How long are morons gonna say LUCK > WILSON...??!!

[LolaRox]

Great topic OP, It has been bugging me lately as well.

I think it happens for a couple reasons that people have already mentioned:

1. Pre draft the scouts/gm made it up in their minds that Luck was the 2nd coming and fed that to the media, the media then fed it to all that would believe it, so for now that's their story and they're sticking to it. Their only other option is to admit that a guy they projected as 3rd-4th rounder could actually be better but that would be like admitting they were wrong and that isn't going to happen.

2. They believe Luck has amazing potential and maybe he does but I've never seen potential win a SB or even a game for that matter. If you're judging 'right now', right now and the two years leading to right now, the data (and the eye) supports that Russell is better. I don't know who will be better in the future and neither does anyone else.

Production > Potential every day of the week.

3. The 'old school' mentality is still alive and well in football about what a QB should look like, Luck has that look, Russell doesn't. Hopefully the continued success of Russ, Kaep, Cam, and others will open people's mind.


As far as trading straight up? No thanks, I'll keep Wilson, he's proven and has great intangibles. There is not way to know if Luck could do what Russell does for this team. I'd rather deal in reality than in hypotheticals, potential, and perception.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

I'm sorry, but if I read one more time that TY Hilton is a top-10 receiver, I'm gonna blow up. He isn't a top 40 talent. If he is considered anywhere near a top-10 receiver, it is because Andrew Luck made him so.

You can't dismiss that Russell has the luxury of teams thinking the Seahawks are going to run the football and are not gearing up to stop the pass. Every single team that Luck plays against, is solely focusing on stopping the pass.

I hate having to take this argument because I feel like in trying to defend Luck against blind homerism, I therefore am taking shots at Russell Wilson, which couldn't be further from the truth. I'm just saying that Russell isn't the only one that is one of the best young QB's in the history of the game.

It is absolutely impossible to compare the two since their situations and what is asked of them couldn't be further opposites. Russell is asked to play smart and not turn the ball over. Which he does insanely well. Luck is asked to go out and throw it so well that it will cause his team to win. Both are fantastic for their prospective teams and situations.

The Colts were ranked 14th in pass/run ratio in 2013. They unquestionably pass more than the Seahawks but lets not exaggerate the degree to which they depend on Luck's passing. As far as pass-happy offenses go they are roughly in the middle of the pack, just as they are in most offensive categories with Luck at the helm.

To me blind homerism is not using real world stats to support their case, which is what Wilson's supporters generally do. To me blind homerism is insisting on ignoring stats in favor of appeals to authority, vague assumptions, conjecture, and imaginary alternative scenarios which are generally the foundation of arguments by Luck supporters.

The coordinator for the Colts is hard-headed and continues to try to run the ball to help Luck, but because this doesn't work, they still end up #23 in the league in rushing attempts, and 20th in yards, and that is with the opposing defense putting zero emphasis on stopping the run. We all love to cherry-pick stats to prove our points. How about if we show the missing stats to show the entire picture about how much more Luck is asked to do than Wilson is:

Pass attempts
Luck 1322 Wilson 990

Pass Completions
Luck 1197 Wilson 799

Pass Yards
Luck 8196 Wilson 6475

Rush TDs
Luck 9 Wilson 5

300 yard games
Luck 9 Wilson 2

Believe it or not, the HC of the Seattle Seahawks is extremely hard-headed. They play to the tune of the opponent, as in if the Seahawks play a highly touted defense, more often than not they'll play a ball control offense and not allow turnovers to dictate the game.

Also, it might seem you got your numbers wrong:

Luck: 682 Comp/1197 Pass Att (57%)
Wilson: 509 Comp/800 Pass Att (63.6%)

I don't know if you were including Playoff Atts or Running Atts but you did get Reg Season passing yards right:

Luck: 8196 Yards w/ 46 TDs to 27 Ints (6.8 YPA)
Wilson: 6475 Yards w/ 52 TDs to 19 Ints (8.1 YPA)

What separates Luck from Wilson is a whopping 397 passing attempts and a rather subtle 1721 passing yards.

