am
  • 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.
    If I seem too passionate, it’s because I care. And if I come on too strong, it’s because I feel strongly. And if I push too hard, it’s because things aren’t moving fast enough. This is my home, you are my family, and I promise you, I’m not going anywhere.” - L.K.
    Pandion Haliaetus
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2003
    Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:15 am
  • 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.
    User avatar
    DTexHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4161
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:55 am


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Wed Oct 09, 2013 4:01 pm
  • 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.
    LotsOfLuck
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 47
    Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:17 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Wed Oct 09, 2013 4:44 pm
  • 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
    User avatar
    sc85sis
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4942
    Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:40 am
    Location: Southern CA


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Thu Oct 10, 2013 2:49 am
  • Only on a Seahawks forum would anyone legitimately try to argue that Russell Wilson is better than Andrew Luck
    drastik
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 79
    Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:11 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Thu Oct 10, 2013 3:25 am
  • 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.
    User avatar
    bigtrain21
    * NET GIF Master *
     
    Posts: 1213
    Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:48 am


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:51 pm
  • 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?
    drastik
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 79
    Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:11 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Thu Oct 10, 2013 5:09 pm
  • 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.
    cesame
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1661
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm


Re: Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
Fri Oct 11, 2013 12:09 am
  • 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.
    Image
    User avatar
    WilsonMVP
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 913
    Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am


PreviousNext


It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 6:19 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online