KitsapHawk
New member
LotsOfLuck":1kt975qz said:
How many boards discuss 2 qbs not on their team?
Russell Wilson v. Andrew Luck
- Thread starter aawolf
- Start date
How many boards discuss 2 qbs not on their team?
DavidSeven
New member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2013
- Messages
- 5,742
- Reaction score
- 0
TJH":2uwrasjh said:
We get it, man. You hate Russell Wilson. You've seriously dogged him in basically every thread that's come up in the last two days. Hard to take you seriously.
OP
OP
aawolf
New member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2012
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 0
Sgt. Largent":2gai7x4n said:
Luck is better if you ignore every statistical category other than total yards; including stats like total wins, completion percentage, TDs, QBR, YPA, rushing yards, ect. Sgt. Largent, you have bought into the hype.
You can make the case that Luck is more accurate, but completion percentage blows that up.
Look, I'm not saying both will not be elite. I predict both will be Hall of Famers one day. I'm just saying RW deserves the same amount of props for being great as Luck does and several posters on this board need to recognize it. He doesn't deserve to be thought of as only the third best or fourth best Sophomore QB. He's been more successful that Luck and just as clutch.
DavidSeven
New member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2013
- Messages
- 5,742
- Reaction score
- 0
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.
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.
-The Glove-
New member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 7,689
- Reaction score
- 0
DavidSeven":333jh1fz said:
This...
paramedic586
New member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
aawolf":2sdvxjrl said:
Actually luck has a better QBR then Wilson. Luck also has more passing yards with less INTs. I wouldn't use rushing yards as a statistic for who is a better QB.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr
JSeahawks
New member
Not even going to bother reading the thread, but I'll just say they're both really good QB's. They both have bright futures. And both franchises should be happy to have them.
OP
OP
aawolf
New member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2012
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 0
paramedic586":1pw9zzd2 said:
I was factoring in QBR from last year too. Wilson is better
Hawkpower
Well-known member
gTJH":vo6b327x said:
I'm starting to wonder if you are Matt Flynn.
Or if perhaps Wilson stole your lady.
Every single one of your posts is bashing the guy. You have gone past helpful criticism and have now entered bashing territory.
razgriz737
New member
I'm the exact same way. If you offered me a straight across trade, Wilson for Luck, I would say no 10/10 times. You could show me indisputable evidence that Luck is and will always be a better quarterback than Wilson, and I wouldn't really care. Good for the Colts for drafting Luck, but I'm perfectly happy with Wilson.KARAVARUS":3581oygh said:
-The Glove-
New member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 7,689
- Reaction score
- 0
I think RW is the perfect Seattle QB. It goes beyond football IMO
NFSeahawks
New member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2009
- Messages
- 4,714
- Reaction score
- 0
Sgt. Largent":2jxrjdzl said:
How so? His stats to this point are less than what Wilson has done and youre talking about him like he's the next Joe Montana. Maybe he has the potential to do something like that but until he proves it and gets his first playoff win, all those accolades you and the rest of the media want to give him are fictitious.
I think Luck is great I just don't really think he's beyond Russell Wilson or even on another level yet, theres still lots to improve on in his game.
But I'll be the first to credit him when/if he does finally make it, I've just always believe the proof is in the pudding.
paramedic586
New member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2013
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
aawolf. So based on your grading of qbs then you should think that Collin kaepernick is a better qb then russell Wilson. He has a higher qbr this year and last year. So do think CK is better then RW?
Always Fierce
New member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2013
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 0
aawolf":2hss94nm said:
How did Wilson get so fast all of a sudden?
Wilson is very good but his best asset is being ale to run when he gets in a jam. Look how many times he ran against the Colts.
Wilson also has one of the best Ds, if not the best, in the league and a running game.
Luck is a better QB. Obviously it bothers the OP since he started a thread about it.
I keep seeing people talk about "accuracy"....you guys know Wilson is only completing 58% of his passes this year.....right? Which is less than the "inaccurate" Luck.
Last year for most of the year Wilson was a game manager, nothing wrong with that but the Seahawks D and running game (and replacement refs) were what won the Seahawks games last year.
Luck is already better than Wislon and is only going to get better as he ages, Wilson is going to slow down and he won't be able to rely on running as an escape every time he gets in trouble. It will affect his game.
Wilson also has one of the best Ds, if not the best, in the league and a running game.
Luck is a better QB. Obviously it bothers the OP since he started a thread about it.
I keep seeing people talk about "accuracy"....you guys know Wilson is only completing 58% of his passes this year.....right? Which is less than the "inaccurate" Luck.