That's only 4.34 Passing Yards Per Attempt... AGAIN JUST ONLY 4.34 YPA!!

That's more than a yard lower than Wilson's Rushing YPA.

And its almost 4 yards lower than Wilson's career passing YPA of 8.1. To reach Luck's production Wilson would only need 213 of 397 attempts at 8.1 ypa. 246 of 397 at 7.0 ypa. And still 287 of 397 at 6.0 ypa.

No matter what if you gave Wilson 397 more attempts, he would blow Luck's production out of the water, at max production we are talking about 10, 000 yards, 80 TDs with less than 30 TDs.

But back to reality, other than passing yards Wilson has produced more TDs with less Ints on 397 less Attempts. As Marshawn Lynch would say that's "Big Time, Boss"

But what everone has left out the entire picture is pressure factor.

Luck: 73 Sacks on 1197 Attempts (6.1%)
Wilson: 77 Sacks on 800 Attempts (9.6%)

Wilson with 1197 Attempts would be Sacked 116 times!!
Luck on 800 Attempts would be Sacked 49 times.

I don't care to paint the picture Wilson is better than Luck but to me they are both equally great for what they do for their respective teams. But simply one cannot just say Luck is better than Wilson and that be a fact.

Luck is 6'4, 235 w/4.6 speed
Wilson is 5'11, 205/215 w/ 4.5 speed

For Wilson to have produced 52 TDs to Luck's 46 on 397 less Pass Attempts while getting sacked and pressured at a much vilotile rate ( 43 more times on a attempt for attempt basis). That says a whole lot about Russell Wilson and that no he doesn't receive the high volume of plays to post gaudy passing stats. But nonetheless he's working his ass off in the field, being one of the most highly effecient QBs in the league despite having the worst pass protection as well as no HoF calibur WR like Reggie Wayne easing the transition into the league and not possessing a homerun burner like Tye Hilton. It says a lot and you just can't over look that because Wilson doesn't pass for over 4,000 yards a season and Wilson would never throw 4 Ints in a Play-Off game... not even against some of the best defenses in the NFL, not even accrued.

And last but not least to end this argument I will posted a non-biased value metric, pfref's Approximate Value.

Luck: 13/15 for 28 career AV
Wilson: 16/16 for 32 career AV

 

[TXHawk]

By showing those stats, I was not placing any importance on yards or volume stats, simply showing that Luck is asked to do about 1/3 more than Russell is. Russell has probably the easiest job of any QB in the NFL. Therefore, it is very difficult to compare him to any other QB in more average situations, it just is. Would we all think Russell would be great if he had to be a completely different player? Sure we do, he hasn't shown us any reason to think he wouldn't. But I don't think it is fair to give him credit for being that type of player when he hasn't had to do it. Luck has had to pass for 300 yards in a game 9 times or his team had no chance to win those games. Russell just isn't put in that situation very often. They also both have just about identical interception percentages.

The sad part about this debate is that it creates a lot of attacks against Andrew Luck. If this thread was along the lines of "Andrew Luck is one of the best young QB's to ever play the game, but Russell is even a little better", that's super to easy to buy. I can get on board. Fine. But implying that Andrew Luck is anything short of sensational is horribly inaccurate and makes us look like a bad group of fans. I do acknowledge that some here aren't taking that angle. But many here are, and I will fight for the kid. The job he is asked to do is ridiculously more difficult than the job that Russell is asked to do, and he deserves a lot of credit for what he has done.

Easy? OL was so bad he was running for his life. Don't know if a qb other than RW would've survived the year.

None of them have "easy" jobs. I used it as a relative term. Should I have said he was asked to do less than any other QB in the league?

I'd argue that throwing fewer passes hardly equates with having an easier job. Hell, Geno Smith passed the ball more often than Wilson which only means he threw more bad passes, which isn't particularly hard. I'm not comparing Luck to Smith, I'm just saying that what's hard is passing the ball accurately and consistently while avoiding mistakes and that's something that Wilson has done better than Luck up to this point in their careers.

Wilson played in a much tougher division where even a single additional loss would have relegated the Seahawks to the wild card and three road games to get to the Super Bowl. By contrast the AFC South was very weak this year and there was a large gap between the Colts and the rest of the division. The Colts coasted to a relatively easy division win while Wilson and the Seahawks had to go down to the final game to secure their division title over the 49ers. There's nothing remotely easy about playing quarterback in the NFC West.

Luck did pass the ball 163 more times than Wilson last season and what did he produce with those additional passes? Just 465 yards...an average of 2.85 yards per pass. That's not much. Wilson probably could have thrown an additional 163 passes left handed and exceeded Luck's total yardage by a comfortable margin. That's not a slam on Luck, just an example of how much more effective Wilson was as a passer when he did drop back to throw.

It's not an attack on Luck to claim that Wilson has clearly been the better quarterback and using stats to back it up. There's no shame in being behind Wilson at this point in his career and there's a lot of football left to play for Luck to become the elite quarterback that everyone thinks he will be. It's just my personal belief that his reputation exceeds his actual production so far and I certainly don't blame Luck who hasn't been out beating his chest about his superiority to my knowledge. I blame it on the media who have promoted him as the new Golden Boy and seem reluctant to allow a short 3rd round draft pick to interrrupt that narrative.

 

[Hawkpower]

By showing those stats, I was not placing any importance on yards or volume stats, simply showing that Luck is asked to do about 1/3 more than Russell is. Russell has probably the easiest job of any QB in the NFL. Therefore, it is very difficult to compare him to any other QB in more average situations, it just is. Would we all think Russell would be great if he had to be a completely different player? Sure we do, he hasn't shown us any reason to think he wouldn't. But I don't think it is fair to give him credit for being that type of player when he hasn't had to do it. Luck has had to pass for 300 yards in a game 9 times or his team had no chance to win those games. Russell just isn't put in that situation very often. They also both have just about identical interception percentages.

The sad part about this debate is that it creates a lot of attacks against Andrew Luck. If this thread was along the lines of "Andrew Luck is one of the best young QB's to ever play the game, but Russell is even a little better", that's super to easy to buy. I can get on board. Fine. But implying that Andrew Luck is anything short of sensational is horribly inaccurate and makes us look like a bad group of fans. I do acknowledge that some here aren't taking that angle. But many here are, and I will fight for the kid. The job he is asked to do is ridiculously more difficult than the job that Russell is asked to do, and he deserves a lot of credit for what he has done.

Why are you so concerned with Andrew Luck's "attacks" on here? (Never mind the fact that you keep pushing this strawman that isnt even true. Posters on this thread have been propping up Wilson more than putting down Luck )

Luck has not been as good as Wilson, and yet the national perception out there is that he is quite a bit better.

Thus, Luck has his sack slobbered PLENTY. He doesnt need you, I or anyone else worrying about his mystique. It is quite safe.

Luck is good. But he's not as good as Wilson yet. Nearly every measurable consideration makes this clear, so we as fans have every right to be irritated when less accomplished players get propped up because they are tall.

But hey, keep fighting the good fight for Andrew. More advocates is clearly what he needs :roll:

 

[WilsonMVP]

I'm sorry, but if I read one more time that TY Hilton is a top-10 receiver, I'm gonna blow up. He isn't a top 40 talent. If he is considered anywhere near a top-10 receiver, it is because Andrew Luck made him so.

You can't dismiss that Russell has the luxury of teams thinking the Seahawks are going to run the football and are not gearing up to stop the pass. Every single team that Luck plays against, is solely focusing on stopping the pass.

I hate having to take this argument because I feel like in trying to defend Luck against blind homerism, I therefore am taking shots at Russell Wilson, which couldn't be further from the truth. I'm just saying that Russell isn't the only one that is one of the best young QB's in the history of the game.