Last year for most of the year Wilson was a game manager, nothing wrong with that but the Seahawks D and running game (and replacement refs) were what won the Seahawks games last year.
Luck is already better than Wislon and is only going to get better as he ages, Wilson is going to slow down and he won't be able to rely on running as an escape every time he gets in trouble. It will affect his game.
Sarlacc83
Active member
Bartmuley":2yotz7kc said:
Hahahaha, you don't know anything. Go watch the Bears game. Or the Atlanta game. Or the December 49ers game.
Game manager. Brilliant.
Bartmuley":yc7zvfi8 said:
Man, what an ignorant troll post. If you want to say Luck is a better QB, that's fine. He's a great QB. So is Wilson. Like I said earlier, it's apples and oranges. 2 QB's, and 2 different teams with 2 different offenses. It doesn't matter who is better if they can win you a SB.
Saying replacement refs what won Seattle games last year is ridiculous. You obviously didn't watch Seattle play any games last year, so don't go posting ignorant garbage like that.
chrispy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2011
- Messages
- 1,075
- Reaction score
- 1,112
a)The Seattle D wasn't an elite D on Sunday. Part of that was because of Luck's manipulation and part can be attributed to an off-week. I'm sure that's something else on which we can all disagree.
b)I'm sure that both Luck and Wilson would agree with a few of the previous posts that point out the only stat that matters is the W/L. In the game Sunday, Luck got the W. All in all, both teams have 1 loss. It could also be pointed out that Tannehill was the better the QB on Sept 15.
c)It's crazy to completely ignore rushing yards when judging a QB.
Isn't it reasonable to ask the question: Without the starting QB, how would the team do?
I think, on Sunday, those couple of TD passes to TY had so much room, many QBS could make that throw. That's not to diminish any other play. I just don't agree with previous posters comparing TY's TDs to Tate's miss. There was a difference of about 5 yards of separation. That's not on the QB. That's a fail on the D or a win for the WR. I'd guess, with the situation Sunday, the Seahawks would have performed worse with Luck at the helm than the Colts would have with Wilson going. ... just a guess.
That's only one day. In general, I think Luck would have gone deep into the playoffs if he had the advantage of CLink. That has nothing to do with him as a player. ...just the fans in Indy.
b)I'm sure that both Luck and Wilson would agree with a few of the previous posts that point out the only stat that matters is the W/L. In the game Sunday, Luck got the W. All in all, both teams have 1 loss. It could also be pointed out that Tannehill was the better the QB on Sept 15.
c)It's crazy to completely ignore rushing yards when judging a QB.
Isn't it reasonable to ask the question: Without the starting QB, how would the team do?
I think, on Sunday, those couple of TD passes to TY had so much room, many QBS could make that throw. That's not to diminish any other play. I just don't agree with previous posters comparing TY's TDs to Tate's miss. There was a difference of about 5 yards of separation. That's not on the QB. That's a fail on the D or a win for the WR. I'd guess, with the situation Sunday, the Seahawks would have performed worse with Luck at the helm than the Colts would have with Wilson going. ... just a guess.
That's only one day. In general, I think Luck would have gone deep into the playoffs if he had the advantage of CLink. That has nothing to do with him as a player. ...just the fans in Indy.
-The Glove-
New member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 7,689
- Reaction score
- 0
Bartmuley":2ep7760z said:
He threw 21 TD's last year from the pocket. Had a higher QBR and completion percentage inside the pocket. But who cares, right? Espn says he's a run-first QB...it must be true
Ozzy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2013
- Messages
- 9,294
- Reaction score
- 3,820
First of all QBR is a joke. Mannings 7 TD 450+ yard game wasn't even in the top 4 games of week one for QB's. No one uses QBR other than ESPN. Statistically Wilson has been better than Luck up to this point in their respective careers. I am a huge fan of Luck but Wilson has been as good or better while playing a much tougher schedule. Last year Wilson had one of the toughest schedules for a QB in the league....people forget that.
I think both are going to be great and they are the two best young QB's in the league. Would most GM's take Luck over Wilson? Probably because of his size.
I would love to revisit this after Wilson has a weapon like Harvin for 4 games or so. I think we see a jump in Wilson's stats when he has a guy who can create space and get open on his own at will.
I think both are going to be great and they are the two best young QB's in the league. Would most GM's take Luck over Wilson? Probably because of his size.
I would love to revisit this after Wilson has a weapon like Harvin for 4 games or so. I think we see a jump in Wilson's stats when he has a guy who can create space and get open on his own at will.