It is absolutely impossible to compare the two since their situations and what is asked of them couldn't be further opposites. Russell is asked to play smart and not turn the ball over. Which he does insanely well. Luck is asked to go out and throw it so well that it will cause his team to win. Both are fantastic for their prospective teams and situations.

The Colts were ranked 14th in pass/run ratio in 2013. They unquestionably pass more than the Seahawks but lets not exaggerate the degree to which they depend on Luck's passing. As far as pass-happy offenses go they are roughly in the middle of the pack, just as they are in most offensive categories with Luck at the helm.

To me blind homerism is not using real world stats to support their case, which is what Wilson's supporters generally do. To me blind homerism is insisting on ignoring stats in favor of appeals to authority, vague assumptions, conjecture, and imaginary alternative scenarios which are generally the foundation of arguments by Luck supporters.

The coordinator for the Colts is hard-headed and continues to try to run the ball to help Luck, but because this doesn't work, they still end up #23 in the league in rushing attempts, and 20th in yards, and that is with the opposing defense putting zero emphasis on stopping the run. We all love to cherry-pick stats to prove our points. How about if we show the missing stats to show the entire picture about how much more Luck is asked to do than Wilson is:

Pass attempts
Luck 1322 Wilson 990

Pass Completions
Luck 1197 Wilson 799

Pass Yards
Luck 8196 Wilson 6475

Rush TDs
Luck 9 Wilson 5

300 yard games
Luck 9 Wilson 2

that's great now lets look further at the stats that really matter

QB rating
Rw 100.2 Luck 78 (in the playoffs RW 102 Luck 70)

COMplt%
Rw 63.6 Luck 57 (in playoffs RW 63% Luck 54%)

pass TDs
RW 52 Luck 46 (in playoffs RW 6 Luck 6)

Ints
Rw 19 Luck 27 (oh and Rw has 1 in the playoffs Luck 8)

YPA
RW 8 Luck 6 (inplayoffs Rw 8.5 Luck 7)

Rushing yards
RW 1028 Luck 632 (in playoffs Rw 169 Luck 85)

Rushing Fds
Rw 61 Luck 46 (In Playoffs RW 8 Luck 6)

So basically Luck has more yards because the throws more but loosed in everything else. Heck Tannehill had more throwing yards than Luck I guess that make shim better than luck too. Yards alone are not eh measure of a great QB you need to take into account the other stats and in everything else Rw wins easy, and unlike Luck Rw steps it up in the playoffs. enough said

Wilson doesnt have any interceptions in the playoffs...unless you really count that hailmary against the Falcons as an interception after he lead the offense down to take the lead with 30 seconds left.

 

[Sherman4Prez]

Look at the defenses, look at the supporting casts. Lynch and the defense played a massive role last year. Luck cannot say the same. That's why they traded for a high profile RB last year, it's a team sport. With that said, Wilson's pocket awareness is second to none.

This season will be very telling. It's an unwritten story, man.

Dude we have already shown that the whole defense and running game argument is wrong.

True, but what about passing attempts? Two very different offenses. I think it's safe to say Luck carries a much heavier load than Wilson. In other words, Luck had to do more in order for the Colts to win because the Seahawks are a better team. It's not even close in terms of supporting cast talent. As of right now, though...

Super Bowls:

Wilson 1
Luck 0

That weighs heavy in the long run. Colts ain't there, yet. The AFC looks like it'll come down to NE and DEN, again. This is why I'm pulling for Cinci. I don't care for either team. I get tired of the the Luck crap, too. He did get away with a ton of picks.

okay this is crap

Indy has a top 10 scoring defense
they have a run game that avg 4.3 ypa same as ours
they have a HOF wr, and another in the top 10 and their WR corps is ranked 7th

The difference is in the offensive philosophies and nothing more, One throws more the other is balanced. However that is mitigated by Iny being week AFC and the Haws being in a stronger NFC and specifically in the NFC west.

The only thing Luck has over RW is yards and attempts, however If Rw can through the ball 30+ times a game and still have a QB rating well over 100 and complt% well over 70% agasint 2 top 5 defenses like Carolina and NO then he can do it against anyone. SO that whole argument is moot.

Really, you took 2 out of 16 games and claimed my argument is moot. Lol! Lynch pounding the rock and Wilson cleaning up is the Seattle offense, Luck gets praise because he is the Colt's offense. If Luck and Wilson switched teams, Wilson would not be an upgrade over Luck. I do beleive that is the popular perception but just not here. Wilson is still a good QB, though, so I don't see why it matters.

 

[TXHawk]

Really, you took 2 out of 16 games and claimed my argument is moot. Lol! Lynch pounding the rock and Wilson cleaning up is the Seattle offense, Luck gets praise because he is the Colt's offense. If Luck and Wilson switched teams, Wilson would not be an upgrade over Luck. I do beleive that is the popular perception but just not here. Wilson is still a good QB, though, so I don't see why it matters.

This post is Exhibit A of what I was talking about when I said that Luck's supporters rely mainly on appeals to authority, vague assumptions, conjecture, and imaginary alternative scenarios rather than the real world stats that are commonly used to measure quarterback performance.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

DYAR:
Wilson: 770
Luck: 650

DVOA:
Wilson 15.6%
Luck: 4.6%

/thread.

 

[Anthony!]

By showing those stats, I was not placing any importance on yards or volume stats, simply showing that Luck is asked to do about 1/3 more than Russell is. Russell has probably the easiest job of any QB in the NFL. Therefore, it is very difficult to compare him to any other QB in more average situations, it just is. Would we all think Russell would be great if he had to be a completely different player? Sure we do, he hasn't shown us any reason to think he wouldn't. But I don't think it is fair to give him credit for being that type of player when he hasn't had to do it. Luck has had to pass for 300 yards in a game 9 times or his team had no chance to win those games. Russell just isn't put in that situation very often. They also both have just about identical interception percentages.

The sad part about this debate is that it creates a lot of attacks against Andrew Luck. If this thread was along the lines of "Andrew Luck is one of the best young QB's to ever play the game, but Russell is even a little better", that's super to easy to buy. I can get on board. Fine. But implying that Andrew Luck is anything short of sensational is horribly inaccurate and makes us look like a bad group of fans. I do acknowledge that some here aren't taking that angle. But many here are, and I will fight for the kid. The job he is asked to do is ridiculously more difficult than the job that Russell is asked to do, and he deserves a lot of credit for what he has done.

dude do you read what you write at all? do you think about it at all? Rw doe snot have the easist job of any qb at all. What a load of crap Rw gets 3-4 palys every down, he picks which one to run not eh coaches He, Luck gets one play and that is it, he can audbile but that is all. Rw can do that too. You mention how luck had to pass for 300 times 9 times or his team had no chance. The only problem with that is luck only through for over 300 yards 3 times this pas season so were did the 9 times comes form, I am guessing you are counting last year too, so with last year that is 9 lets look at those. so in 2012 he through for over 300 ayrds 6 times he lost half of those, he had to through over 300 yards because in those games he 11 ints, and guess what it was those ints that gave up the lead, so you are correct he is asked to do more to make up for his own mistakes, mistakes Rw does not make. So that excuse is also wrong

 

[Anthony!]

I think the definition of "Blind Homerism" needs to be addressed here since Tical21 thinks its being used.

I think that coming to the conclusion that QB "A" is better than QB "B" because he has better statistics, a Super Bowl win, etc. is rational.

I believe coming to the conclusion that QB "B" is better than QB "A" because he is tall, he throws it a lot and because the crusty old media guys tell me to think that, is more indicative of "Blind Homerism" myself.

But hey, keep fighting the fight for Andrew. Lord knows he needs more guys in his corner lol

Yeah he does even the guys on NFL TV are starting to see it, Sapp and a few others were saying how Indys defense was better than people think and how Indys Wr corps was better than the Hawks, even some of the Luck jock sniffers agreed but always came back top yards, and how he is a prototypical QB ie over 6 foot, since Sapp brought up Rw had better number sin the pocket.

People are starting to catch on in the end all anyone has as of now is his draft position, height and white, nothing else.

LOL did you really see you've seen every game Andrew Luck has played? While having the time to chart every Seahawks play from the stands?

were did I say I saw every game Indy played and charted the hawks games from the stands, oh and by the way I could have its called recording duh.

 

[Anthony!]

I feel like luck has wayy more interceptions then 27 .


We can't deny the facts - Luck is an incredible talent-
-plays with one of the worst defenses
-has the worst offensive line in all of football
- rushing attack in bottom 5 in the league
Luck carries the colts and they get wins

BUT

I would never ever trade Wilson for anybody in the world including luck. I'm sure many of you feel the same way .
Wilson is among the elite , we all see that. We see his superb decision making in crucial moments every Sunday .
If it takes the rest of the world a few more seasons to know what we all knew last year , it's fine with me

plays with one of the worst defenses wrong they were top 10 in scoring defenses
-has the worst offensive line in all of football wrong again they were top 10 in pass blocking
- rushing attack in bottom 5 in the league again a by product of attempts as they avg the same YPa as us but on 10 fewer attempts
Luck carries the colts and they get wins he also sinks them and he gets looses, and it helps he has a top 10 wr corps.

LOL OH Anthony !
how am I wrong ????
I said the Colts have one of the worst defenses ( not SCORING defense as you so kindly put it )
I said one of the worst offensive lines (not worst PASS blocking as you so kindly put it )
Then i said worst rushing attack ( and again you tried to miniscule it )

Of course you ignored the rest of my post , you just wanted to just say somebody was wrong.

since you wanted to compare rushing attempts between the Seahawks and the Colts , lets comparesome other statistics. Again keep in mind that I very much believe that Russell Wilson is better then Andrew Luck .


Seahawks Colts
Overall Defense - (1st) 276 ypg -14ppg (20th) 357 ypg - 21ppg
Rushing Defense - (7th) 101.6 ypg (25) 125 ypg
Takeaways (1st) 39 (15th) 27


Profootball focus ranked the Colts Offensive line 25th overall with the 28th worst pass blocking and 22 worst run blocking.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -rankings/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -rankings/

That's all regat but last I checked scoring is how you win and loose games and in that aspect Indy is just fine, and as to o-lin new are talking about QBs so pass blockinf is what matters, nice try though, love dhow you made statements pertaining to a QB and then tried to through in general stats to support you instead of the ones that apply to a QB.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

If Luck and Wilson switched teams, Wilson would not be an upgrade over Luck.

Well that's quite a guess by everyone involved. :roll: How can it be that they have nearly the same amount of comeback wins, even though Luck has had way more opportunities? There is no proof either way unless you make the switch; however, Wilson has been super efficient regardless of the offense he has been in. That has not been the same for Luck.

 

[Anthony!]

Really, you took 2 out of 16 games and claimed my argument is moot. Lol! Lynch pounding the rock and Wilson cleaning up is the Seattle offense, Luck gets praise because he is the Colt's offense. If Luck and Wilson switched teams, Wilson would not be an upgrade over Luck. I do beleive that is the popular perception but just not here. Wilson is still a good QB, though, so I don't see why it matters.

Dude I picked those 2 games to make a point and it worked, You state that Luck is the Indy offense, I am sure his HOF WR appreciates that but lets look at it then

Luck makes up 77% of the yards between passing and running and 70% of the scoring
Rw make sup 75% of the total yards and68% of the scoring

Hmm seems pretty close so remind be again about the offense seems to me Rw makes up as much of the offense as luck does for his team. Oh and this is just 2013, so that excuse doe snot wash either

 

[seedhawk]

I would lay down some serious money that we have this same discussion in like 10 years. Would not surprise me at all if RW has more playoff wins and rings than Luck

Still won't make a particle of difference. Just like with Manning and Brady. Hell, throw in Manning the younger since he has 2 rings.

Too many Qb's get extra credit because their team is good, too many get ragged because their team is bad, and, perhaps more importantly, too many wind up stuck below where they truly should be ranked, simply because they did what their HC and OC wanted them to do, to maximize the team, while putting up lower stats than their peers.

Most Qb's can't truly be rated until they have been retired 10 years or so.

 

[Anthony!]

If Luck and Wilson switched teams, Wilson would not be an upgrade over Luck.

Well that's quite a guess by everyone involved. :roll: How can it be that they have nearly the same amount of comeback wins, even though Luck has had way more opportunities? There is no proof either way unless you make the switch; however, Wilson has been super efficient regardless of the offense he has been in. That has not been the same for Luck.

well to be honest it wrong period Rw would go form a team with the worst pass blocking o-line to a top 10 pass blocking o-line, he would move to having a HOF wr, and a top 10 WR, and he would be taking his 100+ qb rating, his 63% completion percentage, 52 tds to 19 ints to a passer dream, while luck would take his 78 QB rating, 57 complt% 46 tds to 27 ints to a team with a worse pass blocking o-line and wr not as good, seems pretty obvious

I mean the reality is simple

Pass blocking advantage LUCK (luck to p10 Rw dead last 32nd)
run game Advantage RW (though the both avg the sameYPA)
WR advantage LUCK (INdy #7, Seattle 15th if harvin is healthy 25th if not)
Passing system advantage LUCK
Defense Advantage Rw but both are top 10 in scoring)
Passing coach LUCK


Luck wins 4 out of 6 advantages or a passer, and the experts are starting to see it.. enough said

 

[EastCoastHawksFan]

I feel like luck has wayy more interceptions then 27 .


We can't deny the facts - Luck is an incredible talent-
-plays with one of the worst defenses
-has the worst offensive line in all of football
- rushing attack in bottom 5 in the league
Luck carries the colts and they get wins

BUT

I would never ever trade Wilson for anybody in the world including luck. I'm sure many of you feel the same way .
Wilson is among the elite , we all see that. We see his superb decision making in crucial moments every Sunday .
If it takes the rest of the world a few more seasons to know what we all knew last year , it's fine with me

plays with one of the worst defenses wrong they were top 10 in scoring defenses
-has the worst offensive line in all of football wrong again they were top 10 in pass blocking
- rushing attack in bottom 5 in the league again a by product of attempts as they avg the same YPa as us but on 10 fewer attempts
Luck carries the colts and they get wins he also sinks them and he gets looses, and it helps he has a top 10 wr corps.

LOL OH Anthony !
how am I wrong ????
I said the Colts have one of the worst defenses ( not SCORING defense as you so kindly put it )
I said one of the worst offensive lines (not worst PASS blocking as you so kindly put it )
Then i said worst rushing attack ( and again you tried to miniscule it )

Of course you ignored the rest of my post , you just wanted to just say somebody was wrong.

since you wanted to compare rushing attempts between the Seahawks and the Colts , lets comparesome other statistics. Again keep in mind that I very much believe that Russell Wilson is better then Andrew Luck .


Seahawks Colts
Overall Defense - (1st) 276 ypg -14ppg (20th) 357 ypg - 21ppg
Rushing Defense - (7th) 101.6 ypg (25) 125 ypg
Takeaways (1st) 39 (15th) 27


Profootball focus ranked the Colts Offensive line 25th overall with the 28th worst pass blocking and 22 worst run blocking.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -rankings/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -rankings/

That's all regat but last I checked scoring is how you win and loose games and in that aspect Indy is just fine, and as to o-lin new are talking about QBs so pass blockinf is what matters, nice try though, love dhow you made statements pertaining to a QB and then tried to through in general stats to support you instead of the ones that apply to a QB.

Again you completely refuse to intellicuatley read what I originally wrote . I was never comparing Lucks stats to Wilson directly . I said Luck has a terrible o-line , a pretty bad defense and a horrible rushing attack. I then I provided you with facts but still your ignorant .

 

[Hawkpower]

DYAR:
Wilson: 770
Luck: 650

DVOA:
Wilson 15.6%
Luck: 4.6%

/thread.

The Luck Lovers in this thread glossed right over your post.

They like to use Pete Prisco and Mel Kiper Jr as their authority on NFL ability. Who cares if numbers and reality prove all of those crusty old guys are wrong.

Tradition (6'5 white prototypical QB's are a step above just 'cause) is a hard thing to eliminate, even for a few hardcore hawk fans apparently.

 

[Anthony!]

Again you completely refuse to intellicuatley read what I originally wrote . I was never comparing Lucks stats to Wilson directly . I said Luck has a terrible o-line , a pretty bad defense and a horrible rushing attack. I then I provided you with facts but still your ignorant .

I raed your post and your facts and I provided facts showing your wrong, as it relates to being a QB enough said.

oh and so there is no doubt and I have posted in this thread before yours but here it is again

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

And in case you missed it look all the way to the right and you will see at # 6 indy in pass blocking, and if you look to the left you will see indy at 15 in run blocking avg 11th. Now look to the left and you will see Seattle run blocking 9th, and look to the right and down and you will see Seattle pass blocking 32nd avg 20th, remind me whos line is better?


Now lets look again at defense, for this we will look at 2 sites

first this one

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

we are first, indy is 15th not as bad as you said since you said pretty bad.

Now sight 2 and what really counts in a defense scoring

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/ ... on/defense

look at that indy is top 10 hmm again not so bad huh

no I think we also talked running game

so lets look here first

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff

Now notice 8 colums over it says rush ranking guess what INdy is ranked 11th wow that is not so bad now is it, we were ranked 7th, hmm not so big a difference is it now.

What I find very interesting is how although we have showed indy has the better o-line and especially pass blocking, and Indy has better WR, and they have Luck they are still only 17th in pass ranking while Seattle led by Rw is 8th hmmm.

Now more for rushing, lets look at RB, now Indy does it more by committee but let check it out anyway

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb

our RB ranks 5th and guess who is ranked 14th an Indy RB not so bad

now for the biggie, so total yards is a by product of attempts, so not a good indicator, however ypa is, of course you need a minimum attempts to even be on the list so no worries there.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/ ... ushAttempt

Hmm indy is 13th, we are 12th, wow , now of course that is indy as a team so it include a lot so lets just look at rbs/fbs.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/rushing

Indy had 1743 rushing yards on 409 attempts avg 4.3. Now lets only look at the rbs/fbs, that give them 1328 on 310 for an avg of 4.28 ypa

Seattle had 2188 yards on 509 attempts avg 4.3, now lets look at rbd/fbs, that gives Seattle 1611 on 402 for an avg of 4 ypa So we see that Indy actually has as good a run game as Seatlle and better if only rbs/fbs are accounted for.

Oh and also the difference in Seattle and Indy rbs/fbs is 283 yards or 17.7 yards a game. The difference in total Indy rushing versus Seattle rushing is only 27.8 yards per game, again not much when you consider Seattle runs the ball 6.3 more times a game than Indy(INdy 25.5 per game, Seattle 31.8)

My point being Indys run game is pretty good, they are just a pass orientated team

Of course you calling me ignorant and resorting to personnel attack a side like I said Indy not having a good run game, bad o-line well was wrong.

 

[Tical21]

Just thought I would throw my discussion from thehuddle.com in here for fun.

http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?/ ... vs-wilson/

 

[hgwellz12]

Just thought I would throw my discussion from thehuddle.com in here for fun.

http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?/ ... vs-wilson/

Got to, I think, Page 2...where you mentioned how you would take Luck in a trade... AFTER everything you said supporting Wilson, and I have come to the conclusion that you just like arguments. Weird AF.